The way I see it Nintendo can do as they please with NX. It will be a wacky platform probably with a bunch of crazy accessories on the console side like this patent Nintendo filed:

http://www.gameranx.com/updates/id/22968/article/nintendo-patents-a-3d-eye-tracking-device/

These are 3D glasses that can also create smells and blow wind/air to the users face, lol.

Smartphone revenue will be huge for Nintendo, they can now do as they please with NX.

They no longer have to cater to casuals/kids per se either because iOS/Android can fill that void even better than the Wii/DS did, but they don't have to grovel to third parties/dudebros players either. They can make something "Nintendo wacky" and so long as it doesn't lose them money, they'll be fine.

So from a business POV the smartphone thing is a monstrous game changer. 

NX is the first Nintendo platform that doesn't neccessarily have to carry Nintendo all by itself on its shoulders and be all things to all people either. It can just be one part of their business, next to smart device games, Quality of Life devices, and use of Nintendo IP in movie franchises and TV series'. As such I think Nintendo will be emboldened to take some chances/risks with the hardware design that they wouldn't otherwise. 

In 3-4 years Nintendo may very well have four profitable divisions rather than just being a gaming company that goes up and down based on however their current console and handheld is doing.

This isn't about trust. third parties do not think their games don't sell on nintendo consoles.

I'm also sure that GAMERS still trust nintendo due to their software quality.

Only as a whole due to many companies joining the gaming business. money wise for each individual company, it's not as profitable as before.

That's really not the point, the point is what's possible at the latest fab scales, you made a claim that AMD's next APUs for 2016 could perform as well or better than PS4's SOC and run on 15 watts. NVidia's designs of GPU tend to be more efficient than AMD's.

A 15 watt APU isn't going to beat PS4's SOC or even come close to matching it for performance.

Carizzo is a 28nm APU, with 512 Stream Processors or 8 Compute units, 2-4 Excavator CPU cores the desktop varient uses about 35 watts, which means efficiencies have been made, but they're not sufficient to put a 16nm SOC, with PS4 level specs, at that level of power consumption. A SOC, with 8 excavator CPU cores and 16CUs would run at around 1.7TFlops for 70 watts, PS4 is close to 2TFlops (taking it's CPU and GPU performance into consideration), so it's within spitting distance.

The 35 watt chip is less than half of the performance of PS4's SOC, CPU wise it may be better, but the graphics side is substantially weaker. Powerful enough to run modern games at HD resolutions at 30FPS, with low graphical settings, but those games wouldn't look great, I doubt Nintendo could be shooting for that low a level of performance, not in 2016/2017, not even if they launched this year.

Considering that Excavator is an evolution of current AMD architecture and they've managed to get some pretty decent efficiency improvements with slight tweaks to their current designs, on the same manufacturing process, a full, brand new process and brand new architecture design could yield bigger gains than I thought previously, but still not 15 watts for a SOC with PS4 levels of performance at 16nm. Maybe around 35 watts for PS4 levels of performance.

More like it gets out of  the third parties' way.  There is nothing wrong with making it easy for third parties to succeed.  TLoU is selling just fine.

Based on what?  Maxwell is more efficient than AMD's ~2 year old GPU's.   LOL big deal!  AMD's new line-up is out in 3 months so wait till then and we can talk.

As for history, Nvidia has by no means been an efficiency leader:

HD 5000 >>> GTX 400

HD 6000 >> GTX 500

HD 7000 >= GTX 600

R9 200 = GTX 700

R9 300 ? GTX 900

Based on the most important factor when it comes to efficiency, namely performance per watt.

GTX 900 should be compared to R9 200, they're both 28nm parts, yet NVidia's tech performs vastly better for the same or even lower levels of energy.

GTX 980 runs on like 165 watts, yet it vastly outperforms an R9 290x, meaning it's absolutely the more efficient card.

As things stand right now NVidia are far ahead, they release actual hardware revisions more often than AMD, they will be releasing a completely architecture next year in Pascal.

The only thing AMD has on Nvidia is cost, but they don't have a card on the market that will compare to the performance per watt of Nvidia's offerings, it's just a fact.

Beautifully put. The 3rd and 4th gens were the era of first parties calling the shots, from the 5th gen on, third parties called the shots, wth the exception of the Wii. Frankly, I prefer the dictatorship of first parties to third parties, if SNES/Wii are what happen when manufacturers call the shots, and PS4/Xbone are what happen when the third parties have the power.

This doesn't mean that first parties can't prosper, just that the consoles aren't led necessarily by their efforts.

So did you even look at what I said?  That is what I am talking about too, and Nvidia has been WAY behind for a long time.  Maxwell is the only efficient design I have seen them create, and it is competing with 2 year old cards lol