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

Forums - Nintendo Discussion - Switch TFLOPS : 1,024 ? 0,79 ? 0,393 ?

Trumpstyle said:

Ryzen 2700U is far weaker than Xbox one, it runs Doom (Vulkan) at 30 fps 900p with lowest settings, xbox one does 60fps 900p with medium-high settings. In Witcher 3 Ryzen 2700u does 20fps at lowest setting with 720p... it's not even close.

(Doom video)

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NijqNFWlUug&t=492s

(Witcher 3 video)

https://youtu.be/Am7gzmMuaGI?t=180

I haven't actually tried those two games on my Ryzen 2700U notebook.

But Overwatch, Battlefield 1, Call of Duty: WW2 were hitting 1080P native... Which is certainly a step up over what my base Xbox One machine can do... Or I can dial back the resolution to 75% scale (Which fits the bandwidth better) and dial up some of the effects.

The thing with Ryzen notebooks is that Ryzen has a configurable TDP and some notebook manufacturers limit it to 15w instead of 25w.
Some notebooks also only come with single channel DDR4...
And some notebooks (like mine) actually allow the DDR4 to run at 2666mhz rather than 2400mhz.
And some notebooks aren't limited to 12 month old driver sets. (I hacked mine.)


Trumpstyle said:
I'm glad you accept last-gen games (atleast uncharted 3) looks better than what Switch has, I remember we had a similiar discussion about this and you and John refused to accept Halo 4 looked better than Doom on Switch (handheld).

"Look better" is a subjective approach... I rather take a methodical one.

Doom on Switch is using techniques that Halo 4 doesn't such as GPU accelerated particle effects, it's rendering is a step up over Halo 4's baked approach and it shows.
From a graphics perspective, Doom on Switch beats Halo 4 on 360 in terms of fidelity. - Artistic style, Halo 4 probably wins.

Mr Puggsly said:

Generally speaking we know the PS4 and X1 are about equal on the CPU side, but lower resolutions are on the X1 due to GPU limitations. So generally speaking, it evident low resolution is mostly a GPU issue.

Indeed, the Xbox One is GPU limited.

But games that are CPU bound will occasionally pull ahead. (Assassins Creed at one point.)
The difference between the Xbox One and Playstation 4's CPU's are pretty inconsequential. I.E. 1.6ghz vs 1.75ghz. - 150Mhz is stuff all either way you cut the cake.

The Xbox One does have the DDR3 and eSRAM advantage which reduces latencies as well, which gives it a little extra kick in the CPU department.

However, the Xbox One on the GPU side is partly hampered by the lack of bandwidth... Even the PC's Radeon 7750 saw large reductions in performance moving from GDDR5 to DDR3. - The Xbox ONE's GPU is a step up over that and it has to share it's limited bandwidth with the CPU and other components as well, compounding the issue... Granted it's mitigated somewhat by the use of a 256bit bus and eSRAM, but not resolved entirely.

The ROP/CU/TMU reductions doesn't help matters either of course.

Nate4Drake said:

Pop in will always be an issue if Devs don't address the power in a "balanced way".  Of course a very weak hardware has much more problems, and if you wanna eliminate significantly pop in, the overall geometry, tessellation and IQ would be so poor that Devs prefer to keep more significant pop in, and a clear example is The Legend of Zelda on Nintendo Switch.

 So, what about pop in, when PS5 and Next Xbox will be out ? It could always be an issue if Developers aim for the maximum geometry, details, effects, good tessellation in the medium/long distance and big scale and complex environment, to an extent that frame rate would significally drop with zero pop in. It's only a matter of resource management, and it will be always an issue, regardless of the power available.  The good thing is, with PS5 and Next Xbox, you might have games with far better graphics, more advanced physics, AI, Animations, effects, and further reduce pop in, if devs want.

PS: Do you remeber what kind of pop in we had in racing games on PSX, Sega Saturn and N64 ? :D

Well. There are better ways to go about resolving pop-in, such as fading. But I digress, that is another discussion entirely that could take me many hours to elaborate upon. :P



--::{PC Gaming Master Race}::--

Around the Network
curl-6 said:
HoloDust said:

As said previously, all games need to run in portable mode, so your base performance is set at under 200GFLOPs.

