We've already been there before with PS3, PS4, and Vita. Things didn't work out because, Sony did an absolutely terrible job with the Vita. 

Right now you can do exactly what I am talking about across any Windows 10 device, with all MGS games, and a handful of 3rd parties that support play anywhere. Phil Spencer said at E3, that they are going to continue to expand the ability to play your games on more devices, via new streaming tech and new hardware.

There are rumors right now that Google, is making a strong move to bring an Android based Gaming platform to the market, both through physical hardware, and streaming. 

Games like Fortnite, and PUBG are now playable on everything from Phone to PC.  Elder Scrolls:Blades was announced from everything at E3. More and more games are being made to work on every platform you own. It is not a future pipe dream, it has been happening for almost 10 years, and each year we are getting more and more games, on more and more ecosystems, that can be played on more and more devices. 

The technology to deliver games at an acceptable level of performance and quality on everything from Phone to high end PC/VR is already here. With 7nm fabrication, we will be at the point where it is possible to produce these expereinces at console and handheld friendly prices. 

Any company that wants to stay afloat is going to have to offer more value, and more ways to access your content. Nintendo, PlayStation, and Xbox no longer live in a bubble. They compete directly with every other personal computing platform on the market. If they can't compete with iOS, Android, Windows, Amazon, on non gaming, they will eventually be squashed out. That is why Nintendo has to expand their platform to a larger range of products. If you can play a better version of your favorite game on your iPhone and Apple TV, then their is no point for a Switch, Xbox, or PlayStation. If SNM can show that they can replace your iPhone and Apple TV, and offer better exclusive content, then they remain viable. Simple as that.

I'm having trouble imagining Nintendo prioritizing 4k resolution even if they did a Switch revision. The fact of the matter is that plenty of Switch games, both Nintendo published titles and third party titles, already aren't able to maintain 1080p when docked.

I suspect Nintendo's priorities would be backwards and forwards compatibility, battery life, and maybe including  new piece of tech that could have easily been an accessory, a la amiibo support on New 3DS. Any cases where hardware is stronger would mostly be noticable on things like load times.

I think a switch pro will have better battery and cooling(or a chip that draws less energy)
1080p screen. But same size, to use joy con and the same dock. More storage too.
It will run dock setup on hh mode.
The user choose to use handheld setup as well, in order to improve battery time.

Should be the same technology of 3ds sucessor(that will also run switch games)

There would obviously be functional units disabled, lower clocks, more aggressive binning to achieve lower voltages to hit the same target as Switch.

Your comment was in response to mine, hence I assumed that was where you were taking things.

Either way, the 256-bit LPDDR4 at 137GB/s still fits in with my prior claim that the chip will be ideal doing 1080P or less, that is provided they retain such a wide bus, they may just cut that in half.

Not really. And certainly not when comparing AMD against nVidia.

Nope, never going to happen. And we knew it was never going to happen when we found out what connection the Switch was using to the Dock.
The USB interface on the Switch lacks the appropriate bandwidth necessary. We are talking Megabytes per second rather than the required Gigabytes per second here.

Not to mention the latency as well.

Will never happen.

They would be better off releasing a Switch TV, ditching the Joycons, Screen, Battery and using a much chunkier Tegra SoC.

The technology doesn't exist. So of course a console isn't going to leverage it.

I would like to see a larger, higher resolution screen in the device itself though, even if games aren't fully leveraging it. - 720P @ 6.2" isn't exactly trend setting.

1080P @ 8-10" would be amazing.

...except Windows 10 Mobile devices, Windows 10 tablets and PCs running Windows 10 32-bit for most Play Anywhere titles, even lightweights like Ori & Cuphead.

