But the enhanced devices are essentially halfway-to-next gen devices. Like the phone model. The older ones don't suddenly become incompatible. I think it's a great model that looks much more like PC gaming, and that's a good thing. There's no such thing as a next-gen PC. Just iterative improvements. This is the same thing.
My opinion as well, which is why I always expected a Switch pro to hit the shelves roughly at the same time as the next gen consoles of the competitors, that is in or after 2020.
Exactly my thoughts.Yea I think any upgrade will maintain 720p. Running existing games on a 1080p screen will be a pure downgrade all the way around. IQ, battery life, and cost would all suffer.
You got that backwards.Not with PS5 and XboxOne2 around the corner. Needs to be a Pro variant. The mini can come later.
Even the next gen system won't be pulling off that shit if it works similarly to how the Switch does. Those are some insane expectations.It happens every time. Every time someone hears "hardware revision" they think "next-gen system."
well they wouldn't go "full TV" because the regular Switch would be on sale too. But if you remove the dock then where is the "Switch" part? And as mentioned the Switch can't be smaller because the joycons would have to be different or they wouldn't ift.
Now my proposal would be a Switch home version and if you think about it: The Switch's hardware is tiny already. Look up what's inside the Switch case, then remove the screen, remove the battery and you could fit that into an SNES classic case. You would lose the portability aspect but you know what you are buying. You buy it because you don't need it, so...??
Then it would remove the need to support Nintendo Labo, something that the initiative from Nintendo was kickstarted from.At worst the only thing I could see removed is the IR camera on the right joy-con since it's essentially useless but I doubt it'd bring down the costs significantly.
Xavier does up to 1.4 FP32 TFLOPs, with a "typical TDP" of 20W and a lot of stuff including AI parts and massive CPU cores that the Switch revision would not use. Its GPU part is 90sq.mm at TSMC's 12nm process. A part like this with 4 A7x cores at ~2GHz and with the GPU doing a bit more than 1 FP32 TFLOP would sit at about the same power consumption as the X1's 10W and it would be more powerful than the XBOX One in every respect.Ballpark being the key word. Max performance of known Tegra mobile chips is 756Gflops even assuming Nvidia has secretly been working on a custom Switch Pro chip I doubt it would exceed 1TF.
However same as the X1 theoretical performance was 500Gflops the actual chip ended up being ~400 docked so expect a similar decrease in order to maintain consistent performance in the thermal and power threshold required. A bigger upgrade would be changing to an A72 CPU which would actually put it slightly above the PS4/X1 in single core perf (albeit with less cores assuming they maintain the same setup).
Note that this applies to all console manufacturers. :/I appreciate early adopters making it a success, but I know how Nintendo works now after all these years.
It will be compatible with the normal joycons same as the Switch is compatible with the pro controller, wirelessly. But the controllers it comes with will be built in, not detachable.
LOL read the post you responded to...Not with PS5 and XboxOne2 around the corner. Needs to be a Pro variant. The mini can come later.
If you remove the dock how can it be switched? And you would have to buy a separate set of joycons just to use it at home then?Right you lose the portability while a switch without the dock and some attached Joy-cons loses nothing you still have a switch that can be "switched".
If you can still dock it to the older docks then it would have to have the exact same dimensions. So all you did was remove the dock and also remove the ability to detach the joycons. How is that a good deal? Also for the home version of Switch you of course could use bluetooth controllers.You could still dock it, still connect regular joy-cons to it (via bluetooth), etc.
Just like Wii and it sold a shitton. and it could be a lot cheaper than regular Switch too.you just have an underpowered console with no ability to take it on the go
Xavier does up to 1.4 FP32 TFLOPs, with a "typical TDP" of 20W and a lot of stuff including AI parts and massive CPU cores that the Switch revision would not use. Its GPU part is 90sq.mm at TSMC's 12nm process. A part like this with 4 A7x cores at ~2GHz and with the GPU doing a bit more than 1 FP32 TFLOP would sit at about the same power consumption as the X1's 10W and it would be more powerful than the XBOX One in every respect.
And, now that we are at it, it's interesting to me that Volta doesn't really have any disadvantage against Turing in FP32 compute per square millimeter or per watt, despite Turing having the RT cores. Both architectures exist at the same 12nm process.