The thing is though, in portable mode the smaller screen means you can get away with a lot of cuts to make up the difference. Lower screen resolutions, ambient occlusion off, lower res shadows, dialled down draw distance, etc. On a 6 inch screen cutbacks like this aren't as noticeable as they would be on a HDTV.

Yeah, they do get away with lower res (though it's the same viewing angle with 6" tablet that is some 40 cm from your eyes or 60" TV that is 4m away), but you can clearly see all other cutbacks. Not that it matters much, cause that's the base performance devs have to deal with on Switch, since all games need to support it.



Pemalite said:
Trumpstyle said:

Ryzen 2700U is far weaker than Xbox one, it runs Doom (Vulkan) at 30 fps 900p with lowest settings, xbox one does 60fps 900p with medium-high settings. In Witcher 3 Ryzen 2700u does 20fps at lowest setting with 720p... it's not even close.

(Doom video)

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NijqNFWlUug&t=492s

(Witcher 3 video)

https://youtu.be/Am7gzmMuaGI?t=180

I haven't actually tried those two games on my Ryzen 2700U notebook.

But Overwatch, Battlefield 1, Call of Duty: WW2 were hitting 1080P native... Which is certainly a step up over what my base Xbox One machine can do... Or I can dial back the resolution to 75% scale (Which fits the bandwidth better) and dial up some of the effects.

The thing with Ryzen notebooks is that Ryzen has a configurable TDP and some notebook manufacturers limit it to 15w instead of 25w.
Some notebooks also only come with single channel DDR4...
And some notebooks (like mine) actually allow the DDR4 to run at 2666mhz rather than 2400mhz.
And some notebooks aren't limited to 12 month old driver sets. (I hacked mine.)


Trumpstyle said:
I'm glad you accept last-gen games (atleast uncharted 3) looks better than what Switch has, I remember we had a similiar discussion about this and you and John refused to accept Halo 4 looked better than Doom on Switch (handheld).

"Look better" is a subjective approach... I rather take a methodical one.

Doom on Switch is using techniques that Halo 4 doesn't such as GPU accelerated particle effects, it's rendering is a step up over Halo 4's baked approach and it shows.
From a graphics perspective, Doom on Switch beats Halo 4 on 360 in terms of fidelity. - Artistic style, Halo 4 probably wins.

Mr Puggsly said:

Generally speaking we know the PS4 and X1 are about equal on the CPU side, but lower resolutions are on the X1 due to GPU limitations. So generally speaking, it evident low resolution is mostly a GPU issue.

Indeed, the Xbox One is GPU limited.

But games that are CPU bound will occasionally pull ahead. (Assassins Creed at one point.)
The difference between the Xbox One and Playstation 4's CPU's are pretty inconsequential. I.E. 1.6ghz vs 1.75ghz. - 150Mhz is stuff all either way you cut the cake.

The Xbox One does have the DDR3 and eSRAM advantage which reduces latencies as well, which gives it a little extra kick in the CPU department.

However, the Xbox One on the GPU side is partly hampered by the lack of bandwidth... Even the PC's Radeon 7750 saw large reductions in performance moving from GDDR5 to DDR3. - The Xbox ONE's GPU is a step up over that and it has to share it's limited bandwidth with the CPU and other components as well, compounding the issue... Granted it's mitigated somewhat by the use of a 256bit bus and eSRAM, but not resolved entirely.

The ROP/CU/TMU reductions doesn't help matters either of course.

Nate4Drake said:

Pop in will always be an issue if Devs don't address the power in a "balanced way".  Of course a very weak hardware has much more problems, and if you wanna eliminate significantly pop in, the overall geometry, tessellation and IQ would be so poor that Devs prefer to keep more significant pop in, and a clear example is The Legend of Zelda on Nintendo Switch.

 So, what about pop in, when PS5 and Next Xbox will be out ? It could always be an issue if Developers aim for the maximum geometry, details, effects, good tessellation in the medium/long distance and big scale and complex environment, to an extent that frame rate would significally drop with zero pop in. It's only a matter of resource management, and it will be always an issue, regardless of the power available.  The good thing is, with PS5 and Next Xbox, you might have games with far better graphics, more advanced physics, AI, Animations, effects, and further reduce pop in, if devs want.

