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

Forums - Nintendo Discussion - NVIDIA launches Jetson TX2 devkit with twice performance

jonathanalis said:
"Running the Jetson TX2 at 7.5 watts and offering performance that’s on par with its 10W predecessor
Running at 15W for 2X the performance"

I think it means if it was on switch, portable mode would spend less batery, or increase performance by 33% than switch is now, by adjusting the clock(suposing on 16nm, heating wouldnt be an issue worst than it is at 33% more clock).
And docked would double it, 266% than it is on portable.

Also, switch chips are from august 2016, if it was adopted, would take until holidays for launching, and probably other chip would be avaliable.
I like the double memory bandwidht and HBM memory.

It would be a significant boost in performance and double the memory bandwidth would be a big deal too, IMO I think the memory bandwidth is one huge reason Switch games are having frame rate problems, even the Wii U has more memory bandwidth in certain situations because it has 60GB/sec eDRAM, something the Switch doesn't have. But if you bumped Switch's main memory to 50GB/sec, that would dramatically improve its memory setup. 

It's a shame they apparently didn't use this chip. 



Around the Network
Ljink96 said:
Welp, maybe this will be a candidate for switch 2. But by then, there'll probably be another chip out with twice the performance of this one...

Switch 2 would probably be the Tegra X3 or X4 or whatever the equivalent to that is I would think. That would likely bring them on par with XB1/PS4. 

Tegra X1 - 500 GFLOP (394 GFLOP effective)

Tegra X2 - 1 TFLOP (788 GFLOP effective?)

Tegra X3 - 2 TFLOP (1.57 TFLOP effective)



Noticed a few bringing it up, so I added devkit to the title.

Soundwave said:
jonathanalis said:
"Running the Jetson TX2 at 7.5 watts and offering performance that’s on par with its 10W predecessor
Running at 15W for 2X the performance"

I think it means if it was on switch, portable mode would spend less batery, or increase performance by 33% than switch is now, by adjusting the clock(suposing on 16nm, heating wouldnt be an issue worst than it is at 33% more clock).
And docked would double it, 266% than it is on portable.

Also, switch chips are from august 2016, if it was adopted, would take until holidays for launching, and probably other chip would be avaliable.
I like the double memory bandwidht and HBM memory.

It would be a significant boost in performance and double the memory bandwidth would be a big deal too, IMO I think the memory bandwidth is one huge reason Switch games are having frame rate problems, even the Wii U has more memory bandwidth in certain situations because it has 60GB/sec eDRAM, something the Switch doesn't have. But if you bumped Switch's main memory to 50GB/sec, that would dramatically improve its memory setup. 

It's a shame they apparently didn't use this chip. 

Switch portable, just like the WiiU before, is a 720p device. Not sure why they are pushing for 900p in Zelda, they should have left it at 720p and added enhancements at that resolution.



@Twitter | Switch | Steam

You say tomato, I say tomato 

"¡Viva la Ñ!"

TomaTito said:

Switch portable, just like the WiiU before, is a 720p device. Not sure why they are pushing for 900p in Zelda, they should have left it at 720p and added enhancements at that resolution.

No, Zelda looks a lot better and clearer  on Switch due to the higher resolution alone. It is embarrassing that the Switch cannot handle full 1080p, games just look ugly and pixelated in comparison. In my opinion they should have simplified the shadows and weather effects to let the game always run at 1080p. They could have implemented a dynamic resolution downgrade for slower areas.

I wonder if the Switch will receive the new chip one day. It would be worth it for the longer battery duration alone. Hardware revisions are normal and all former consoles received a new internal chipset design in or de rto save costs if better or cheaper components become available.



last92 said:
Slightly off topic, but do we know what the actual performance of the Switch are in teraflops terms? I've read somewhere that it's 1tf, but it's still not clear whether that's double or single precision.

We don't know yet, Chip Works X - Ray is coming out later this week. However some sort of custom chip based on the Tegra X1 is looking to be the most likely, but how customized it is is still a mystery.



Around the Network
SpokenTruth said:
Soundwave said:

That's just the standard price I think, the Jetson X1 (Tegra X1) was $500 or something too (which is actually cheap for a development kit) obviously we know the Switch isn't $600. Nvidia doesn't sell many of these and they're for developers so the mark up is high. 

