By using this site, you agree to our Privacy Policy and our Terms of Use. Close
nemo37 said:

I sort of responded to this before (in a reply above), but I will paste what I said in that post below (just as a summary, the GFLOPS number is not in many cases the best indicator of real-life performance; in practice the Switch's GPU should be equivalant or more powerful than the GPU in the PS3 even when not docked, but of course nowhere near as powerful as what is in the PS4 and Xbox One). Here is my argument pasted below again:

"As for the GPU, I am assuming you are looking at the floating point operations per second (FLOPS), in which case yes the PS3 is theoretically faster than the Switch in portable mode. However, that number may be deceiving because there are many other factors that need to be taken into account, and in practice the Switch in portable mode should be, at worst, on-par or, most likely, even faster than the PS3 GPU. Here is a good example as to why GFLOPS are not the end-all, especially in gaming performance. This link (  benchmarks the AMD Radeon Fury X (8601 GFLOPS) compared to an Nvidia GTX 1070 (5783-6463). Going by the GFLOPS alone, the Fury X should be able to handedly beat the GTX 1070, but in most cases the 1070 outperforms the Fury X. Now it should be noted that Fury X and GTX 1070 were released in 10 month period from one another; there is a 10 year gap between the Maxwell-based GPU in the Switch's X1 and the PS3's GeForce 7-based GPU, so even while the theoretical floating point is slightly higher on the PS3 than Switch in portable, there are numerous other advantages that the Maxwell GPU has over its PS3 predecessor that should give Switch in portable mode the performance advantage (even if it is a narrow advantage)."

I wouldn't deny that. I was just going on the basis of heresay and I'm no expert at this. Still of course, the OP wants full blown PS4 games on the Switch, which is a different challenge entirely. People that are happy with the Switch support don't realise most third party games on the Switch are ports of last generation games, exclusives and 60fps games on current generation. The Switch has yet to be tested with a 1080p30fps title on the PS4 that's not also on a last generation console which I don't think is possible without stripping away its soul.

I would agree. most Western AAA titles are pretty much out of the question, though there are still quite a few non-AAA titles, even some that are capped at 30 FPS that can make it (remember not all titles are capped because that is what the system can run, sometimes a cap is put in place because the dev does not want the frame rate to fluctuate). Nevertheless, technical limitations are amongst the primary (potentially the primary?) reason why we will not get third-party release parity with the other systems. My point though was just about disputing the weaker than PS3 GPU aspect of your post.