PS: Do you remeber what kind of pop in we had in racing games on PSX, Sega Saturn and N64 ? :D

Well. There are better ways to go about resolving pop-in, such as fading. But I digress, that is another discussion entirely that could take me many hours to elaborate upon. :P

I love technical explanation, I'm ready !  :)



”Every great dream begins with a dreamer. Always remember, you have within you the strength, the patience, and the passion to reach for the stars to change the world.”

Harriet Tubman.

Pemalite said:
Trumpstyle said:

Ryzen 2700U is far weaker than Xbox one, it runs Doom (Vulkan) at 30 fps 900p with lowest settings, xbox one does 60fps 900p with medium-high settings. In Witcher 3 Ryzen 2700u does 20fps at lowest setting with 720p... it's not even close.

(Doom video)

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NijqNFWlUug&t=492s

(Witcher 3 video)

https://youtu.be/Am7gzmMuaGI?t=180

I haven't actually tried those two games on my Ryzen 2700U notebook.

But Overwatch, Battlefield 1, Call of Duty: WW2 were hitting 1080P native... Which is certainly a step up over what my base Xbox One machine can do... Or I can dial back the resolution to 75% scale (Which fits the bandwidth better) and dial up some of the effects.

The thing with Ryzen notebooks is that Ryzen has a configurable TDP and some notebook manufacturers limit it to 15w instead of 25w.
Some notebooks also only come with single channel DDR4...
And some notebooks (like mine) actually allow the DDR4 to run at 2666mhz rather than 2400mhz.

And some notebooks aren't limited to 12 month old driver sets. (I hacked mine.)

Some games are problematic on my Raven Ridge 2700U notebook. I hope that gaming performance gets a lot more stable when I can finally update the GPU driver from 2017 to 2019 in a few months. But I don't expect Xbox One performance.



Mr Puggsly said:
OdinHades said:

Yeah, I know all that, bit still. Consoles used to be crazy fast machines for little money back in the days. And now they are kinda outdated the very day they are released. With just standard PC parts and little to no of that sweet sweet secret sauce. All that stuff was just way more exciting in the 90s and 2000s, if you know what I mean. 

I'm not really sure what your point is. I mean even if these current consoles aren't incredibly powerful they're still very capable, I'd argue they're aging better than last gen consoles.

I mean what if 8th gen consoles had double the CPU power, 16GB of RAM and a GPU with 3-4 TF at launch? Would gaming right now be much more enjoyable? I think it would be pretty much the same just with better performance and graphics. Compared to last gen developers got a huge spec boost for the 8th gen but the games are basically the same with better graphics in my opinion.

However, I do like the spec boost of the X1X simply because its making modern console games more visually appealing.

You don't think the scale increased? That's the one big difference I noticed from last gen is how much bigger the average levels/worlds in all the games are. That and how they stuff them full of more more items/objects/animations/clutter.

Even linear games/franchises seem to have gone semi if not fully open-world.



Around the Network
HoloDust said:
curl-6 said:

The thing is though, in portable mode the smaller screen means you can get away with a lot of cuts to make up the difference. Lower screen resolutions, ambient occlusion off, lower res shadows, dialled down draw distance, etc. On a 6 inch screen cutbacks like this aren't as noticeable as they would be on a HDTV.

Yeah, they do get away with lower res (though it's the same viewing angle with 6" tablet that is some 40 cm from your eyes or 60" TV that is 4m away), but you can clearly see all other cutbacks. Not that it matters much, cause that's the base performance devs have to deal with on Switch, since all games need to support it.

From my experience, most people don't sit that far back from their TV.

On paper, Switch's power level in portable mode should make games like Doom and Wolfenstein II unfeasible, yet it can still do them simply cos you can cut the game down significantly in portable mode and it won't be as noticeable to most players. It gives you a ton of extra breathing room.

In practice that "base performance" is a very flexible threshold that be be stretched a long way.

