| jonathanalis said: where are tech experts? 16 nm or 20? there are images from x1 and p1 chips? |
Impossible to tell with the naked human eye at such densities with such images.
| cycycychris said: The only thing I can guess from looking at this is that the 2 boxes above the nvidea chip are probably the the RAM, suggesting 4GB. |
Yep. 4GB Ram.
JRPGfan said:
my first thoughts are its tiny, and looks more like a phone than a console on the inside. |
Funny how that works. It is using a mobile SoC.
| cycycychris said: I just want to point out how massive the battery is, they have literally put in the biggest battery that they more than likely could fit into the Switch... People might shit on the battery life, but it really looks like Nintendo tried there best to stretch it out as far as there design would let them. |
More to battery capacity than just physical size.
Different chemistry's have different power densities.
Lithium-ion Phosphate (Life4po) for instance is cheap, heavy, but lower density than your typical LiPo.
| Wyrdness said: From what I've read it indicates Maxwell Gen 2. |
It's Maxwell or Pascal, with a greater chance of it being Maxwell it seems. - That hasn't really changed since we discovered that the Switch was going to be Tegra powered.
| JEMC said: Do 2GB RAM chips exist? I thought the highest ones were 1GB. |
They sure do. Samsung has 16Gb chips. As there is 8 bits in a byte... That makes 2GB.
There is also 64Gb LPDDR4X chips as well, which is 8GB.
| dahuman said: Max is 4GB @ 3200MHz |
4266mhz.
| numberwang said: You can buy the Switch soon and we still don't know how much memory is in there... just Nintendo things. |
I think Ram capacity is the least contentious issue about the Switch.
| BlkPaladin said: On the reddit thread someone is saying since it is smaller then the X1, so it is at least made with the 16nm process, the X1 is 20 nm, But since it is a custom chip there isn't much else you can glean from it then that. |
TSMC's 16nm Finfet is based upon 20nm.
| JRPGfan said: Pretty sure the rumored 25 GB/S will turn out to be true. |
Yup.
| Bofferbrauer said: It's possibly LPDDR4, which comes at lower volume and clock rates due to lower voltages (and thus lower power consumption). However, a console like the Switch could need the bandwith from high-speed RAM, at 3200Mhz in a 64bit connection in Dual Channel (which seems to be implemented considering they have each their own connections to the custom Tegra chip) it could reach 51.2 Gigabyte/s. If the connection is broader than 64bit (Xbox ONE connects it's RAM with a 256 connection, so it's doable, just not the standard), Bandwith could be much higher. at the aforementioned 256bit the bandwith would be ober 200GB/s in this particular case, way more than the chip could ever need. My guess is it's (LP)DDR4-2133, but with a 128bit connection, giving a bandwith of 68GB/s, which should suffice for a console like the Switch. |
I think you are getting a little carried away.
DDR3 chips typically have a 16-bit memory bus for each chip. LPDDR4 has a 32bit bus for each chip. Thus it's impossible for it's bus width to be any larger than 64bit. Sorry to burst the bubble on that one.
Ergo, you are not going to have 68GB/s, 51.2GB/s or 200GB/s.
It will be 20-25GB/s which is standard for Tegra. - nVidia rely's on Delta colour compression to eek more usable bandwidth out of the limited resources it has.
| SegataSanshiro said: Disagree. Gamecube is the most efficent design there is in a console. PS4 get's loud and very hot. GCN never did. |
Agreed. The Gamecube was built like a brick shithouse.
But to compare it to the Playstation 4 is like comparing apples to oranges, completely different performance and power levels.
| curl-6 said: Gamecube was a very well balanced system; it was small, powerful, quiet, cheap, easy to develop for, had no serious bottlenecks, etc. It may be my least favourite console of Nintendo's due to its software, but in terms of hardware even Digital Foundry heaped praise on its elegant design. |
Agreed. It was well balanced. I would have preffered a more standardised GPU with proper shader support, but that is nit-picking.
| jonathanalis said: Correct me if Im wrong, but the foxconn leaks doesnt also said that the build was from october? So, if the teardown is from the final retail version, there is no october build, so, other point wrong to foxconn leak...(if im not mistaken) |
Didn't the Foxconn leaker also state that he thought the screen was 1080P? Why should the Foxconn leak hold any weight?
| SegataSanshiro said: Gamecube was very powerful console of it's gen and in some ways bested Xbox. |
The Xbox could easily best the Gamecube when it was programmed it's way. Games that pushed pixel shading really set the Xbox ahead of the Gamecube.
Although the Gamecube *could* technically do everything the original Xbox could, it did require more trickery to achieve it, regardless. The proof is in the pudding, ignoring asthetics/art, the Xbox had technically superior games.
| dahuman said: Nvidia doesn't license out their designs, Nintendo doesn't own it therefore it wouldn't be surprising to not see Nintendo on the chip. Nvidia also would be the ones to eat ARM's licensing costs and Nintendo wouldn't even have to worry about it. |
Exactly. nVidia holds it's cards (Pun intended) very near it's chest.
It was also likely the reason why Sony never combined the Cell and the nVidia GPU into a single chip, nVidia retained I.P control.
| maxleresistant said: Unremovable battery is kind of a big no for me. What is going to happen when the battery start to lose its efficacity? I'm going to have to open it like this? |
Yup. You either open it up. Or live with it.
Lithium battery's have a finite lifespan, exceed the amount of cycles on the battery... And it's dead.
maxleresistant said:
You can have a replaceable battery and have a sleek formfactor. A lot of phones have replaceable batteries. |
The 3DS battery only needed 2 screws..................
| monocle_layton said: Unfortunately, many phones are opting to remove the privilege of removable batteries. Baffles me how people are perfectly fine with it. |
I am a firm believer that the only time a feature should be removed is if you are replacing it with a better one, or improving the current one.
The only time I find a phone acceptable in removing the ability to remove the batterys is if they counter that with waterproofing.
Sure you can have a degree of water resistance even with a removable battery... It will never be as superior as a fully sealed unit from the outset.
--::{PC Gaming Master Race}::--
