It's hard to gauge the Tegra X1 chip because as something that's only in Nvidia's Shield Console basically it has very little software support and no team was going to build a game specifically for it, the Shield's install base makes the Wii U look like the PS4. It's quite likely developers coding to the metal of the unit and actually putting effort into it could get a ton more out of it (look at what Vita devs have pushed a chip 1/14th of a Tegra X1 to).

But Doom 3 BFG Edition on the X1 is one example of a port from PS3/360 that runs at full 1080P 60fps while the PS3/360 struggle to run the same game at 720p (PS3 version drops below 720p many times actually). So when programmed well for it can run 1080P 60 fps games even, just PS3/360 quality, but that is not an insignificant bump.

To me this whole NX concept hinges on execution from now. Nintendo can either be sloppy with the execution or they can take this concept and execute it very tightly but would say is:

There must be TWO performance modes for NX IMO. If this is truly a portable console and not just a portable with a TV out, then it should have different performance modes. The needs to display on a 6-inch screen are very different from a 55-inch HDTV display.

You don't need even 720p for portable mode. Even 960x540 or 1024x600 as a display target for play on the go is plenty.

But the home games should be able to run at full 1080p IMO. It needs to be a tangible leap beyond the Wii U when playing at home.

The home mode performance should be in the range of 1 TFLOP while the portable being 400 GFLOPS or so. If they can pull that off, however they do it (docked mode, a dock with extra processing power, all the power in the chip which downclocks in portable mode then is cooled by the dock for full power, etc. etc.) then this concept will work pretty well for them.

If they are just farting out a portable that can render OK on a 6-inch sub-720p display but thinking that signal mirrored to a TV is good enough for it to function as a "home console" too ... that is incredibly lazy and the system won't be seen as a viable TV console IMO. 

The problem is that going for full 1080p might actually prevent its graphics looking considerably better than Wii U, as a lot of its extra processing power would be used up just in the increase from 720p to 1080p. They'd probably be better off spending that extra power on graphical elements that are more noticeable, much like how most of the best looking Xbox One games shoot for 900p or 720p in favour of more detailed visuals.

I am not saying the Tegra chip isn't going to be more powerful than the Wii U SoC, it's not an overly difficult thing to achieve anyway, beating the Wii U.
But I am also not the one beating the drum saying it's the second coming either.

You are basing your entire "performance" assumption on a single number. Flops. - Which from that you are assuming it's going to be doing high-end 1080P gaming, when the fact of the matter is, the Tegra chip just isn't capable of it with a degree of imagry we have come to expect, you need to look at the entire graphics processor, not just it's single precision floating point performance.

Let's use the Xbox 360 and Xbox one in combination with your silly flops metric as an example shall we?
Most Xbox 360 games were around 720P, just like the Wii U.

The Xbox 360 has only 240 Gflop.
The Xbox One has 1.3 Teraflops, that's the equivalent of 5.5x Xbox 360's. - Is the Xbox One running games at 5.5x the resolution of the Xbox 360? NO. It's not, it struggles to achieve 1080P in a ton of titles.

Again, having Pascal instead of Maxwell in Tegra isn't a game changer, not to the same degree we saw on the Desktop, Tegra isnt going from 28nm to 16nm for starters, that limits what nVidia can do.

I do agree to an extent. There is not much in the way of software built for Tegra that takes advantage of various nuances in the chip design.

But that isn't to say we don't have an *idea* of it's capabilities, there have been a few Unreal Engine 3 powered games ported over to Shield and the results were mixed, sure, it did pump up the resolution and framerate, but image quality was severely compromised as Tegra simply doesn't have the bandwidth and fillrate to keep pace with the bigger consoles... And that was on a last generation title. (Resident Evil 5.)

Vita games tend to look terrible to me by the way, they "hide" the graphics with substantual use/abuse of 2D sprites and pre-calculated lighting/shadowing/baked details to hide the devices shortcomings.

Doom 3 is an old game, not a next-gen title pushing the hardware.

Proof?

And you continue to abuse the Gflop metric.

Here is the kicker. You could have a 400Gflop GPU beat a 1 TFLOP GPU.

Do you even know what kind of Gflop/Tflop you are even talking about?

But it would be cheap... And that play's to Nintendo's strengths that they have stuck to for the Wii and Wii U, price.