Last edited by curl-6 - on 23 January 2019

Bet with Liquidlaser: I say PS5 and Xbox Series will sell more than 56 million combined by the end of 2023.

Conina said:
Pemalite said:

I haven't actually tried those two games on my Ryzen 2700U notebook.

But Overwatch, Battlefield 1, Call of Duty: WW2 were hitting 1080P native... Which is certainly a step up over what my base Xbox One machine can do... Or I can dial back the resolution to 75% scale (Which fits the bandwidth better) and dial up some of the effects.

The thing with Ryzen notebooks is that Ryzen has a configurable TDP and some notebook manufacturers limit it to 15w instead of 25w.
Some notebooks also only come with single channel DDR4...
And some notebooks (like mine) actually allow the DDR4 to run at 2666mhz rather than 2400mhz.

And some notebooks aren't limited to 12 month old driver sets. (I hacked mine.)

Some games are problematic on my Raven Ridge 2700U notebook. I hope that gaming performance gets a lot more stable when I can finally update the GPU driver from 2017 to 2019 in a few months. But I don't expect Xbox One performance.

You would be surprised how well the 2700U can pull ahead. - If you limit your CPU's clockrate, the APU will allocate more TDP towards the GPU... And that translates to performance gains in GPU limited scenario's, sometimes significantly...
Ironically the 2500u actually ends up faster than the 2700u in some games due it's slightly more conservative CPU clocks, meaning more TDP thrown at the GPU.

In most games that are shader heavy, the 2700u will sit around the Xbox One level, which isn't a high benchmark to reach to start with.

Ryzen 3700u should bring with it a good 20% performance improvement... Thanks to process gains. - And hopefully AMD fixes their terrible idle power consumption, Ryzen 4700u will be where Ryzen mobile will beat the Xbox One definitively though, maybe approaching the PS4. Calling it now.



--::{PC Gaming Master Race}::--

Scoobes said:
Mr Puggsly said:

I'm not really sure what your point is. I mean even if these current consoles aren't incredibly powerful they're still very capable, I'd argue they're aging better than last gen consoles.

I mean what if 8th gen consoles had double the CPU power, 16GB of RAM and a GPU with 3-4 TF at launch? Would gaming right now be much more enjoyable? I think it would be pretty much the same just with better performance and graphics. Compared to last gen developers got a huge spec boost for the 8th gen but the games are basically the same with better graphics in my opinion.

However, I do like the spec boost of the X1X simply because its making modern console games more visually appealing.

You don't think the scale increased? That's the one big difference I noticed from last gen is how much bigger the average levels/worlds in all the games are. That and how they stuff them full of more more items/objects/animations/clutter.

Even linear games/franchises seem to have gone semi if not fully open-world.

I think there are exceptions, I can point to games that I feel are using the increased power for more enemies on screen, player counts and other aspects that truly affect gameplay.

Generally speaking though, the average game is feels like last gen but with more refined/modern game mechanics and improved visuals. As I staed before when developers get superior specs there is a tendency to use resources less efficiently as well.

Nintendo seems to do magic with inferior specs but they're just being efficient with limited power. Kinda like how developers used to approach 7th gen hardware.



