| Yerm said: the Switch's power falls somewhere between a Wii U and a PS4, |
The Switch's power falls somewhere between a Calculator and the most powerful super computer on Earth.
| Yerm said: also remember the Vita, which basically was a portable PS4 that people hated so much that Sony stopped making portable consoles entirely. |
The Vita has nothing on the Playstation 4 in any metric.
| Green098 said: Could they? Today; It would be very expensive for chip that powerful to be developed and created to work in the Switch's form factor. Battery life would be lucky to last an hour on certain games, you can only squeeze so big a battery in such a small space. And If it's meant to be grouped in with the PS4 eco-system disks wouldn't work which would be a problem for people who buy PS4 games physically. |
It doesn't have to be as powerful. It just needs to be good enough.
Mobile chips are getting close, but still not enough.
People seem to forget that the Switch released with several year old technology. More modern stuff is more powerful.
The Disk issue could be worked around by using a Dock with a built in optical disk reader.
| shikamaru317 said: PS4 is still much too powerful for a portable version at any sort of reasonable cost. I would love a new Sony handheld that is fully compatible with PS3 games as well as it's own exclusives though. I doubt that is feasible however due to PS3's unique Cell architecture being difficult to emulate. |
Playstation 3 emulation is happening extremely quickly though. In-fact it's better than Xbox 360 emulation. Granted they likely have more resources and such, but clearly the Cell isn't holding those efforts back.
| Soundwave said: If you mean a literal portable PS4, that would be virtually impossible, even the newer slim PS4 model still consumes like 63 watts, which is 7 times too high of a power consumption. |
That chip wouldn't be the exact chip that ends up in a portable device.
It's not energy efficient.
| Soundwave said: Yes, by 2020, 600GF-1 TFLOP (undocked) and 2 TFLOP (docked) should be doable (or close enough). |
It's doable today.
One word. Xavier.
| Soundwave said: Good luck with mobile memory bandwidth of 140GB/sec anytime soon either. |
Good thing they also don't need 140GB/s of raw bandwidth.
| EricHiggin said: They would probably want to use a larger battery than Switch, which would add to the thickness of the handheld, plus extra cost. |
The Switch isn't using the best battery chemistry with the best power/weight/size ratio. They are using what is economical.
| EricHiggin said: If they waited until 7nm, they could probably use x86, but still play the games at 720p and medium settings, allowing the chip to run between 60% to 85% so its power usage and heat output is low enough. |
7nm should enable all sorts of possibilities. But considering we now know that "12nm" is a thing, that could be an interim solution.
With that, 7nm, 12nm, 14nm, 16nm etc' at TSMC, Global Foundries, Samsung etc' are just advertising numbers.
We know for certain those fabs aren't building all of a chip at such resolutions, 14nm chips for instance are having large parts of the chip at 20nm. 7nm will have large chunks of a chip at 14nm.
Just shows how far Intel is in reality.
taikamya said:
No, it does not. The Switch is a lower clocked nVidia Shield from 2015. The Switch is not even close to a PS4. The Switch uses the same exact chip as the 2015 Shield model, with HALF, yes, you heard me, HALF the clock speed. |
Nope. His statement is technically correct.
The Switch's power does fall between a Wii U and a Playstation 4. Doesn't matter if it's power is closer to an Xbox 360/Playstation 3/Wii U. It's still faster than those consoles and still slower than a Playstation 4/Xbox One.
| KBG29 said: I completely agree, it would be a terrible idea for Sony to make an ARM based device, and compete in the mobile market starting from scratch. The only way it makes since is if the make an X86 based, mobile that has full compatability with PS4 or PS4 & PS5. ARM is only an option if they are going to go with nvidia next gen, and they port the entire PS4 library to that tech, because their is absolutely no way they survive, if they don't have BC on PS5. |
Sadly AMD doesn't have an ultra low-powered mobile x86 CPU. Intel does with Atom/Medfield and it's derivatives.
ARM really is the best choice. With that, you can use binary translation to run x86 apps on ARM and vice-versa.
nVidia was also going to (Not sure if they ended up doing so... I can't be assed looking it up at the moment.) adopt Code Morphing via recompilation into it's ARM denver cores to give it x86 compatability that way as well.
--::{PC Gaming Master Race}::--