I can play Metal Gear Solid 4 on anything other than a Playstation 3? Do tell. Play Anywhere allows Xbox gamers to play select games on PCs. This is yet again one of those things that you were *totally sure* was going to lead to hundreds if not thousands of games instantly being playable on multiple devices you own as soon as you bought one copy. As it turns out the program has led to some terrible ports, and it gained almost no traction outside of Microsoft's first party games. To this date there are less than 50 Play anywhere games, and the program appears to have gained less traction as time goes on, not more. Looks like you took a huge cut on that one, and never even made contact.

So now you're going to use multiplatform games as justification? Skylanders came out on pretty much every platform on the planet. Same thing with Just Dance. Publishers have been making cheap to develop multi-platform games for decades now. You can find a bunch of titles every single year that do this. The only difference now is that  instead of porting older platforms like the 3DS, developers are now targeting cell phones. How does this indiciate that soon Sony are going to start offering the ability to play "PS5" games that can be played on your phone or your tablet, or a PS5, or a PS5 Pro, or your PS5 "Fuck you I'm rich" ultra mega performance edition, and your PC? Ohh right. It doesn't. Ohh hey look, another strike.

Now streaming is indicative of your master plan that has Sony making phones and car stereos with a Playstation OS? Playstation Now has existed for a long time. Sony keeps offering new plans, cheaper rates, and more incentives. Eventually you're probably going to see it as a cheap add-on to PS+ at this rate. Even still, despite all of the time and investment, and multiple game streaming solutions, (remember "THE POWER OF THE CLOUD!"?) bandwidth still isn't there to offer a seamless experience over wired connections, and it degrades from there. Most people don't have gigabit wireless, and 4G/LTE is still a far ways off from offering enough bandwitch for players on cell phones to not have a severe disadvantage against a PC or console player. It's an adorable little niche at this time, but let's not pretend it's anywhere close to prime time. "The cloud" hasn't changed gaming in nearly the amount of ways you thought it would. Five years after the Xbox One came out the vast majority of gamers are still playing on game pads in front of TVs, playing games on discs, or downloaded onto their harddrives, as they have been doing since the original XBox. Strike three.

You claimed that with the progress Nintendo has made with the Switch platform? Weren't you just sure the Switch was not only going to come in multiple form factors (home/portable/tablet) but also that it was going to run an android-based OS and be compatible with Android apps, and be ridiciously easy to port to? Here we are over a year later, and you can't even watch Youtube or Twitch on your Switch. Yet somehow this indicates that Nintendo is soon going to offer its games on multiple devices? Because maybe they'll make a "Switch Pro" just like they made a "new 3DS" and a "DSi"? Even if they do a "Switch Pro" it STILL doesn't indicate that your dream is any closer to reality. Let's never mind how completely awful games like Wolfenstein have ended up running on the Switch, and how Capcom has come out and said that games like Monster Hunter World "isn't possible on the Switch"?

The Switch is nothing like you claimed it would be. Accept it. Strike four.

And now you think reducing chip fabrications from 12nm to 7nm is going to be the tipping point? Why? What if the PS5/XB2 uses a 7nm fabrication process and takes the low TDP to leverage even more performance out of their design? How are you going to use the same 7nm fabrication process to make a chip that has to have a TDP that's a fraction of what the PS5 uses and offer enough performance to make ports as easy as you would thought they would be on Switch? Your whole concept assumes the whole home console and PC space is going to stand still or not leverage the same technologies any kind of mobile device could use. It's completely foolish. Strike five.

Its so sweet that you think Sony, Nintendo and Microsot are just going to go the way of the Dodo if they don't take Apple and Google head-on. I mean it's total bullshit, but sweet. How's Microsoft doing in the cell phone space. Ohh right. 0.3%. That's Microsofr, with enough resources to actually take a huge swing. How many hundreds of millions have they lost so far? If only they spent that money trying to compete with Sony instead.... But lets be real. Google and Apple aren't going to get into the serious gaming spaces because frankly there's not enough money in it. Apple sold 200 million iPhones last year alone. Why would they start making devices that ideally would sell about 10-15% of that? You'll probably see a google branded Android box, and you already have the apple TV. Adding a controller to that isn't going to have people jumping ship from Nintendo to a Google console. If Google or Apple really want to get into the console space, they'll just buy Sony or Nintendo. They don't need to compete against them when they can just purchase the revenue stream. It's pretty much what these companies do everywhere else, why should the console space be any different? But this is what you do. You take a little rumor or nothing burger of a device and turn it into a sign Sony putting the playstation OS on a cell phone. While you're at it, perhaps you need to tell Atari they need to start making car stereos if they want to survive in the console space. I'm sure they'll hire you as an advisor right then and there. Or not. Strike six.

