Based on Nvidia's own slides. The Tegra X2 is roughly 50% more powerful 768GLOPS (X2) versus 512GLOPS (Tegra X1). It's manufactured on a smaller process. So it should use less power than a Tegra X1. The Tegra X2 also has 2 to 3 times the memory bandwidth depending on whether it's using LDDR4 (50GB/s) vs GDDR5 (80GB/s). The Tegra X1 had 25GB/s LDDR4. You'd hope Nintendo would opt for GDDR5 but you never know with Nintendo.

Edit: The 1.5 TFLOP number people are touting is inaccurate that's in FP16. It's half that number 768GLOPs in FP32. FP32 is what the Xbox One and PS4 GPUs specs measured with.

Price is the concern.  I have hope mainly because of the beating the Tegra brand has taken.  It peaked way back in 2011 with the Tegra 3.  Since then they have lost a lot of market share to competitors in the tablet and cellphone space and attempts to penitrate those markets and the console market with their own Shield devices have failed.  So Tegra needs a win and powering a device like the Switch to a high level would be huge PR bullet point for them, perhaps big enough to be worth taking smaller profits than normal.  But yes, cost is a trouble.  But that may be part of the reason they have customized it quite a bit, to pull the cost down while keeping as much of the muscle in there as they can.

As for price, I'm more leaning towards 300 to 350 as opposed to 250 to 300.  Obviously 300 would be better and easier to sell than 350.  But, I think 350 could work.  With the right marketing, the newness factor can help in those early months.  Also, if they can continue to emphasize the convenience, I think that will help hold interest.  The unique abilities of the system are novel like the Wii, but also practical in a way that won't just wear off like the Wii did for many.  But most important are games.  If they can really have a cdense lineup and some good 3rd party support, I think they could do well at 350 at least until E3 2018, where they could lower the price.  Zelda and Mario are looking to be the launch and holiday titles respectively so that's a great start, we now need to know what will stack the shelves in the months between.  If they play their cards right, I think 350 could work, if the power is there.  If not, then 300 will be the top they could sell at. 

It will be intersting to see where this goes, but I'm optimistic in general with the Switch.

I think that the Switch is dead at $350. There's no way Nintendo can release a device like this at that price when the competition have vastly more powerful devices for less. Nintendo isn't a premium tech brand, and as amazing as the tech is it's not a premium tech device, so they can't afford to price their systems that way.

I also am confident they won't put anything in the system to put it over $300, because the executives over there have repeated multiple times that they regretted pricing the Wii U that high, and that that was something they wanted to fix with the Switch. They want to make the Switch inexpensive. It's just a matter of whether they consider that $299 or $249. I'm hoping it's $249 because that would be a titanic price point, but I'm expecting $299. If Nintendo reveals the price to be $350, I think you'll see an onslaught of negative press. At $300, you'll get a mostly neutral press. At $250, you'll see overwhelmingly positive press and momentum, so I think that that is what Nintendo should be going for. The most powerful they can make the Switch for $249.

I think that the Switch is dead at $350. There's no way Nintendo can release a device like this at that price when the competition have vastly more powerful devices for less. Nintendo isn't a premium tech brand, and as amazing as the tech is it's not a premium tech device, so they can't afford to price their systems that way.

I also am confident they won't put anything in the system to put it over $300, because the executives over there have repeated multiple times that they regretted pricing the Wii U that high, and that that was something they wanted to fix with the Switch. They want to make the Switch inexpensive. It's just a matter of whether they consider that $299 or $249. I'm hoping it's $249 because that would be a titanic price point, but I'm expecting $299. If Nintendo reveals the price to be $350, I think you'll see an onslaught of negative press. At $300, you'll get a mostly neutral press. At $250, you'll see overwhelmingly positive press and momentum, so I think that that is what Nintendo should be going for. The most powerful they can make the Switch for $249.

They didn't have a choice with the Wii U. The dollar was weak and the yen was strong. Exchange rates were killing them.

The temperature of the press with regards to price I think will heavily depend on 1) how seamless the switching is and 2) performance.  Also, it the Scorpio - the other new hotness of 2017 - will also help if it's priced rather high.  It's all relative afterall.  I think 300 would be ideal but I think 350 could work, assuming it has the specs and works as well as the trailer shows.  I think $250 is unrealistically low, given Nvidia's involvement.  Nvidia isn't going to want to power something very weak, their rep is all about that premium idea.  And while I think they would give Nintendo a good deal, I doubt they would give them THAT good a deal :P . 

Another question is whether Nintendo will willingly take a loss to keep the price low.

Also, I think the marketing so heavily emphasizing the home consoleness of the Switch - home console orriented games in the trailer, calling it home console over and over - is a good indicator that it won't land in a handheld-esque price range in 2017.  Which is another reason I would say 300 is the bottom possible price.

Based on Nvidia's own slides. The Tegra X2 is roughly 50% more powerful 768GLOPS (X2) versus 512GLOPS (Tegra X1). It's manufactured on a smaller process. So it should use less power than a Tegra X1. The Tegra X2 also has 2 to 3 times the memory bandwidth depending on whether it's using LDDR4 (50GB/s) vs GDDR5 (80GB/s). The Tegra X1 had 25GB/s LDDR4. You'd hope Nintendo would opt for GDDR5 but you never know with Nintendo.

Edit: The 1.5 TFLOP number people are touting is inaccurate that's in FP16. It's half that number 768GLOPs in FP32. FP32 is what the Xbox One and PS4 GPUs specs measured with.

The temperature of the press with regards to price I think will heavily depend on 1) how seamless the switching is and 2) performance.  Also, if the Scorpio - the other new hotness of 2017 - is priced too high, that will help by providing a distraction and favorable value comparison.  It's all relative afterall.  I think 300 would be ideal but I think 350 could work, assuming it has the specs and works as well as the trailer shows.  I think $250 is unrealistically low, given Nvidia's involvement.  Nvidia isn't going to want to power something very weak, their rep is all about that premium idea.  And while I think they would give Nintendo a good deal, I doubt they would give them THAT good a deal :P . 

Another question is whether Nintendo will willingly take a loss to keep the price low.

Also, I think the marketing so heavily emphasizing the home consoleness of the Switch - home console orriented games in the trailer, calling it home console over and over - is a good indicator that it won't land in a handheld-esque price range in 2017.  Which is another reason I would say 300 is the bottom possible price.