So essentially, if you have Volta you can put Turing instead and have the RT cores with no penalty. Food for thought. Essentially, with the 12nm process you can have a ~200 sq.mm chip that has similar FP32 compute as the XBOX One, a better CPU, ray tracing acceleration and support for DLSS, and that can fit a Switch. The question is whether it would be better to strip those components for more FP32 performance, but Nvidia seems pretty set on their new architecture.
There is a 0% chance we see a PS5 or Xbox Successor in 2019.I just hope that future games keep supporting the 'old' version as well.
(I mention this because of the 3DS/New 3DS situation)
There is a chance for the PS5 to be released during the holidays of 2019.
If both things happen, it would be a very interesting situation indeed.
how big are RT cores though? remember the RTX GPUs are all over 700mm^2, it's the second largest die ever made. Xavier's GPU and A7x/A53 8 core setup is fine for a refresh, at the old leaked specs that I'm still thinking Mariko is, you'd get 943GFLOPs, which is exactly what you'd need to take 720p 393gflop games to 1080p. This also means you can run the "pro" at 393gflops on the go and if they really want to, they can boost the current Switch to 393gflops on the go as well. I also think they could "bin" Mariko and launch a mini at $199 no problem. If Nintendo has the bandwidth to launch the 3DS XL and Wii U in the same year, and have launched the new 3ds and new 3ds XL at the same time, why they couldn't launch 2 "tablets" only varying in clocks, is beyond me.Xavier does up to 1.4 FP32 TFLOPs, with a "typical TDP" of 20W and a lot of stuff including AI parts and massive CPU cores that the Switch revision would not use. Its GPU part is 90sq.mm at TSMC's 12nm process. A part like this with 4 A7x cores at ~2GHz and with the GPU doing a bit more than 1 FP32 TFLOP would sit at about the same power consumption as the X1's 10W and it would be more powerful than the XBOX One in every respect.
And, now that we are at it, it's interesting to me that Volta doesn't really have any disadvantage against Turing in FP32 compute per square millimeter or per watt, despite Turing having the RT cores. Both architectures exist at the same 12nm process.
So essentially, if you have Volta you can put Turing instead and have the RT cores with no penalty. Food for thought. Essentially, with the 12nm process you can have a ~200 sq.mm chip that has similar FP32 compute as the XBOX One, a better CPU, ray tracing acceleration and support for DLSS, and that can fit a Switch. The question is whether it would be better to strip those components for more FP32 performance, but Nvidia seems pretty set on their new architecture.
If you remove the dock how can it be switched? And you would have to buy a separate set of joycons just to use it at home then?
If you can still dock it to the older docks then it would have to have the exact same dimensions. So all you did was remove the dock and also remove the ability to detach the joycons. How is that a good deal? Also for the home version of Switch you of course could use bluetooth controllers.
Just like Wii and it sold a shitton. and it could be a lot cheaper than regular Switch too.
A Switch Mini is an obvious move, but I don't think that would even require a new SoC, new higher quality display or new hardware or software features. I don't think it makes sense to call it an upgrade either, which is what the article wants to say this is.
My opinion is that it's both, the reason they need a more powerful Switch is the same reason that we need generations, we are now seeing streaming games on Switch, but the 2.4x upgrade I'm suggesting, would easily handle these games and be relevant until at least 2022. I don't think it makes long term business sense for Nintendo to wait on releasing a "pro" model, and no I don't believe it would really effect developers much, if it's a multiplat game they were already working on, they can drop the XB1 version's settings onto this new Switch and it would likely handle it just fine. If you want 3rd parties to keep coming to the Switch, and start coming day and date, they need a path to put some of these games on there. Yes a bigger market is always better, but a stale Switch at $199 isn't going to see them through a new console launch and it might be hard to get back momentum after that.
Putting out a mini is important for their current market, that will keep high sales numbers for the next year, but unless they have a substantial market for a more powerful Switch, it's back to wait and see. 2019 is one of these big do or die moments for Nintendo, like CD drives, HD and whatever the hell Wii U was, yes Wii was a hit, but a Wii HD that was only twice as powerful as the Wii was, that gave 720p output as an option... That could have secured their future, and with Switch, they struck lighting in a bottle a second time (or 4th or 5th, it's sometimes hard to keep up with Nintendo) if they want to keep the momentum in 2020, they need a more powerful Switch in 2019.
