Steep will benchmark Nintendo Switch power

Ganoncrotch

Currently Offline

45,595

11175 posts since 01/07/12

Recent Badges:

VGChartz Man 1,000 comments posted on VGChartz news articles.
Social Butterfly 50 friends on gamrConnect.
Littlest Genocide 1,000 posts on the gamrConnect forums.
So You Came Back For More, Huh? Logged in a second time.
11 Years Has been a VGChartz member for over 11 years.
Open For Business Earned 10 badges.

Currently Playing:

Super Street Fighter IV: Arcade Edition (X360)
World of Warcraft (PC)

Ganoncrotch on 16 January 2017

fleischr said:

Ganoncrotch said:
Massive flaw with the OP, you state PC requirements and say how will a console match those to run the game.

Google the mini requirements of GTA5 on the PC, Google the specs of the X360, that game should never run on that hardware.

What will be a perfect benchmark really when the machine launches is how it runs a game which has obviously been given a lot of time porting over to the switch and that we know exactly how it runs on a number of configurations and that is The Elder Scrolls Skyrim, people will know immediately the power of the system based on exactly which effects make it into the switch version and exactly how well the machine can reproduce them in portable and docked mode.

GPUs listed in specs are comparable to what's in PS4/X1.

PS4/X1 being x86 make the PC specs more relevant. Closer to an apples to apples comparison.

360 was a powerpc architecture. More of an apples to oranges comparison.

The GTAV min specs on the PC requires 8GB of RAM and a Graphics card with 2GB of video memory... The MINIMUM specs.

Honestly trying to say that the difference in architechure between PowerPC and x86 will negate the 20x difference between the RAM requirements alone between what the X360 has and what the PC version required is just insane. Like... the X360 has 512MB total memory, Video and System, on paper it should never run GTAV, and it does, very well too.

Not to mention exactly how many frames per minute you would get running the PC version of GTAV on a PC with a Radeon X1800 graphics card in it. Again, no change of architecture changes that effectively ancient thing inside the X360 into the 2GB GTX660 which is the Min req for GTAV on PC.

You're saying that spec comparisons from older gen consoles can't be made to the PC because of differences between the systems, that is true, but it is still true even if they are all using X86, even down to the simple fact that you have a single closed hardware to work with in optimization, that can never be done on the PC, hence why you get massive spec requirements to insure that a game will boot.

Why not check me out on youtube and help me on the way to 2k subs over at www.youtube.com/stormcloudlive

h2ohno

Currently Offline

5,179

986 posts since 03/07/14

Recent Badges:

3 Years Has been a VGChartz member for over 3 years.
Vice Free Managed to avoid being banned for 6 months.
'Ello Princess! Awarded for signing up.
6 Years Has been a VGChartz member for over 6 years.
Site Veteran Has been a VGChartz member for over 5 years.
Freezing Logged in on Christmas day.

h2ohno on 16 January 2017

fleischr said:

NATO said:

is switch running a resource heavy OS and hardware abstration layer? nope.

Humor me a minute:

Say Steep hits 900p 30fps - same as the Xbox One version. Let's say that's running settings overall on "medium" on PC gives a similar performance profile.

And then Switch version comes along and does 900p 30fps in docked mode. Slightly downgraded textures compared to the X1/PC version, but still pretty similar.

And you're telling me that comparison tells us nothing about how powerful the system is?

The issue is that a PC will alwys require more power to run the same game at the same settings as a console, so the minimum for a PC could very well be above the specs of a console but the game would actually run better on the console.

NATO

Banned

5,059

1411 posts since 11/12/16

Recent Badges:

Littlest Genocide 1,000 posts on the gamrConnect forums.
So You Came Back For More, Huh? Logged in a second time.
Trust Me, It'll Have Legs 100 replies made to user's most popular thread.
Leaving Limbo 100 posts on the gamrConnect forums.
1st Birthday Has been a VGChartz member for over 1 year.
'Ello Princess! Awarded for signing up.

NATO on 16 January 2017

fleischr said:

NATO said:

is switch running a resource heavy OS and hardware abstration layer? nope.

Humor me a minute:

Say Steep hits 900p 30fps - same as the Xbox One version. Let's say that's running settings overall on "medium" on PC gives a similar performance profile.

And then Switch version comes along and does 900p 30fps in docked mode. Slightly downgraded textures compared to the X1/PC version, but still pretty similar.

And you're telling me that comparison tells us nothing about how powerful the system is?

Yes I am, read Ganoncrotch's post above.

maxleresistant

Currently Offline

4,912

1390 posts since 13/02/07

Recent Badges:

8 Years Has been a VGChartz member for over 8 years.
Harvest Time Logged in at the start of Spring.
Littlest Genocide 1,000 posts on the gamrConnect forums.
16 Years Has been a VGChartz member for over 16 years.
12 Years Has been a VGChartz member for over 12 years.
So You Came Back For More, Huh? Logged in a second time.

maxleresistant on 16 January 2017

fleischr said:

maxleresistant said:

DQ heroes is clearly made from the PS3 version, not the Vita.

And even then, the PS3 version looks better.

So I wonder why people think a game like steep could be ported without being downgraded. It's like the 1 TF debate all over again... Let's be realistic please.

But Steep has no PS3, 360, or Vita versions to rush to.

You miss the point of the OP. The point is that if we see Steep downgraded, then our worst suspicions are likely proven true. But if it instead strongly resembles the PS4/X1 versions - we have to revisit this idea that Switch is vastly underpowered.

Let's get real - straight ports are way easier than downgraded ones. And if a straight port wasn't possible or was outright difficult - Ubi likely would not bother with it.

Then again - We are of course talking about the same company that put Watch Dogs on WiiU - but they at least had 360/PS3 versions to work with for that.

yep, it's the 1TF discussion all over again...

I'm out. I prefer real discussions based on things that could actually be true. This is just ridiculous.