Recently Completed
River City: Rival Showdown
for 3DS (3/5) - River City: Tokyo Rumble for 3DS (4/5) - Zelda: BotW for Wii U (5/5) - Zelda: BotW for Switch (5/5) - Zelda: Link's Awakening for Switch (4/5) - Rage 2 for X1X (4/5) - Rage for 360 (3/5) - Streets of Rage 4 for X1/PC (4/5) - Gears 5 for X1X (5/5) - Mortal Kombat 11 for X1X (5/5) - Doom 64 for N64 (emulator) (3/5) - Crackdown 3 for X1S/X1X (4/5) - Infinity Blade III - for iPad 4 (3/5) - Infinity Blade II - for iPad 4 (4/5) - Infinity Blade - for iPad 4 (4/5) - Wolfenstein: The Old Blood for X1 (3/5) - Assassin's Creed: Origins for X1 (3/5) - Uncharted: Lost Legacy for PS4 (4/5) - EA UFC 3 for X1 (4/5) - Doom for X1 (4/5) - Titanfall 2 for X1 (4/5) - Super Mario 3D World for Wii U (4/5) - South Park: The Stick of Truth for X1 BC (4/5) - Call of Duty: WWII for X1 (4/5) -Wolfenstein II for X1 - (4/5) - Dead or Alive: Dimensions for 3DS (4/5) - Marvel vs Capcom: Infinite for X1 (3/5) - Halo Wars 2 for X1/PC (4/5) - Halo Wars: DE for X1 (4/5) - Tekken 7 for X1 (4/5) - Injustice 2 for X1 (4/5) - Yakuza 5 for PS3 (3/5) - Battlefield 1 (Campaign) for X1 (3/5) - Assassin's Creed: Syndicate for X1 (4/5) - Call of Duty: Infinite Warfare for X1 (4/5) - Call of Duty: MW Remastered for X1 (4/5) - Donkey Kong Country Returns for 3DS (4/5) - Forza Horizon 3 for X1 (5/5)

Mr Puggsly said:
Scoobes said:

You don't think the scale increased? That's the one big difference I noticed from last gen is how much bigger the average levels/worlds in all the games are. That and how they stuff them full of more more items/objects/animations/clutter.

Even linear games/franchises seem to have gone semi if not fully open-world.

I think there are exceptions, I can point to games that I feel are using the increased power for more enemies on screen, player counts and other aspects that truly affect gameplay.

Generally speaking though, the average game is feels like last gen but with more refined/modern game mechanics and improved visuals. As I staed before when developers get superior specs there is a tendency to use resources less efficiently as well.

Nintendo seems to do magic with inferior specs but they're just being efficient with limited power. Kinda like how developers used to approach 7th gen hardware.

What do you mean for "average Game" ?  

 What I noticed going from 7th Gen to 8th Gen is an increase in scale, more draw distance, far more geometry, better textures, lighting, IQ, everything, physics/animations, effects, in those games where developers have put some serious effort; and I think you cannot expect more than this.

 Killzone Shadow Fall, even though it was not the game I was expecting, showed immediately a big jump in scale, in the graphics department, effects, IQ.  Not a game changer of course, as it was just a Launch title.  But what about Uncharted4 and God of War ? Talking about the latter, it completely blows me away, on PRO even more.

 Then we have many other games that don't show much of an improvement over last gen, apart from prettier graphics and more modern mechanics, but this happens on any system of any gen, looks like you discovered the warm water...

 How many remakes, rehash of games we have already seen millions of time from Nintendo, which plays and feels like Nintendo64 games with just a graphics and little "mechanics" update ?? But still, we have other very good games like Super Mario Odyssey and Zelda which showed much more than just an increase of numbers of enemies, graphics and prettier textures.   This concerns every hardware of any generation compared to any other hardware of the previous generation, and don't expect the "Next Gen Factor" on average games, where for a reason or another, devs didn't put enough effort because of lack of resources/time/talent/etc.

""Nintendo seems to do magic with inferior specs but they're just being efficient with limited power. Kinda like how developers used to approach 7th gen hardware.""

Nintendo is not the only one able to do "magic" with its own hardware, just they have less resources to work with.  GOW and Forza Motosport4 say HI :)



”Every great dream begins with a dreamer. Always remember, you have within you the strength, the patience, and the passion to reach for the stars to change the world.”

Harriet Tubman.

Nate4Drake said:
Mr Puggsly said:

I think there are exceptions, I can point to games that I feel are using the increased power for more enemies on screen, player counts and other aspects that truly affect gameplay.

Generally speaking though, the average game is feels like last gen but with more refined/modern game mechanics and improved visuals. As I staed before when developers get superior specs there is a tendency to use resources less efficiently as well.

Nintendo seems to do magic with inferior specs but they're just being efficient with limited power. Kinda like how developers used to approach 7th gen hardware.

What do you mean for "average Game" ?  

 What I noticed going from 7th Gen to 8th Gen is an increase in scale, more draw distance, far more geometry, better textures, lighting, IQ, everything, physics/animations, effects, in those games where developers have put some serious effort; and I think you cannot expect more than this.

