Should remember it was Capcom that got the memory of Switch upped from 2GB to 4GB because they stated they couldn't get some of their latest engines working in 2GB which was the Switch's original design memory.
The figure of 1 core and 1GB used for the Switch os is on early release firmware and could be improved but I suspect the firmware will get many additions and it will never be reduced but the operating system will get many great features added like saving video, more apps and other functionality that will require cpu processing.
The big little arrangement of the X1 was designed by Nvidia and not ARM and unfortunately it can only use 4 cores at a time. As far as we know Nintendo has disabled this completely and a custom revision of the chip could actually remove the small CPU's and use the space for something else. It's possible to do design nips and tucks especially if it goes to 16nm that will not effect compatibility but could add increased battery life and prevent memory bottlenecking and frame drops. Alternatively some processing currently on support chips could be moved into the SOC, wifi processing which again would speed up the system and still be compatible. So a later Switch revision could be nicely improved with better frame rates without losing compatibility. It will mean the early Switch's are inferior though which is a kick in the teeth to early adopters.
With the 32GB storage being on a daughter board its pretty clear Nintendo had designed the Switch with regard higher capacity models, so we may see 64GB and 128GB models too and they seem to have designed the system so internal storage outperforms third party SD cards so those wanting the best performance will go with these premium Switch models. 32GB models will probably represent entry level at some point and new colours and special editions with higher capacity storage the premium end.
For reference I think the ps3 uses one cell processor out of 7 for the operating system and doesn't touch the dual thread main powerpc cpu and I think the Xbox 360 uses one of its 6 threads for the operating system. For audio processing I think again the PS3 uses one cell processor and unsure on 360. The original xbox has a dedicated 5.1 audio chip but I think the 360 has to process audio from its cpu so possibly another thread or partial thread used. So the Switch is using a lot more of its resources for the background operating system.
I think we should be looking at 360 and PS3 for comparable performance to Switch. In some ways they are superior, memory bandwidth and cpu performance and in some ways inferior gpu architecture and lower memory capacity but I think they represent what is achievable by Switch thereabouts. Both original ps4 and xbone are hugely more powerful than Switch but then Switch is a portable and really should be compared to ios, android and vita plus maybe windows tablets. If you want to compare to a home console it should be the last gen models.
The difference between Dragon Quest on ps4 and Nintendo Switch is a comparable gulf to those of ps4 and ps3 or xbox one and xbox 360.
As ever with Nintendo its going to be interesting to see what can be achieved with their hardware and how it compares to the best games on other portable systems.
