Can we agree Nintendo should go third party, now?

[sc94597]

JRPGfan said:

sc94597 said:

You are talking about a five year span here. Tegra will likely not even be labeled "X-whatever" then. I suspect an "X3" would be long old technology, and the x-series analogous to the non-K/X series today. 

Again Tegra 2 had a max of 7 GFLOPS in 2011 and the X1 500 GFLOPS in 2016. Even if Moore's Law slows its pace for GPU technology like it has for CPU's (which is a wild prediction), it is unreasonable to believe that it will slow that much.

Switch's successor is going to easily be more powerful than a base PS4, and likely will match or exceed a PS4 pro

Apples & oranges.

Tegra 2 was ment for smartphones. (0.3-1,5watts)

Tegra X1 is ment for cars. (10-20watts)

You cant really compair them directly because their at two differnt power consumption levels.

 

Nvidia:

2013 : Tegra 4 = 76.8 Gflops @4watts (28nm hpl)

2014 : Tegra K1 = 365 Gflops @8-10watts.  (28nm hpm)

2015 : Tegra X1 = 512 Gflops @15-20watts (20nm)  (shield TV uses 20-22+ watts when gpu is at max load)

 

These are big improvements over just 2 years time... however I dont think it continues at this rate.

Tegra 2 was used in tablets as well as phones which should have similar power requirements to the Switch when gaming. What it meant for does not matter, it is what it was used for and how much power was available which matters. A fairer comparison is that between the Switch in handheld mode and a 2012 tablet with tegra 2. The difference is still quite large. 

 

There is no reason to think the theoretical performance gains are going to change in rate. GPU's are paralellizable (you add more cores with die shrinks) and therefore more closely realize performance gains from transistor count than CPU's. That is why performance changes so rapidly all else held equal. Nvidia has already hinted at Volta Gpu's with 512 CUDA cores. And that is for this year.