EDIT: Jetson X1 was $599.99 as well. It's just the standard price. For students, Nvidia drops the price to $299.99 for the kit. So obviously there is a fat mark up. 

That $299.99 academic price is in limited quantities and only to the US and Canada where they get tax breaks for education programs like this.  This is not a price they can apply to mass distribution.

It's a dev kit, it's not a consumer product to begin with period, so it's limited quanitities either way. Trying to figure out the cost of a chip from a dev kit is quite simply a fool's errand. 

A 3DS dev kit costs several thousand dollars, obviously the consumer 3DS does not cost several thousand dollars. A Vita dev kit was over $2000, and Sony was hailing that as very cheap for developers. Wii U dev kit is $5000. 

The Jetson X1, which has the Tegra X1 for example is still available too (this is the chip that's supposedly in the current Switch) .... for $499.99 (they dropped the price by $100). By that logic, a Switch should cost like $650-$700 ... $500 for the Tegra + $99 for the Joycons + $50+ for the LCD and battery. 

A Tegra X1 successor was inevitable, the the Tegra X1 (20nm) is a two year old chip, that's fairly dated in mobile chip terms. 



SpokenTruth said:
Soundwave said:

It's a dev kit, it's not a consumer product to begin with period, so it's limited quanitities either way. Trying to figure out the cost of a chip from a dev kit is quite simply a fool's errand. 

A 3DS dev kit costs several thousand dollars, obviously the consumer 3DS does not cost several thousand dollars. A Vita dev kit was over $2000, and Sony was hailing that as very cheap for developers. Wii U dev kit is $5000. 

The Jetson X1, which has the Tegra X1 for example is still available too (this is the chip that's supposedly in the current Switch) .... for $499.99 (they dropped the price by $100). By that logic, a Switch should cost like $650-$700 ... $500 for the Tegra + $99 for the Joycons + $50+ for the LCD and battery. 

A Tegra X1 successor was inevitable, the the Tegra X1 (20nm) is a two year old chip, that's fairly dated in mobile chip terms. 

Not the same thing.  A video game development kit comes with more than just the hardware (which is typically a high end version of the consumer model plus all the peripherals and some testing gear).  You also get development and debugging software plus access to a bunch of libraries and more.  Certain licensing is also included in that cost.

The Jetson TX2 is just hardware, a quick start guide and a safety booklet. 

So is the Jetson TX1 ... and it's $500 (formerly $600).

So if you're trying to extrapolate a price based on the Jetson prices, you're not going to get anywhere. The Switch should cost like $650 by that logic, and the Shield Android Console should been $600 two years ago, not $199.99. 



Getting back the point of the thread I think there's a more simple explaination ... Switch was always supposed to launch in fall 2016. 

The delay to 2017 was a software hiccup, but Nintendo wanted the hardware for holiday 2016, no way would they intentionally aim for a March 2017 launch. In 2014 Iwata said it would take about 2 years for them to have what they were working on bear fruit. 

The hardware seemed finished for a while too with units floating around in February, so they had just been sitting around. 

Possibly this chip would not have been available for fall 2016 and Nintendo had to make these decisions two years ago most likely, the Tegra X1.

It was too late in the game likely to change to a TX2, a chip that Nintendo possibly had not testing/R&Ded for.



I hope Nintendo moves over to this architecture Christmas 2018 at the latest (the sooner, the better though). I plan to play the waiting game in the hope of getting a console with significantly improved battery life and a slightly better performance (even 2-3 frames in troubled parts of games would be great, kinda like the XboneS). Hopefully I'm not gonna have to wait too long for this improved version to hit the shelves, since I'm hyped for the Switch!

Go Switch!



Wii U is a GCN 2 - I called it months before the release!

My Vita to-buy list: The Walking Dead, Persona 4 Golden, Need for Speed: Most Wanted, TearAway, Ys: Memories of Celceta, Muramasa: The Demon Blade, History: Legends of War, FIFA 13, Final Fantasy HD X, X-2, Worms Revolution Extreme, The Amazing Spiderman, Batman: Arkham Origins Blackgate - too many no-gaemz :/

My consoles: PS2 Slim, PS3 Slim 320 GB, PSV 32 GB, Wii, DSi.