Mobile chips  are designed to throttle based on the power available. It is quite possible that the system consumes more power when docked allowing access to more hardware components. It is hinted with the existence of the heat vent (which implies high power consumption.) 

Yeah that's true, when you put a laptop on high performance it drains the battery but it becomes way more powerful, I guess this is similar, when docked it will be more powerfull, but looking at the size seems like it should be really expensive to be close to Ps4, all the hardware is on the little tablet.

Its not just about costs.

Sometimes its about whats physically possible (laws of physics & reality).

Its not currently possible to make a tablet that can reach PS4 levels (at the size the Nitnendo switch is).

The Nitnendo Switch is going to be much less powerfull.... but it ll do something the PS4 doesnt.

You can use it as a handheld gameing or tablet (for reading in bed, tv series ect).

And as long as it has Nintendo games thats good enough, you cant get those on a PS4 either.

Again you're arguing with yourself here I've simply said battery life may not be as much of a priority as a handheld given they've said it's not replacing 3DS and that Switch is primarily a home console you're now arguing that people have said it has poor battery life, two completey diffeent statements which is why I'm saying some of your arguments are your own thing here you're arguing with something you've told yourself in the debate and not what has actually been said.

Second Nintendo's staement tells me that primarily the home experience (gaming is such environments) is what switch aims for so being portable in one aspect is just a neat feature it has but not the main focuse which leads to what I initially said in that a handheld variant could focus more on the portable and mobile aspects because portable gaming experience is a different ball park it's more pick up and play and continue the design and usage of two screens in the DS brand (something switch can't emulate on the go) while games while Switch focuses on more traditional home console experiences.

How am I arguing with myself? You suggested that the battery life on it might be poor even giving examples of 3-4 hours which is one way your so called handheld might differ from it. Meanwhile, I am saying that the Switch might have a good battery life to not warrant that. And when did I say "people have said it has poor battery life" ??? I said you said it but not people...

How is the Switch in a different ball park than portable gaming? Tablets and phones have all been single screen gaming for quite sometime now... They have plenty of pick up and play games... Now of course, it being portable isn't its main focus, but rather, it being portable while you are on the go or when you are at home, it being able to connect to the TV is its main focus. Nintendo certainly could make a handheld but as far as to why you are saying they will instead of having the Switch be both their console and handheld doesn't really make much sense. Because while Switch can't do Dual Screen gaming, why does it need to since mobile and tablet users are plenty happy with single screen gaming.

I said it may not be a priority for them to match other portable devices in that aspect if they primarily see it as a home console so a possible life of 3-4 hours may be possible, you however have taken it as an actual claim that it's going to have that so yes you're arguing with yourself on that one as you keep asking questions like where did they say that in the video. That's your own issue and not my problem if you condition yourself to think that.

If you don't understand the difference from portable gaming experiences to home console gaming experiences don't reply, no offence dude just don't I'm not interested in you just looking for an argument, because it's well noted the difference between the more pick up and play designs of the portable world which often leads to alot of bitesize sections and all while home console gaming experience is more geared for prolonged play in longer sessions. This is one massive reason why Nintendo's HH userbase is separate from the console userbases, ALBW and the upcoming BOTW highlight the differences.

The dual screen gaming add a lot to Nintendo's portable games that's why, some games are completely built around it as well mobile and tablet users are catered to on the 3DS where as they could be on its successor.

I don't think thats what "arguing with yourself" means... At best, it could mean a miss communication... Not arguing with myself... Also I don't think I have said that you claimed that it has poor battery life, I said that you suggested it might (hence your charger arguments) which the trailer does not suggest so it is a less of a reason for them to make a handheld.

Well.. You quoted me and aren't making convincing arguments as to say what the differences could be. If you can't that's not my problem. What you are suggesting about pick up and play games can be done with the current Switch.

It did add a lot but that doesn't mean Nintendo can't move away from it. And mobile and tablet users are catered more so to single mobile/tablet screens than the DS setup since that is what they use daily. 

Upscaling on a small mobile screen shouldn't be too jarring. But upscaling that on a 60" TV will be terrible.

It's not 25.6Gb/s in the real world and is not representative of your old Geforce.

If you cared to read... The Dev kit says Maxwell 2nd Generation. That's Pascal.

Without a doubt I can say it is vastly superior to the Wii U in every aspect. There isn't even any need for games to prove this point.

At the moment. It's impossible. Fabrication isn't "there" yet.
This device is using a modified Tegra, thus there are compromises in order to hit a low enough TDP for mobile devices.

CPU side though, nVidia's Big.Super Core layout might be able to beat Jaguar, I would need to see what Dev's do without first to know for sure.

i mean modular

but wasnt the launch price of the 3DS 250$?