Pemalite said:
Miyamotoo said:
Difference is that Jaguar in PS4 is 8-core CPU that runs at 1.7GHz while A57 is 4-core CPU that runs at 1GHz. If I recall, A57 vs Jaguar core vs core on same clocks had similar results in benchmarks.
|
The Playstation 4 Operates at 1.6ghz, not 1.7ghz.
ARM A57 and AMD's Jaguar should be roughly equivalent in performance per clock. But Jaguar operates at a higher clock and has more cores. - But you are just reinforcing my argument at this point.
Remember though... AMD's Jaguar was AMD's absolute worst CPU at a time when even their high-end CPU's were trending towards the low-end. - Perspective.
Miyamotoo said:
PS5/XB2 will have huge update in CPU, but possible Switch 2 will also have huge upgrade in CPU side in any case, I mean if just now curently imagine for instance A76 6-core CPU running at 2GHz compared to current A57 4-core CPU runing at 1GHz, we talking about huge difference, and Switch will most likely using more stronger and more advance CPU than latest ARM CPU for potential Switch 2 that would most likely be released in 2023, and that would be most likely enough to runs 4K PS5/XB2 games at 1080p at least in docked mode.
|
The Switch 2 will also have an increase in CPU capability, it would be pretty asinine to assume otherwise anyway.
The jump from A57 to A72 was 90%.
The jump from A72 to A73 was 30%.
The jump from A73 to A76 was 35%.
The jump from Jaguar to Zen you are probably looking at 400% or more. - 800-900% if it's an octo variant of Zen+.
And that is before we start looking at Zen 2...
Fact is... AMD spent years trailing the industry, where-as ARM hasn't... And that pays off for the current Switch in comparison to the Playstation 4/Xbox One. - But that all goes away next gen as AMD finally has a CPU design worth talking about, the performance delta on the CPU side of the equation is set to grow next gen, that's just a reality of AMD catching up to Intel.
Miyamotoo said:
No I didn't forget, I actually wrote its 20nm, and 20nm is reason why they couldnt go with higher clocks, higher clocks with X1 thats 20nm would mean higher heating and less battery life.
|
It's part of the reason.
The other is that it's a Maxwell derived part. - nVidia made significant engineering changes with Pascal in order to drive up clockrates for the same amount of power.
Miyamotoo said:
If they for instance used Tegra X2 you can bet they would use higher clocks for CPU and GPU. Biggest bottleneck for Switch is CPU not GPU, and that was obvious from day one.
|
I disagree, the largest bottleneck is the GPU. - It simply doesn't have the bandwidth/fillrate to drive higher resolutions... And that is evident in the many games that aren't even in HD/720P.
The CPU doesn't really help in some games though.
curl-6 said:
GTA5 runs on the Xbox 360. Anything that runs on the 360 could run on Switch.
|
Anything the Xbox 360 can do, the Switch can do better.
Miyamotoo said:
Again, point that some game isn't on Switch (at least currently) doesn't meant that game couldnt run on Switch. Actually we had multiply different insiders saying that current one of biggest problem for some biggest 3rd party games coming to Switch is size/cost/availability of Switch carts, and games like GTAV and CoD are heavily hinted examples. So Pro model still wouldnt solved currently one of biggest Switch problems regardles big 3rd party games. I mean there is reason why no one using even 32GB Switch carts (so 16GB is biggest cards that are using).
|
Also can't forget that... The Xbox One and Playstation 4 tend to have uncompressed 7.1 audio, which takes up a massive chunk of space. - And then 1080P FMV on top of that.
Carts are technically superior to optical disks on every front, except... Cost.
It costs to have large capacities, so something has to give somewhere.
|
My bad, XB1 operates at 1.75GHz.
Yeah, I know that, but ARM A57 was in Switch was heavily constrained buy 20nm, thats why has 4 core and operates at only 1GHz.
Well person I was replying to was talking like Switch 2 will stay on ARM A57.
Thats just jump when you talk about same clock and some Core count, tell for instance about how much difference we talk only if Switch 2 uses for instance A76 6-Core CPU clocked at 2GHz compared to A57 4-Core 1GHz? And its safe to say that potentail Switch 2 will use more stronger CPU than A76.
Like you wrote earlier, 8-Core ARM A57 at 1.7GHz would be very comparable to PS4/XB1 CPU. I was very clear that PS5/XB2 will again have stronger CPUs than Switch 2 in any case, I dont arguing that. But with all that on mind, Switch 2 could easily have stronger CPU than PS4/XB1 have, and IMO that would be enough to run 4K PS5/XB2 games at least 1080p in docked mode maybe even in 1440p with maybe some other downgrades, and that was my main point.
Well that's my point, Tegra X2 would alow Switch to have higher CPU and GPU clocks than currently has, even higher memory bandwith (double compared to current one).
Switch has enough power to run some games at higher resolution than it does currently, but doesn't have enough CPU power to maintain probably even 20 FPS in that case. From specs reveal devs said that biggest bottleneck is A57 that has 3-cores available for games and operates at only 1GHz. Next biggest bottleneck is RAM bandwidth, when you look hole Switch configuration, GPU is biggest advance of Switch hardware and after that size of RAM.
Yeah, one of biggest problems for some 3rd partyes when to comes to Switch support is cost of Switch carts.