Xavier has massive CPU cores and lots of extra hardware that is not needed for gaming.20W for only a chip is not tablet hardware. Even the completely stationary Nvidia shield with active cooling is only a ~10W TDP. You're looking at 756Gflops theoretical max.
As far as I can tell, RT cores are tiny. GV100 is actually 100sq.mm bigger than GT102. Doing a rough calculation to scale the RTX 2080 down to 512 CUDA cores gives ~90sq.mm, just like Xavier's GPU.how big are RT cores though? remember the RTX GPUs are all over 700mm^2, it's the second largest die ever made. Xavier's GPU and A7x/A53 8 core setup is fine for a refresh, at the old leaked specs that I'm still thinking Mariko is, you'd get 943GFLOPs, which is exactly what you'd need to take 720p 393gflop games to 1080p. This also means you can run the "pro" at 393gflops on the go and if they really want to, they can boost the current Switch to 393gflops on the go as well. I also think they could "bin" Mariko and launch a mini at $199 no problem. If Nintendo has the bandwidth to launch the 3DS XL and Wii U in the same year, and have launched the new 3ds and new 3ds XL at the same time, why they couldn't launch 2 "tablets" only varying in clocks, is beyond me.
Yeah, the screen on the original ones is pretty fantastic.Honestly the screen quality of my launch switch is fine. I think a brighter one might actually kill me.
Actually the Tegra X1 has the same 20watt TDP, the X1 throttles, and the Shield TV actually runs slower than the Switch, though the CPU runs faster, but when you max out the GPU in tests, the CPU will drop down below 1.2GHz as well... it's all "numbers" but Xavier is running 1.4GHz for the GPU at 20watts, and has different, much more power hungry CPU cores, so no, the chip would work fine for Switch.20W for only a chip is not tablet hardware. Even the completely stationary Nvidia shield with active cooling is only a ~10W TDP. You're looking at 756Gflops theoretical max.
Xavier has massive CPU cores and lots of extra hardware that is not needed for gaming.
Actually the Tegra X1 has the same 20watt TDP, the X1 throttles, and the Shield TV actually runs slower than the Switch, though the CPU runs faster, but when you max out the GPU in tests, the CPU will drop down below 1.2GHz as well... it's all "numbers" but Xavier is running 1.4GHz for the GPU at 20watts, and has different, much more power hungry CPU cores, so no, the chip would work fine for Switch.
I never said 1.4 TFLOPs, it wouldn't need to be rated at 1.4 TFLOPs to outperform the XBOX One in real-world FP32 calculations.And it still wouldn't hit 1.4tflops in the Switch's TDP.
The chip would work fine but not at 1.4tflops
They definitely need to swap the plastic screen for glass, though. The damn thing scratches easily if you don't have a screen protector.The Switch screen is fine, at least for me...I don't know how much better it could get without changing to OLED. It's like Apple when they say the newest iPhone has the best LCD screen ever made and in real life is almost the same as the previous model.
That isn't how developers have been designing games for the Switch... They optimize 1 performance mode, and the other does what it can... Cities Skylines was optimized for handheld mode iirc, but it's hardly the only one doing this, Zelda was optimized for handheld mode as well... They would just continue to do that. I mean this is pretty much how PCs work too, you design for a couple specs (usually just recommended actually) and there you go. Do you really think developers are taking their time optimizing the game for PC, PS4, XB1, XB1s, XB1X, PS4 Pro, Switch, PS5 and XBnext right now? I mean there are games in development coming to all of those platforms, and it's not how they are doing things. This is why the idea that these 'complicates things' is a myth.I guess I just don't see Nintendo fragmenting the user base like that. Either developers will make their games for just the new Switch pro power level(s) or they'll have to make it for the original Switch's levels in addition to the new Switch. Developers dragged their heels on doing just 2 PS4/XB1 and PS4Pro/XB1X levels, with this new pro Switch they'll have 3-4 different levels to optimize for. It's a tall order.
And that won't exactly solve the problems I mentioned, like card cost/capacity. Some developers and insiders have said that's a much more important reason why we aren't seeing some multiplats than power is. I know the power gulf will become even greater when PS5/XB2 come out but I don't think a pro Switch will make a big dent in that gulf.
I guess we'll see though.