You're a big baseball fan, Kev. How many strikes do you need before you've struck out? I'm pretty sure it's less than six. How about you accept that you struck out, take your seat in the dugout, and admit that standing at the plate when you don't even know how to hold the bat properly isn't a very good idea.

So was the X1. (That was the point)

no honey it’s not similar to cell Lol. It’s an arm processor.

Tegra processor never took off after tegra 3. It started flopping because industry started adopting Qualcomm for mobile (thanks Samsuang)

from X1 onwards all tegra chips were used for AI. Xavier is no different from the switch soc right now. 

People comparing Flops when Xavier is far and away more advanced than anything we have right now. Even if raw computing power won’t match the PS5, games should look comparable regardless.

Progress takes time, and we have marched closer and closer to each one of these things over the past decade. As I said, I have already been using Cross Buy/Play Anywhere for years now. I have had a subscription to PS Now since day one, except for a short while after they dropped support for PS Vita, PS TV, PS3, and Sony TV's/Blu-ray Players. I use Remote Play all the time, and I have used Xbox streaming a couple of times when I visited my sister.

I never stated Nintendo should run Android on Switch. If anything I said Nintendo would be extremely unwise to bring in Google to run their OS. I wanted Nintendo to offer apps on their own OS, and offer both a Wifi model, and a 4G model with Calling and Texting, but it didn't happen. 

Yes, I am pointing at multiplats, and how they have expanded to wider range of devices. This only helps to establish deeper that every game should be able to be played across multiple devices. If you can play Fortnite and PUBG on iPhone why can't you play COD, Battlefield, Madden, GTA, and such against your friends on PS/XB/PC?  That is a real question I get from casual gamers right now.

Why does 7nm make a difference?  Well for one, it it is not reducing fabrication from 12nm to 7nm. It is reducing fabrication from 20nm on the Switch and 16nm on PS4 Pro and XOX. We already know a 16nm Switch using Tegra X2 could either run at docked mode levels on the go, or double the battery life on the go running at the same performance as 20nm Switch. You can look at AMD's current tech and road maps, which I am pretty sure we have already linked to in the past, and see exactly where we are right now with 14nm Ryzen and Vega Mobile chips, and make a pretty solid prediction to where we will be with 7nm Ryzen and Navi chips. Then you have a target relsoution of 4K, which requires massive amounts of processing additional processing power, that is not neccessary for a Mobile device, because 720p is very acceptable on a 5" screen. When games were targeting 900p - 1080p on consoles, a mobile would have struggled to deliver 240p, and that would not be acceptable. In a case where we are aiming for 4K on a 7nm console, a 7nm mobile will be well capable of delivering that expereince at 720p. 

Why is this different than the past? In the past you had PS4, PS3, and PS Vita all running on massivley different architectures. Xbox 360 and Xbox One run on massivley different architectures. Scalability from software engines, and hardware where not in massive demand. Over the last 6 years Sony and Microsoft have worked to build scalability into every aspect of their ecosystem. Hell, the XOX is a vastly different layout than the XBO, and PC can have any number of variables, but Microsoft has developed their ecosystem to be massively scalable. Something they realized they had to do after a few failures in the mobile space. As they realized you can't have to seperate ecosystems, you have to have one unified and scalable ecosystem, where every device works towards the same goal. It doesn't stop there, AMD, Nvidia, Apple, Intel, and everyone else in the chip industry has been working to make their chips more and more scalable. This has lead to ARM being better in home devices, and X86 becoming much more power efficient. 

