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

Forums - Nintendo Discussion - Digital Foundry: Nintendo Switch CPU and GPU clock speeds revealed

Goodnightmoon on 19 December 2016
bigtakilla said:
Goodnightmoon said:
Well, this reduces the chances of getting many ports of AAA games from western developers, on the other hand this gives me more hopes for the battery life and price, 2 fundamental things to make this a good product.

The machine is still an impressive piece of tech, still the most powerful handheld console released and with a huge difference from Vita going by flops alone, which by the way, they are not the word of God, Flops are the new bits, remember when Atari Jaguar was a 64 bit console that couldn't even match Sega Saturn's power?

This thing will get a lot of Nintendo support thanks to the unified library, a ton of Japanese third party support thanks to its imminent success there and some 3rd party support from western developers to see if their games have some extra appeal on the go, now if the console ends up being successful on the west, western support will come soon or later despite power, same happened with handhelds, and I think it will, this will be a cheap, sexy machine plenty of Nintendo support, with very impressive graphics for a handheld, it will do well (unless they fuck it up on something else)

Unfortunately if you are a home console gamer, it doesnt offer much.

Yes, at the very least it offers you a console that is like 2.5-3 times more powerfull than their previous homeconsole at a lower price with a unified library and great japanese support. It offers you way more than WiiU actually, and that's if you are only interested on the homeconsole side.



Around the Network
Boberkun on 19 December 2016

KLAMarine said:

Why?

I don't really know.. Maybe because Nintendo stop making Wii U games two (!) years ago for the sake of Switch?



bigtakilla on 19 December 2016
CaptainExplosion said:
bigtakilla said:

The whole problem would then be developing two different games for switch, which just isn't going to happen. Even patching it like PS4 Pro seems like a bit much to ask 3rd party devs.

Then why does the PS4 have such a good reputation with devs? At least from what I remember.

Because that's where they make the most money typically.



bigtakilla on 19 December 2016
spemanig said:
bigtakilla said:

We don't "know" anything, that's why they're called rumors.

We can infer that an explicit rumor from a source that has been correct so far about Switch leaks is more reliable than anyone's random speculation based on literally nothing.

So, speculation. Just like hardware.



zorg1000 on 19 December 2016
DonFerrari said:
zorg1000 said:

Werent most rumors saying it was 2-3 times as powerful as Wii U and isnt this pretty much saing it is 2-3 times as powerful as Wii U?

I dont understand the sudden outrage when it is essentially what we have been hearing all along.

We had rumors that it was twice stronger than PS4 as well, and there were people really defending it.

I mean from people who have a good track record of leaking Switch info like Eurogamer, Laura Kate Dale & Emily Rogers not rumors from unreliable sources, especially once Switch was revealed there was no reason to believe it would be as powerful as XBO/PS4.



When the herd loses its way, the shepard must kill the bull that leads them astray.

Around the Network
Miyamotoo on 19 December 2016
Soundwave said:
Wyrdness said:
http://www.neogaf.com/forum/showpost.php?p=226861686&postcount=2358


Numbers can say anything, if EG are right the are still 4 different configuration as pointed out here, news doesn't really tell us much different or change much from any previous rumour.

Could be 3 SMs, but I think 4 is probably a fantasy even Thraktor says so. In reality, seeing as how this is Nintendo, it's probably 2 SMs. 

The memory bandwidth would be higher than 25GB/sec if Nintendo was aiming for a machine well beyond the Wii U. 

To be honest seeing basically all the games in the Switch trailer look like Wii U games or Wii U games on steroids should have been a pretty giant tip off. 

I don't think Nintendo really even wants higher graphics performance. What's the benefit to them? Higher development costs? You think that appeals to Nintendo in any way, shape, or form. They're barely now just coming to grips with Wii U development (Zelda has taken them like 5 years to finish, lol), they were never going to do a huge generational upgrade in just 4 years time, not when Sony/MS spent like 8 years in that graphics range. 

Of Course they will look like Wii U games when they are actually Wii U games (MK and Splatoon), lol. Actually only game that isnt Wii U game, 3D Mario, looked better, but Nintendo said people don't need to assume that games look or run exactly same.