Just to note, what TSMC calls "16nm" is just their rebranded 20nm node with FinFETs instead of an actual shrink so that already limits what nvidia can improve upon with Pascal Tegra when there's no shrink in geometries ... 

Actually, I'd say one of Wii U's major issues was that it was overpriced for what it offered.

Actually I believe here is states a 60% power saving over even 20nm (I guess 20nm was a bust, no wonder it wasn't widely used much) when talking about 16nm FF+ (16nm FF and 16nm FF+ are different). That's pretty significant. 

http://wccftech.com/nvidia-pascal-gpu-manufactured-tsmc-16nm-ff-node-flagship-single-chip-card-feature-16-gb-hbm2-vram/

TSMC’s 16FF+ (FinFET Plus) technology can provide above 65 percent higher speed, around 2 times the density, or 70 percent less power than its 28HPM technology. Comparing with 20SoC technology (this is 20nm), 16FF+ provides extra 40% higher speed and 60% power saving.

Wouldn't surprise me actually if this is the real reason NX was delayed, if they were using a vanilla or even modified Tegra X1 and nothing but, they should have been good to go for this Christmas, and Zelda should be done so I'm sure they could've put together a decent launch since they sure as hell haven't been making many/any Wii U games of late. Since it's a portable hybrid it probably could've had HD versions of Pokemon Sun/Moon too. 

If Kimishima had said that they delayed because of chip issues it would've caused a fire storm of questions over who is the chip maker, what chip is Nintendo using (that caused the NX delayed), etc. etc. etc., so I think saying games weren't ready was a much more PR-savvy excuse. 

No, I don't assume on single number only, I assume also that doesnt make sense at all to release another 720p console in 2017. after Wii U. With Wii U Nintendo clearly targeting 720p machine, and they achieve that, most of Nintendo Wii U games are 720p/60fps and even have some 1080p games, with NX they will most likely target 540p-720p for handheld only and 1080p with base unit for playing on TV, and that could be easily achieved with around 3x stronger hardware than Wii U has, and we all know that Wii U CPU and GPU are quite weak and have only 1GB RAM for games.

I didnt said Pascal will be game changer but definitely will make some difference instead Maxwell.

Also fact is that Nintendo always using custom chips for their hardware, so most likly X1, X2 or Pascal base chip will be custom made for Nintendo needs.

LAWL, don't believe any of the hype from semiconductor foundries when they've been becoming stagnant ... 

In real world scenarios ASICs only managed a gain of a little less than 60% perf/watt at the BEST CASE from 28nm when transitioning to 16nm (GTX 980 t GTX 1080 and the latter had to use the state of the art standardized GDDR5X memory modules) ... 

I am warning you that you are setting yourself up for some extreme disappointment if you believe the NX is going to be this beast of an engineering marvel that'll somehow be able to deliver PS4 equivalent experience at the go in a small little package ... 

I've never said it was a beast, I do think they probably are waiting for 16nm FF+. As far as I know there are no 16nm FF+ processors on the market right now though it was promised for this year, my guess is that being well behind schedule and that is the real reason for the NX delay.

I don't expect pixel perfect PS4 ports, but even the PS3/360 are capable of running some PS4 games like Far Cry 4 and Metal Gear Solid V. It's up to the developer, in Japan I'm going to guess many devs will be willing to put in the effort to retool even PS4 games for NX because it's likely going to be the market leader in Japan.

I think the most sensible set up is for the NX to have one performance mode for portable/battery power, and another for TV/home play that is 2-4x the battery based performance. That would be a *real* hybrid device that can credibly perform on the road but also on a 50+ inch home television screen. How they do that, whether by having only part of the chip active in portable mode or if they have some tech off-loaded onto a home dock is up to their designers to figure out, they get paid a whole lot more money than I do to figure this stuff out (which is $0). 

Having said that, they make their own decisions and I'm buying a NX no matter what on day 1 and I will play my NX more than a PS4 or XBox or whatever because I prefer Nintendo software, doesn't matter how many giga/tera/jigaflops there are. 

Why would they even have to wait for 16nm FF+ when Apple has been using it for almost a year already and that Nvidia themselves have 16nm GPUs out there for the mainstream market since May ?

Even if the NX has two tiers of perfomance modes, Nintendo still has to make sure that the device won't just suddenly start melting at full power ...