 Killzone Shadow Fall, even though it was not the game I was expecting, showed immediately a big jump in scale, in the graphics department, effects, IQ.  Not a game changer of course, as it was just a Launch title.  But what about Uncharted4 and God of War ? Talking about the latter, it completely blows me away, on PRO even more.

 Then we have many other games that don't show much of an improvement over last gen, apart from prettier graphics and more modern mechanics, but this happens on any system of any gen, looks like you discovered the warm water...

 How many remakes, rehash of games we have already seen millions of time from Nintendo, which plays and feels like Nintendo64 games with just a graphics and little "mechanics" update ?? But still, we have other very good games like Super Mario Odyssey and Zelda which showed much more than just an increase of numbers of enemies, graphics and prettier textures.   This concerns every hardware of any generation compared to any other hardware of the previous generation, and don't expect the "Next Gen Factor" on average games, where for a reason or another, devs didn't put enough effort because of lack of resources/time/talent/etc.

""Nintendo seems to do magic with inferior specs but they're just being efficient with limited power. Kinda like how developers used to approach 7th gen hardware.""

Nintendo is not the only one able to do "magic" with its own hardware, just they have less resources to work with.  GOW and Forza Motosport4 say HI :)

I completely agree with stuff I bolded, but that really isn't gameplay improvements per se. Hence, I'm not necessarily enjoying games more because the graphics are better.

Uncharted 4 is larger scale than previous games in the series, but does that mean Uncharted on PS3 couldn't have been larger scale? I mean we have the BF3 and 4 on 7th gen, those are large scale with vehicles, etc. I think Uncharted 4 is a great looking game but not ambitious in the gameplay department.

God of War is another example of a great looking game but not what I would a next gen experience or whatever. Its a relatively linear action game with cool graphics.

Maybe I've just played too many game and become jaded. Maybe I had unrealistic expectations of what developers were going to do with new specs. I mean I still enjoy games, I just think the biggest changes have been in graphics while game design has hit a wall.

Maybe that's partly why battle royal games are so incredibly popular at the moment, that's a unique experience we didn't have last gen.



Recently Completed
River City: Rival Showdown
for 3DS (3/5) - River City: Tokyo Rumble for 3DS (4/5) - Zelda: BotW for Wii U (5/5) - Zelda: BotW for Switch (5/5) - Zelda: Link's Awakening for Switch (4/5) - Rage 2 for X1X (4/5) - Rage for 360 (3/5) - Streets of Rage 4 for X1/PC (4/5) - Gears 5 for X1X (5/5) - Mortal Kombat 11 for X1X (5/5) - Doom 64 for N64 (emulator) (3/5) - Crackdown 3 for X1S/X1X (4/5) - Infinity Blade III - for iPad 4 (3/5) - Infinity Blade II - for iPad 4 (4/5) - Infinity Blade - for iPad 4 (4/5) - Wolfenstein: The Old Blood for X1 (3/5) - Assassin's Creed: Origins for X1 (3/5) - Uncharted: Lost Legacy for PS4 (4/5) - EA UFC 3 for X1 (4/5) - Doom for X1 (4/5) - Titanfall 2 for X1 (4/5) - Super Mario 3D World for Wii U (4/5) - South Park: The Stick of Truth for X1 BC (4/5) - Call of Duty: WWII for X1 (4/5) -Wolfenstein II for X1 - (4/5) - Dead or Alive: Dimensions for 3DS (4/5) - Marvel vs Capcom: Infinite for X1 (3/5) - Halo Wars 2 for X1/PC (4/5) - Halo Wars: DE for X1 (4/5) - Tekken 7 for X1 (4/5) - Injustice 2 for X1 (4/5) - Yakuza 5 for PS3 (3/5) - Battlefield 1 (Campaign) for X1 (3/5) - Assassin's Creed: Syndicate for X1 (4/5) - Call of Duty: Infinite Warfare for X1 (4/5) - Call of Duty: MW Remastered for X1 (4/5) - Donkey Kong Country Returns for 3DS (4/5) - Forza Horizon 3 for X1 (5/5)