Forget about having 60FPS and high resolution and graphics on consoles, you can't have all them at once unless we're talking about PC. For consoles they have to choose the priority among graphics, resolution and frame rate.

Can anyone tell me is the switch CPU better than the PS4 pro CPU cause the CPU on PS4s is really shitty?

Sony gets timed exclusive content and timed exclusive content wrapped inside of paid DLC, Microsoft gets fake news headlines.

Seems about equally irrelevant on both sides.

Faster on MGz, but not on architecture, in real performance the NS cpu is better.

Slag off the game all you want but there's a reason this game sells a shit ton more then rival shooters like titanfall etc. The fans love it and it's only improved since launch.

It will look fantastic and it the fans will enjoy it as much as ever.

It's a complete embarrasment the way Bungie priorizates graphics over gameplay with this one, if there is a genre that needs 60fps is definitely this one but since so many people love to buy games based on how cool the graphics look that's the way they choose and is a good example on how toxic and stupid this modern mentality is.

Idk, Battlefield 1 targets 60fps on the base Ps4 as well as the pro (in 64 player battles with map events) and while it drops qite a bit on the base Ps4, the pro does very well.

B1 has all of the stuff he is talking about and is a gogeous looking game to boot, so I remain sceptical.

What are the specs and what do they mean in normal english?

the A6-5200 is a quad-core jaguar processor clocked at 2 ghz while the jaguar architecture CPU in the PS4 is clocked at 1.6 ghz and the CPU in the PS4 Pro is clocked at 2.1 Ghz. So, how does jaguar @ 2 ghz perform in single-threaded/single-core benchmarks?

A6-5200 geekbench 4 single thread: 554-1161
https://browser.primatelabs.com/v4/cpu/search?utf8=%E2%9C%93&q=a6-5200

And how about the 2 Ghz Cortex A57 quad-core set-up in the Tegra X1(the A53 cores are disabled when the A57s are running)?

X1 geekbench 4 single thread: 1372-1558
https://browser.primatelabs.com/v4/cpu/search?q=shield+tv

What this means is even if we add 5% to account for the 100 mhz higher clock in the PS4 Pro, the highest score on the PS4 Pro CPU would likely be around 1219...which is 11% lower than the lowest score for the Cortex A57(in the shield tv).The X1 based Google Pixel C also reaches higher scores than Jaguar at PS4 Pro-like clock rates in a mobile device scenario(1444 vs 1161).

Google Pixel C X1 geekbench 4 single thread: 1055-1444
https://browser.primatelabs.com/v4/cpu/search?utf8=%E2%9C%93&q=google+pixel+c

Unfortunately, can't seem to find scores for the A4-5100 APU which has jaguars clocked at 1.55 ghz which would almost exactly match the original PS4. We could expect about 80% of the performance though of the same core clocked at 2 Ghz when at 1.6 ghz which could yield an extrapolated result between 443 and 929 on the PS4 CPU. This suggests that the CPU in the Nintendo Switch is at least 13% faster(1055 vs 929) and probably more like 55% faster(1444 vs 929) than one of the cores in the vanilla PS4.

An individual Switch core should outperform a standard PS4 one, but the PS4's CPU as a whole will outperform the Switch's. Ultimately it's just different levels of awful :p