god damn i like shibata, he's the boss :)
Always happy & quirky, getting Iwata feelings

I honestly don't think there is that much of a performance difference. Fast RMX drops to 900p and even 720p depending on load in docked mode and its currently unknown what resolution it drops to in portable mode. To be 2-3 more powerful than wii u it needs a cpu around 20-30,000 mips, memory bandwidth of about 40-60GB/s and a gpu of about 400-600 gflops.  Yet all figures are closer to 2x on Switch except the memory bandwidth actually being a comparable speed overall to wii u. I would think 2x was the absolute maximum you could claim even allowing for the later architecture and 50% boost overall may be more fair. Again we will know more of its performance level as more games come in. Simple race games are never ideal for comparison. Games that attempt realistic graphics and have complex game engines. Skyrim will be ideal because it benefits from performance in all areas, cpu, gpu and memory. Once we see that running on retail switch hardware we will be able to put it in the pecking order of performance.

Double post.

You are wrong, you better look Eurogamer review of Fast RMX (I copy down), like they wrote "Massively improved resolution, faster performance, better visuals. "

Switch has 3x more memory than Wii U for games, it has around 2-3x stronger/more capable CPU and around 2.-2.5x stronger GPU. And thats only buy raw numbers without gains from newer tech/architecture, new tools, APIs...so definitely difference in power is at least around 2-3x.

Fact that you have MK8 720p/60fps on Wii U and 1080p/60fps on Switch, and Fast RMX 720p/60fps (actualy resolution goes betwin 640x720 and 1280x720), and 720p/30fps for 4-player mode, compared to 1080p/60fps (actualy resolution curently goes betwin 900p and 1080p but probably will be fixed like Eurogamer stated), better visuals and 1080p/60fps for 4-play mode on Switch, proves that.

Multiplatform games are never good example of capabilities of console (especially Bethesda games, lol), what really represents capabilities of some console is 1st party exclusive made from start for that console.

"The first major enhancement is resolution. On Fast Racing Neo on Wii U, Shin'en employs a temporal upscaling of sorts, transforming a 640x720 image into a 1280x720 one. Wii U's scaling works but shimmering and combing artefacts are prevalent, giving the impression that the game is running at a lower overall resolution. On Switch, Fast RMX ditches the temporal upscaling technique entirely and instead makes the jump to an adaptive resolution feature, where the game dynamically adjusts rendering resolution based on GPU load.

In docked mode, the game jumps regularly between 900p and 1080p - or even lower in very select circumstances - while portable mode drops the resolution ceiling to 720p where minor drops in pixel-count can also occur, mostly in pre-race fly-bys. From what we understand, there is a small issue with the current firmware on Switch which causes a slight drain on GPU resources - once corrected, we're told that Fast RMX should sustain a full 1080p in docked mode. There's no anti-aliasing as such but the higher average resolution and lack of flickering artefacts on Switch result in a much cleaner presentation."

http://www.eurogamer.net/articles/digitalfoundry-2017-fast-rmx-showcases-switches-power-over-wii-u

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aDAkVPTn8cc

So basicly like wrote, huge upgrade in resoultion, better visuals and better frame rate (60fps/1080p in 4-play mode vs 720p/30fps mode on Wii U.

Rubbish. Using arbitrary numbers isn't accurate.

The Tegra chip is simply more efficient than the much older and inefficient Wii U SoC.