The chipset doesn't exist because it wasn't released yet. Nintendo will use tech released in between 2020 and 2021. There's nothing crazy about a switch 2 being a lot more powerful than a ps4 just like there's nothing crazy about the switch being a lot more powerful than the ps3.
The tegra x2 all the way from 2015 is already on par or better than the xbox one gpu. And are you seriously using overpriced phones for an argument? The switch was going to release in 2016 with a 2015 chip that was high end. My expectations are the same for the switch 2: a 2022 release using a high end 2021 mobile gpu and proportional advances in ram + cpu.
The switch already proves you wrong because nintendo went for the best they could get while breaking even or having a small profit per unit at $299. It used a 2015 gpu with a release scheduled for 2016.
FLOPS =/= PERFORMANCE. If you're going to use just flops, you should first make an "exchange rate" of up to 2:1 because nvidea gpus tend to perform similarly to amd gpus with a lot more flops. In your language, it's like those 400 gflops on switch are equal to 700-800 when compared to the other amd gpus. Tegra volta already has like 1.3 tflops. Several years later and with a 7/8nm shrink, it should be very easy for nvidea to deliver a 3-3.2 tflop mobile gpu in 2021. That would already match or be close to the raw performance of xb1x gpu.
That's like saying in 2013 that a $299 mobile hardware in 2016 would barely surpass an x360 but the switch is here to prove that wrong. The ps4 and x1 are 2013 consoles using 2012 tech. We're talking about a 9 year technological gap that actually favors mobile tech (it's obviously gonna stay bellow non mobile but the gap is smaller). The switch 2 will be obviously superior than those consoles in every aspect and the only thing that might be close is portable mode gpu power. There's nothing surprising about that, it's just how technology works.
Nintendo didn't take the best they could, far from it. If they wanted the newest stuff, they would have opted for a Tegra X2 instead. In fact, most hoped it would be an X2 or a custom chip, and it only being an X1 was a serious bummer for many. A Qualcomm Snapdragon 820 or 821 would also have been a more modern and powerful possibility.
I know very well Flops ain't equal to performance. However, if you have a better metric to compare the raw performance between a console and a mobile chip, let me know about it, please.
@bolded: Well, there's your problem. The GPU is what limits in 99% of the cases. I agree that a Switch 2 will have much better CPU and more technologies to enhance visuals, but the raw performance will be limited by the GPU. Well, the GPU and the RAM, as GDDR5/6 are way too power hungry for handheld use and (LP)DDR5 will still be much slower in terms of bandwidth than GDDR5 was back then, choking the SoC down.
We aren't far away from matching the Playstation 4 today... The Snapdragon 865 will beat the Xbox One... And the difference between the Xbox One and Playstation 4 isn't generationally different.
Afaik that's peak performance, and they can't keep that performance over long distances. I'm pretty sure the 865 will stay well below XBO after the first minute or two, otherwise the case would become too hot and the battery drain too fast.
Orin is a 65W chip and thus doesn't qualify for handhelds even in the slightest. It's fully axed to deep learning, so not even sure if it could bring it's performance to the ground in a console.
Xavier is more interesting, as NVidia just announced 2 new, low consumption versions of the chip. Their name? NX! The 10W version could actually be quite interesting for a mid-life upgrade of the Switch, as it could run at near full speed (Tegra X1 was specified for 15W and had been consequently slowed down a lot)
The Nintendo eShop rating Thread: http://gamrconnect.vgchartz.com/thread.php?id=237454
The Steam/GOG key gifting thread: https://gamrconnect.vgchartz.com/thread/242024/the-steamgog-key-gifting-thread/1/