Hopefully it doesn't have a horribly bloated OS that wastes tons of RAM like Wii U/PS4/X1.
I think it'll be a 3/1 split, 3GB for games, 1GB for the OS.
While more RAM than Wii U is better, it from what I understand cannot have eDRAM, which might give the Wii U some advantages.
If Nintendo is using 25GB/sec that's a really weak memory bandwidth for a console. For a portable it's OK, but for a console that's terrible. They must have some larger sized caches on the processor.
| Soundwave said: I think it'll be a 3/1 split, 3GB for games, 1GB for the OS. While more RAM than Wii U is better, it from what I understand cannot have eDRAM, which might give the Wii U some advantages. If Nintendo is using 25GB/sec that's a really weak memory bandwidth for a console. For a portable it's OK, but for a console that's terrible. They must have some larger sized caches on the processor. |
Yeah, I admit the two things that concern me the most spec wise are (A) the bandwidth situation, and (B) how much RAM will actually be available to games.
1GB for the OS and 3GB for games would be acceptable, if not ideal. Any more (for OS) or less (for games) than that would be a problem.
And if eDRAM/eSRAM is indeed off the table, 25GB/s will be a serious bottleneck.
curl-6 said:
Yeah, I admit the two things that concern me the most spec wise are (A) the bandwidth situation, and (B) how much RAM will actually be available to games. 1GB for the OS and 3GB for games would be acceptable, if not ideal. Any more (for OS) or less (for games) than that would be a problem. And if eDRAM/eSRAM is indeed off the table, 25GB/s will be a serious bottleneck. |
Well I guess it depends what your expectations are for visuals.
With Nvidia's tiling and other bandwidth compression techniques, 25GB/sec would be fine for Wii U/PS3/XB360 tier graphics, and then with chipset architecture advances, maybe you get something a decent amount better looking than what 360/PS3/Wii U could do.
For a portable machine that's pretty good.
If you are expecting PS4/XB1 ports that look "almost" as good as those two consoles ... it's gonna be bad news. That ain't happening.
| Soundwave said: Well I guess it depends what your expectations are for visuals. With Nvidia's tiling and other bandwidth compression techniques, 25GB/sec would be fine for Wii U/PS3/XB360 tier graphics, and then with chipset architecture advances, maybe you get something a decent amount better looking than what 360/PS3/Wii U could do. For a portable machine that's pretty good. If you are expecting PS4/XB1 ports that look "almost" as good as those two consoles ... it's gonna be bad news. That ain't happening. |
I'm well aware that PS4/X1 tier graphics are off the table, and I've spent the last few weeks reminding others of this, as I can see a lot of Nintendo fans building themselves up for disappointment by expecting this thing to somehow pack Xbox One hardware into a portable case.
My primary concern is, to what extent can it surpass Wii U? A generational leap may not be possible, but if the gap isn't even really noticeable, that would be pretty bad, as Wii U was seen as underpowered even back in 2012.
curl-6 said:
I'm well aware that PS4/X1 tier graphics are off the table, and I've spent the last few weeks reminding others of this, as I can see a lot of Nintendo fans building themselves up for disappointment by expecting this thing to somehow pack Xbox One hardware into a portable case. My primary concern is, to what extent can it surpass Wii U? A generational leap may not be possible, but if the gap isn't even really noticeable, that would be pretty bad, as Wii U was seen as underpowered even back in 2012. |
That Mario Switch footage is probably a good barometer, even though it's brief.
That does look better than 3D World, but not like a ton better.
Soundwave said:
That Mario Switch footage is probably a good barometer, even though it's brief. That does look better than 3D World, but not like a ton better. |
do you think we can really tell from that Mario Switch footage that it's not that much better?
Ganoncrotch said:
Ps2 ports did not feature Mii support or those additional games... nor the motion controls which were added to the Wii titles, as well as the obvious fact that Fifa 15 was on the Wii but... not the PS2. Fifa aside though The likes of CoD4, World at War and Black Ops did not feature a PS2 version to start on, they were built as X360/PS3 titles and then were ported down to a machine with less than 1/6th the power... because Money. |
fair enough, but its not like those games were pushing the PS or xbox to its limits not even close. Where were the RE5-6s, GTAs, RDRs, etc. Where were thse Wii ports
| Soundwave said: Kinda what I thought all along. This will be a pretty wicked portable if you're looking for something along the lines of a portable Wii U/Sony Vita successor and don't mind the lower battery life and tablet-size form factor (instead of the DS/3DS stuff). |
even if they could who really wants to play a crap version of a game thats available on 3 other platforms? Some fans make a lot of noise over scalibitly, but at the end of the day it wont matter cause they most likely wouldnt buy it as it would be a crap version
oniyide said:
even if they could who really wants to play a crap version of a game thats available on 3 other platforms? Some fans make a lot of noise over scalibitly, but at the end of the day it wont matter cause they most likely wouldnt buy it as it would be a crap version |
Pretty much, yes.
Some may choose the NS version because of portability (particularily for Japanese games in Japan), but in the West, the Calladooty/Mass Effect/Destiny/GTA crowd isn't going to make the Switch their go to for inferior ports of the games they are obsessed with.
About Us |
Terms of Use |
Privacy Policy |
Advertise |
Staff |
Contact
Display As Desktop
Display As Mobile
© 2006-2024 VGChartz Ltd. All rights reserved.
