By using this site, you agree to our Privacy Policy and our Terms of Use. Close

Forums - Nintendo Discussion - Clarifying the 4GB of RAM of the SWITCH for those who just see the numbers.

 

...

understood 53 61.63%
 
I don't want to understand 32 37.21%
 
Total:85
Wyrdness on 30 October 2016
mjk45 said:
Wyrdness said:

Only one person actually answered my post out of the two who replied to me (so no everyone else haven't told me anything like you dreamt up) and it's not a claim like you imagined in your own little world it was an enquiry on whether it's possible.

I feel Fatslob:O>  answers your question.

He answered after that particular post was made.



Around the Network
Trunkin on 30 October 2016
binary solo said:
It's all well and good to point out that 4GB RAM is not as bad as it sounds. But what that number does tell us is that Switch is a handheld that moonlights as a home console. Now if Nintendo had been open about this from the start, no one would be bothered. Peole would be saying, Wow, most powerful handheld eva! But Nintendo tried to play the "It's a genuine home console" card when it was pretty clear it is not a home console from the moment Nintendo confirmed the dock is just a power and TV out box.

Suggesting that likely max 3.5GB available RAM for games is going to give technically comparable games to PS4/Xb one is really just trying to continue the fiction that Switch is a home console.

Just let Switch be what it is. Nintendo recognising that its consistent success is in handhelds and that putting too much resource into home consoles is rather wasted.

The Ouya is a home console. The "home console" classification has more to do with real-world usage than specs. Actually, it has nothing to do with specs at all.



mutantsushi on 30 October 2016
Ck1x said:
There are plenty of desktop gpu's out there that are 1080p cards with only 2 GB for vram

And those GPUs are paired with CPUs with access to 4-8GB of DDR RAM.  Such systems are pretty equivalent to Sony's set up on PS4.
A system with only 4 GB total RAM is a very far cry from that, don't kid yourself.  
Now, for Nintendo style games, maybe that's OK.  If people expect AAA 3rd party ports seen on MS/Sony/PC they will be disappointed.



mutantsushi on 30 October 2016
binary solo said:
It's all well and good to point out that 4GB RAM is not as bad as it sounds. But what that number does tell us is that Switch is a handheld that moonlights as a home console. Now if Nintendo had been open about this from the start, no one would be bothered. Peole would be saying, Wow, most powerful handheld eva! But Nintendo tried to play the "It's a genuine home console" card when it was pretty clear it is not a home console from the moment Nintendo confirmed the dock is just a power and TV out box.

Suggesting that likely max 3.5GB available RAM for games is going to give technically comparable games to PS4/Xb one is really just trying to continue the fiction that Switch is a home console.

Just let Switch be what it is. Nintendo recognising that its consistent success is in handhelds and that putting too much resource into home consoles is rather wasted.

Right on.  And Nintendo's own messaging is creating this, because they are discontinuing Wii U but not 3DS right away,
they are pushing the "it's a home console, full stop" message, because they want to focus on that market not 3DS right away.
But it's specs are a good upgrade for mobile, for console not particularly impressive, although it's somewhat improved vs Wii U.

The space they're staking out in mobile is good, it's top notch power in mobile terms, and being fixed hardware will be optimized for it's life.
Hardware power does give diminishing returns on perceived output, so maybe that power level is satisfactory plugged into TV too.
If the rumor of extra 2GB of RAM available in console mode is true, that goes a ways to helping, along with possible upclock/core-unlock.
The memory bandwidth is equally an issue, and question is whether it is 50gb period, or whether there is auxiliary ESRAM ala Xbone.



Zkuq on 30 October 2016
Wyrdness said:
Zkuq said:

If you accuse me of making up stuff, don't expect me to just swallow it. Anyway, here's the two answers since you seemed to miss one of them:

This post is hilarious because it's like you're playing dumb as those are the two people I'm talking about, even one of the replies you've link had a response to it clarifying things as he misread the post, this is Donald Trump level of face palm. You'll have to swallow it and move along whether you like it or not.

I think we're done, since we're getting different things from exactly same posts.