Frogger on 19 December 2016
Miyamotoo said:

Case 1: 2 SMs - Docked: 384 GF - Portable: 153.6 GF

Case 2: 3 SMs - Docked: 576 GF - Portable: 230.4 GF

Case 3: 4 SMs - Docked: 768 GF - Portable: 307.2 GF

Case 4: 6 SMs - Docked: 1.15 TF - Portable: 460 GF FP32

All people really care about are the numbers. I think most people assume that it will be either 2/3 SMs with 4 being at the upper limit, so there's little point in considering 4.

What are FP32 and FP16? I think that Case 1 or 2 with FP16, whatever the hell that means, would be more than ideal.

EDIT: I think that Case 2 would be ideal if we're being realistic.

EDIT2: Actually, Thrak doesn't rule out Case 3. I misread. I'm still guessing Case 2, though.



Soundwave on 19 December 2016
Miyamotoo said:
Soundwave said:

Could be 3 SMs, but I think 4 is probably a fantasy even Thraktor says so. In reality, seeing as how this is Nintendo, it's probably 2 SMs. 

The memory bandwidth would be higher than 25GB/sec if Nintendo was aiming for a machine well beyond the Wii U. 

To be honest seeing basically all the games in the Switch trailer look like Wii U games or Wii U games on steroids should have been a pretty giant tip off. 

I don't think Nintendo really even wants higher graphics performance. What's the benefit to them? Higher development costs? You think that appeals to Nintendo in any way, shape, or form. They're barely now just coming to grips with Wii U development (Zelda has taken them like 5 years to finish, lol), they were never going to do a huge generational upgrade in just 4 years time, not when Sony/MS spent like 8 years in that graphics range. 

Of Course they will look like Wii U games when they are actually Wii U games (MK and Splatoon), lol. Actually only game that isnt Wii U game, 3D Mario, looked better, but Nintendo said people don't need to assume that games look or run exactly same.

Those aren't Wii U games though they had new content. Those are Switch games, that's what they'll look like on Switch. 

It makes senese looking at these specs too, 384 GFLOPS is basically double a Wii U which should give you Wii U fidelity at 1080P. Wii U graphics are still a challenge for Nintendo, every one of their more ambitious Wii U titles has taken huge amounts of time (and likely more money than they're used to spending) to develop. 



Frogger on 19 December 2016
bigtakilla said:
spemanig said:

We can infer that an explicit rumor from a source that has been correct so far about Switch leaks is more reliable than anyone's random speculation based on literally nothing.

So, speculation. Just like hardware.

No, rumor.

Speculation is a guess you make up. A rumor is a potential fact that cannot be fully validated yet. Software is a rumor because someone told Emily that with the intention of distributing fact. Hardware is speculation because Eurogamer guessed that with the intention of spitballing fact.



Mowco on 19 December 2016
spemanig said:
Miyamotoo said:

Case 1: 2 SMs - Docked: 384 GF FP32 / 768 GF FP16 - Portable: 153.6 GF FP32 / 307.2 GF FP16

Case 2: 3 SMs - Docked: 576 GF FP32 / 1,152 GF FP16 - Portable: 230.4 GF FP32 / 460.8 GF FP16

Case 3: 4 SMs - Docked: 768 GF FP32 / 1,536 GF FP16 - Portable: 307.2 GF FP32 / 614.4 GF FP16

Case 4: 6 SMs - Docked: 1.15 TF FP32/2.3 TF FP16 - Portable: 460 GF FP32/920 GF FP16

All people really care about are the numbers. I think most people assume that it will be either 2/3 SMs, so there's little point in considering cases 3 or 4.

What are FP32 and FP16? I think that Case 1 or 2 with FP16, whatever the hell that means, would be more than ideal.

 

FP16 is half precision, PS4 PRO is 4.2TF in FP32 and 8.4TF in FP16 for example. So really you want to look at the FP32 figure as that's what everybody uses. People on neogaf seem pretty sure that it's Case 1, so 384 Gflops.