Wrong.

nVidia doesn't make the chips. They only design the chips.

They then contract companies like Taiwan Semiconductor Manufacturing Company (TSMC), Samsung, Global Foundries to "build" the chips for them... Even with nVidia's Graphic Cards, nVidia doesn't assemble the cards, they get an OEM to do it for them.
What we don't know is what Nintendo's contract with nVidia entails, if Nintendo paid nVidia a lump sum for the chip design and then Nintendo deals with the building of the chips remains to be seen.

The Joy Cons are mostly using mostly the same technology that we saw with the original Wii with a few extra features and a new form factor.

RAM and Storage is very dependent on scales of economy and thus buying in bulk, Nintendo has the edge there over nVidia, so should be able to get a cheaper price.
Screen is small, low-resolution and cheap. Battery is small.

It is a semi-custom chip. There is a very big distinction between semi-custom and custom that shouldn't be confused.

From my own conversations with the owner of my local EB Games here in Australia, they make minimal to zero money on consoles, even new released games they don't make much cash on, they get the bulk of their profit with second hand games.

As for retailers, the retailers that did end up selling the Shield console had prices equivalent to nVidia's official sales channel.
But we need to keep things into perspective, the Shield console was never ever expected to sell 10+ million units... And that is fine, that's not it's primary purpose.

So the higher price suddenly makes the lower-graphics capability more acceptable?

How can you tell if it has good graphics though? All the detailes are blurred and hidden.

I don't even think the graphics chip given the realistic constraints of a portable is that bad.

I wish they used a bigger battery so we could get more performance from the chip in portable mode, but 384-400+ GFLOPS is awesome for a portable device.

It's not like Nintendo chose a crappy chip here.

cool, thanks for the info.

This thread still going? If people feel the Switch is too expensive, they'll spend their money elsewhere. Nintendo will respond by lowering prices or putting out bundles or something.

The matter will sort itself out.

Of course, that's exactly what I'm talking about, the expectations of the whole media and people changed after the strong rumours about its 250$ price, that's why I said it was the most plaussible price"right now", I was obviously wrong but it was not really a prediction, more like a suggestion seeing how strong the rumours were, however the initial expectation everywhere after the reveal was on the 300 (some said even more), and at the end the price expected at first was the real one, now is important to aknoledge how much of that dissapointed came from a rumour, before that 300 was mostly considered the acceptable limit, after that it was mostly considered too much.

I agree, the switch is not expensive and both the ps4 and Xbox One had much more expensive launch prices. Ps4 had launch price of $399 and Xbox One had a launch price of $399. The Nintendo Switch is $299 is a great launch price for a hybrid system, and it can only get lower.

Ikr, PS4 and Xbox One were $399 at launch... The Switch launching at $299 is good.

If Nintendo can get it down to $250 by the holiday and throw a game in as a bundle, they could be OK. They need Pokemon Stars or Animal Crossing this holiday, Mario is not enough.

They may have some headaches over the summer too, $300 is a high price in those slower summer months, even with Splatoon 2 around, that will help them a lot in Japan, but US/Euro might not go for it, Splatoon 2 did not boost Wii U hardware sales appreciably in the US/Euro markets even if it sold a nice amount to existing Wii U owners. 

Don't compain about the Switch based on Bethesda's pricing of their game.

Considering Nintendo's options it actually is a crappy chip. The direct successor of the chip is so much more efficient. You wouldn't have needed a bigger battery to increase times significantly.