We are constantly moving towards scalability and unification. If you can not see what has happened over the last decade I don't know what to tell you. I mean do you remember when people had compasses? Now they have Smartphones. Do you remember when people had Navagation systems? Now they have Smartphones. Do you remember when people had Handhelds? Now they have Smartphones. Do you rmember when people had DVD/Blu-ray Players. Now they have set top boxes. Do you rmember when everyone had PC's? Now many have Smartphones, Tablets, Consoles. With every year convergence continues. How much loner until we are asking, Do you remember when people had Xbox, PlayStation, and Nintendos? 

So yes, think it is sweet how I am concerned about the future of decent gaming platforms. If you are fine with touch controls, and gaming as an, oh yeah, you can do that if you like type of product, then great. If you are fine with Apple, and Google taking over everything, then steady the course, because that is where we are heading. But, if you think PlayStation, Xbox, and Nintendo are just magically going to stick around, without adopting to the market, expanding their usefulness, and expanding their form factor, then I believe you will be very very dissappointed. We have basically lost handhelds completely in the last decade, will stagnent console platforms/ecosystems survive the next?

lol. So much nonsense you're doubling down on. It's precious, and so dramatic! But let's sort some things out.

We're moving towards unification, are we? Remember when we could only make phone calls on land-based telephones? Now we can make phone calls on land-based telephones, satellite phones, cellular phones, tablets, PCs, handheld game consoles, etc.Remember when you could only get Netflix on your PC? Now you can get it on PCs, tablets,smartphones, smart TVs, game consoles, handhelds, bluray players, cable boxes etc. Some technologies converge then, as the technology becomes arbitrary to implement, it diverges again. Besides, all you've proven is that people prefer to only have one device on the go. How many people care about how many devices are under their TV? I can't imagine there's too many people that wish their game console was also their TV receiver, but I don't doubt for one second that you wish that was a thing. How many people truly miss the DVD/blu-ray drives in laptops? How many people wish they had a TV receiver in their laptop? How many people wish they could just do away with TVs altogether and consume all media, including live TV on just their smartphone? Not many. HDMI ports are a dime a dozen. Power bars aren't that much more expensive. And let's look at what Apple, Google and MS are actually doing. Creating walled gardens. What else do you think Valve was up to with Steam OS and Steam Machines? The target audience was effectively nobody, but they wanted to take a shot at popularizing a walled garden where people would just keep adding games to their steam library instead of buying them off of all of their competitors that keep springing up. Apple wants to give you every reason possible to just buy Apple products. But, does Apple just want to you to just buy an iPhone? Fuck No! They want you buying iPads. They want you buying apple TVs. They want you buying macs, and they want you to do that so that you have every reason just to use the app store and the apple store to buy all of your music, tv shows, and movies, and be able to stream all that shit over all the other iDevices. But why doesn't apple make a TV? Because they'd have a really, really hard time selling a TV that accepted inputs from other devices. That just isn't the apple way! But let's be clear, Apple's solution isn't unification. That is an ecosystem that says "Don't fucking dare buy anything else".

Most consumers don't take too kindly with that shit. That's why google, while they're trying to put up their own walled garden, got a bit smart and licenced Android to pretty much anyone. That's why you can put windows on any PC you want. It's not because they don't want to be just as closed off as apple, it's because they want to cater to the large swaths of people who are not going to put up with that shit. So where does that leave console makers?


And you want Sony, Microsoft and Nintendo to go up against what apple is doing, except even more walled garden, instead of carving out their own little niches, their own market that requires a fuck load of time, money and effort, when Apple and Google are in much more lucrative markets. Can you see Apple or Google creating/buy 5-10 game studios to make exclusive games to sell on their iConsole/Google console? They don't even make games for iOS/Android. Sure they can buy exclusivity, but MS knows how wonderful that is to consumers. But no! Instead Sony needs to start making an OS that runs on everything from the PS5 to their smartphone to car stereos, and why not PCs? So should Nintendo. Even though MS, Google, and Apple aren't dumb enough to do that, that is Sony's and Nintendo's solution! To make devices they no longer or never made, and put bloated, unnecessary OSes on them so you can play God of War and Mario while driving.

