Pemalite said:
Bofferbrauer2 said:
I expect it to be a shrink to 14/12/10nm (7nm is too expensive and too much in demand right now to produce large quantities). Probably the 12nm process NVidia is already using. However, no actual changes or redesigns in the hardware, so everything new comes with that shrink.
Which means either more power (about 30% max), more battery life (about 50% max), or a mix of both. Given that 30% more is barely visible, I think it will be better battery life except if the game explicitely calls upon the extra horsepower (those things can be programmed in)
It would also be ideal to power a smaller, thinner Switch, as it would produce less heat and run longer with a smaller battery, after all.
|
I concur. 12nm (Based on 16nm which in turn is based on 20nm.) would be the most ideal fit... But that is still a dramatic improvement over the archaic 20nm process.
Very interesting that Nintendo isn't just simply dropping the Pascal derived Tegra in... And nVidia decided it was worth the effort to engineer/respin a new SoC for Switch and Shield.
No reason why we can't have both performance gains and battery life gains though.
|
I can't help but feel like it'll be 16nm simply cos Nintendo always seems to play it conservative when it comes to tech stuff.
As for not using X2, could going from Maxwell to Pascal conceivably cause any compatibility issues, could existing Switch games perhaps use some Maxwell-specific code? Maybe it was simply cheaper this way and they don't wanna fork out the cash for the X2.
