Pemalite said:
curl-6 said:
Switch Lite was pretty much the same hardware as the original, with components cut out to reduce cost, so it would've been very cheap to develop. |
That is exactly what a Switch TV would be.
Components cut-out to reduce cost, so it would have been very cheap to develop.
curl-6 said:
The OP describes the device in question as a "powerful console" that would "compete with PS and Xbox"; that would take a lot more than just some cheap mobile components, you'd have to invest some serious money, and I doubt it would be worth it commercially when the audience who wants graphics will still find it lacking due to all its game being held back by the portable SKU. |
The Switch has significant clockspeed headroom on it's SoC, overclocking results have shown marked performance improvements upwards of 50% or more...
But that's taking clocks from:
CPU:
Default: 1020Mhz
Overclock: 2090Mhz
A 104% improvement. Aka. Doubling.
GPU:
Default: 768Mhz (Docked)
Overclock: 1305Mhz
About a 70% improvement.
Memory:
Default: 1333/1600Mhz
Overclock: 2500Mhz
A 56% improvement.
Some games see significant improvements to framerates of 50% or more, two of the Switch's biggest bottlenecks is the CPU and DRAM bandwidth, the CPU is held back by ancient ARM A57 cores clocked at only 1Ghz... And 1600Mhz Ram is not setting any records.
This would bridge the "gap" to the Xbox One easily enough.
******
Nintendo doesn't need to compete with the Xbox Series X or Playstation 5, it just needs to be "good enough".
And I would argue many ports are not offering a "good enough" experience with muddy textures, low resolutions, lots of pop-in and sub 30fps experiences. |
Oh if we're talking about just a home version of the Switch then I agree completely that it would make a lot of sense.
I was just referring to the scenario outlined in the OP; a console that's power-competitive with PS/Xbox.
Sephiran said:
Hardstuck-Platinum said:
Well according to everyone on this site it's already competing with PS and Xbox. In fact, it's not just competing, it's thrashing them! So, the people here really aren't going to appreciate that question. They think that once that switch slides into that dock, it turns into a monstrous and powerful console that is the envy of Sony and Microsoft, even it was only powerful enough to run one big third party release all year. Sonic shadow generations. Doesn't matter to anyone on here though. Who needs third party games? |
I don't get your point. Switch is evidently competing with them when it comes to sales figures, not when it comes to power. A Nintendo home console could never compete with them on sales figures though, even if they could compete on power. A powerful Nintendo console wouldn't stop Square Enix from making new Final Fantasy games only for Playstation, and same for the other big third parties. |
There's no point trying to have a rational discussion with him, he's just trolling.
Currently Online 
