| Barkley said: Also I thought it was decided Foxconn was the accurate leak and the less powerful Eurogamer specs were "Debunked". |
I never took the Foxconn leak seriously. The leaker thought the Switch had a 1080P screen.
| numberwang said: I wonder what Zelda is running - considering it is only 900p docked it could be the 384MHz Turbo mode for portable 720p. |
Probably the boosted mode, would explain it's battery life.
Alkibiádēs said:
Can you point me to a handheld that can play games like Breath of the Wild on the go? |
I can point you to hardware that would have increased it's performance by a good 50% for the same amount of power.
| curl-6 said: So no real surprises then as far as specs go; we're looking at a Maxwell Tegra X1 with a quad core ARM Cortex A57 CPU, and 4GB of RAM with 25GB/s of bandwidth, as expected. Can someone who's good with tech explain how well the CPU stacks up to Wii U/PS4/Xbone's? (Bearing in mind that one of the four cores is apparently reserved for the OS) |
25.6GB/s of bandwidth docked, 21GB/s undocked.
Delta Colour Compression in an ideal situation would make that 33.28GB/s and 27.3GB/s. Ironically, that's a bandwidth that is well suited to 720P.
CPU wise, ARM A53 quads should beat the Wii U's PowerPC CPU with ease.
As for the cores themselves... ARM A57 > Jaguar > ARM A53 > PowerPC 750 at about the same clocks.
The real caveat is clockrates and core counts... Jaguar is probably going to be clocked higher than the Switch (And use more power) and will have twice the CPU cores for gaming.
So the Playstation 4 and Xbox One could have roughly 3x-4x the CPU performance all told, if not more. But that does depend on the Switch's clock rates being at about 1Ghz~
| Zekkyou said: I've not read that deeply into the A57, but my understanding is that a similarly clocked A57 core will generally perform better than a Jaguar core, but that the A57's overall advantage doesn't extend as far as 1GHz vs 1.6Ghz (the latter being the standard PS4, which has the lowest clocked Jaguar). I'm not sure how it compares to the WiiU's Espresso. |
Yep. A57 wins by about 10-15% at similar clocks to Jaguar...
It just shows how mediocre Jaguar really is though.
| Radek said: I dissagree. Battlefield 1 max settings on PC doesn't look that much better than PS4 Pro version which already runs around 1440p. And it's 60 fps of course... |
No way. Battlefield 1... 144fps and in eyefinity with everything dialed up to 11 is a *massive* difference over the consoles.
4k Eyefinity is a resolution of 11,520 x 2160 verses the Playstation 4 Pro's anemic 2560x1440 or 4k. - And the PC can step that up higher again.
The Graphics settings of Battlefield 1 still fall short of the PC's high settings, let-alone ultra, heck the Playstation 4 Pro's terrain quality is medium, not even high, PC beats it out with motion blur, depth of field, particles, ambient occolusion and more as well.
The PC version is still the definitive version and the best way to play it if graphics and performance are important.
www.youtube.com/@Pemalite