Around the Network
David_Hernandeez on 30 October 2016
SubiyaCryolite said:
I hope Nintendos OS team has gotten better at optimization. The fact that the Wii Us barebones OS used 1GB of RAM was always shockingto me. You can run full on Linux distros with half that amount of RAM. Depending on its complexity the switchs OS better use a maximum of 768MB, preferably 512MB.

Oh god please, the Wii U OS is trash! Slow, lacks of many functions and multitasking, for a 1gb OS is really garbage, the X360 and Ps3 had like 512mb and 256mb for a much better OS.



Sharu on 31 October 2016

Guys, you just cant directly compare Switch to PS4/X1. Its different architecture.
PS4/X1 is pc's little brother now, which is why the games are the same and the specs are compatible.
But Switch is NOT x64 machine. Its likely build on ARM chips, and its total different when speaking to ram/cpu etc.
Take a pc with a Ipad air specs and try to run Hearthstone on it...
And, yes cartriges WILL make a difference. Cause it removes any need to install games. And we don't know what type of memory Nintendo using in this, why just assuming its a SD card?
You re making assumptions without any substantial info, blinded by Sonys marketing trick (more ram is better and gddr5 is better then ddr3).



nanarchy on 31 October 2016
Trunkin said:
binary solo said:
It's all well and good to point out that 4GB RAM is not as bad as it sounds. But what that number does tell us is that Switch is a handheld that moonlights as a home console. Now if Nintendo had been open about this from the start, no one would be bothered. Peole would be saying, Wow, most powerful handheld eva! But Nintendo tried to play the "It's a genuine home console" card when it was pretty clear it is not a home console from the moment Nintendo confirmed the dock is just a power and TV out box.

Suggesting that likely max 3.5GB available RAM for games is going to give technically comparable games to PS4/Xb one is really just trying to continue the fiction that Switch is a home console.

Just let Switch be what it is. Nintendo recognising that its consistent success is in handhelds and that putting too much resource into home consoles is rather wasted.

The Ouya is a home console. The "home console" classification has more to do with real-world usage than specs. Actually, it has nothing to do with specs at all.

and the Ouya was a massive flop. The point he is making is the switch looks like an awesome powerful hadheld, but at best a mediocre console. pushing the console angle only causes comparisons to current gen and upcoming console releases from Sony and MS which of course it doesn't compare well against.



mjk45 on 31 October 2016
Wyrdness said:
mjk45 said:

I feel Fatslob:O>  answers your question.

He answered after that particular post was made.

Sorry if I didn't make myself clear, my reply wasn't aimed at your reply , rather I was bringing your attention to your question being answered, that's why I used the wording answers rather than answered.



Research shows Video games  help make you smarter, so why am I an idiot

Conina on 31 October 2016

Sharu said:
Guys, you just cant directly compare Switch to PS4/X1. Its different architecture.

We all know that it is a different architecture. Doesn't make it uncomparable for every aspect.

PS4/X1 is pc's little brother now, which is why the games are the same and the specs are compatible.

How can specs be compatible? Do you mean comparable? The game versions between PC/XBO/PS4 aren't the same, but they are often similar. Nevertheless there are often performance differences.

But Switch is NOT x64 machine. Its likely build on ARM chips, and its total different when speaking to ram/cpu etc.
Take a pc with a Ipad air specs and try to run Hearthstone on it...

Sorry, I can't find PC hardware with less than 2 GB RAM anymore to test Hearthstone on it.

And, yes cartriges WILL make a difference. Cause it removes any need to install games.

Yes, they will make a difference to STORAGE space, but not to needed RAM. These are totally different things with different purposes and some of you mix that all together to support your arguments.

And we don't know what type of memory Nintendo using in this, why just assuming its a SD card?

It will be some kind of flash memory in the cartridges, don't you agree? It won't be any kind of memory with direct access to the SoC, so it absolutely has to be copied into the RAM to be processed/accessed by the CPU and GPU parts of the SoC. So it mades no difference in a discussion about RAM limitations.

You re making assumptions without any substantial info, blinded by Sonys marketing trick (more ram is better and gddr5 is better then ddr3).

And you are making assumptions that more and faster RAM ain't better than less and slower RAM.