By using this site, you agree to our Privacy Policy and our Terms of Use. Close
dahuman on 17 March 2017
Edit Thread
Pemalite said:
dahuman said:
I honestly have no complaints about it since this is about the best mobile chip you can have on the market ATM, and the Switch has more RAM than all the counter parts.

It's actually not.

dahuman said:

What I'm surprised about however, is that the A53 cores are still in there instead of something else, that, is fucking weird. Which makes me wonder if Nvidia simply refused to change the design or if they changed the way the cache is accessed between the cores somewhere in there, but we'll never know until somebody puts Android or Linux on there then we'll find out for sure(I think it's just a stock X1 at this point for sure though.)

I would have rather Nintendo opted for four of the lowest powered CPU cores that they could get, and only had those. (Like 4x A53).
Then spent more transistors/TDP on the GPU.

I'm not talking just about pure performance, I'm talking about side support from Nvidia as well. Can you imagine the shit show it'd be if they went with something like a Snapdragon 821 or an Exynos 8890? The software engineering on Nintendo's part would be way shittier and most likely not as easy to dev for from 3rd parties.

That's a good thought on the second part for sure, they could have fit another SM in that space and the Switch would have 768GFLOPs in FP32 max in that case, though I wonder what kind of thermal it'd have in that configuration and if it'd have a CPU bottleneck considering that the performance difference between the A53 and A57 can be up to 5x+ depending on the situation. I can't help but think it's because of Nvidia that the SoC is in it's stock configuration at this point.