Also, question on that free Fortnite game. How popular do you think it would be on iOS and Android if it cost $59.99? I bet you know the answer is that everyone would be laughing their asses off if Epic games tried to sell a mobile game for $59.99. How much do they sell Madden for? How about COD or Battlefield? Ohh. No, you're right.Not only is EA going to put the time and effort to porting the full version of Madden to iOS, they're going to give it away for free. Makes sense. That's why they just brought it to PC and Origin for $59.99, because they soon know that those people would rather not play on PC and would rather play on their smartphone.

You are out of your mind if you think 200 million console gamers are just going to roll over and accept a google or apple console, and touch controls as the only input as if such a device would just force Sony, Nintendo and Microsoft from selling game consoles. If people were that willing to flock to such solutions, they wouldn't have bought 130 million + PS4s/X1s/Switches. Google/Apple already offers that, so stop pretending that all paths lead that way. See, here's the part you fail to understand. Sony doesn't have to make anything other than a PS5 that is a beefed up PS4 that adapts modern technology and to trends to keep selling millions of consoles to gamers who want to play great games on TVs with gamepads. There is zero indication that market is dwindling in any way. That's why they've sold over 80 million PS4s in just 4.5 short years. Because millions of people *still* want to play games on TVs with gamepads. Those people aren't just going to start playing on smartphones just because they can get Madden on it.

So can you just quit the nonsense now? Thanks in advance.

You know, people told me the same exact thing about how they would never give up their physical compass, or their dedicated navigation system, or their handheld for one of those iPhone things. That is why I used those examples. I could go on for pages on people I directly know and stories from friends and family, about how so and so said they would never own or never do (Insert Activity) on a smartphone. Now everyone I know has a smartphone, and where are those other devices? The Attic, the Basement, the landfill, one things for sure, they sure as shit arn't being used.

If you look back, PS4/XBO launched just after Smartphones really started to take off. When these two consoles launched I knew many people who did not have a smartphone. 5 years later, everyone of those people have a smartphone. When PS5 and XBO launch in 2019, 2020, or whenever, iOS and Android are going to be much stronger and more engrained than they where in 2013. Why do you think Google said to be making a strong push for gaming in the coming years? It ain't for shits and giggles. They want that royalty money that Sony, Microsoft, and Nintendo are getting from 3rd party games. If they offer a box that is competitve with PS5/XB4/NSW or NSW2, and allow every single game to be played on that Box and you Android Phone, you don't think Android fans are going to make the jump from XB/PS/Nin to Android?

We arn't even talking touch controls here anymore. This would be a box with PS5/XB4 power, and a standard Bluetooth gamepad, which could also be tethered to your Android device. $59.99 and you can play your games on you Android Phone on the go, and in 4K/60 at home. You don't think that is a possability? You don't think Sony, Microsoft, and Nintendo should be fully ready to counter this attack on their turf? 

The writing is on the wall. If Sony, Nintendo, and Microsoft fail to act, just like Sony and Nintendo did with the Handheld market, then consoles as we know them will die just as fast as Handhelds did. I will fight to the very end for all three of these companies, if they put up a fight, thanks to all of the amazing times they have delivered to me in the past 30 years. But, if they fail to put up a fight, and Google or Apple come out with a Handheld Form Factor Mobile device and a Home Console line, with a unified library, and they fail to match them, I am going to have to drop support for these companies. That comes from someone with a passion for these companies and their games. Most people I know couldn't care less whether they play on Xbox, PlayStation, Windows, Mac, Android, or iOS. Switching from their current home console to any other would be no issue whatsoever.