• Hey, guest user. Hope you're enjoying NeoGAF! Have you considered registering for an account? Come join us and add your take to the daily discourse.

Digital Foundry: Nintendo Switch CPU and GPU clock speeds revealed

Status
Not open for further replies.

jroc74

Phone reception is more important to me than human rights
Next Gen starts with the Switch!
Or so I was told.

Yea...its complicated...lol. Definitely next gen for Nintendo tho.

Not even matching the current Nvidia Shield on the market when going with the exact same manufacturer is some hilarious "only Nintendo" shit.

Really trying to hit some battery life impossibility while saving money and not stumping up for a thicker heavier device with a more expensive battery. Shame because the idea of a hybrid is sound, its just Nintendo is so anti tech it's not gonna be what it could. Until maybe.... Revision 3!

If you wanted PS4/Xbox One/PC third party games, you know where you'll continue to find them.

Yea when I read not matching the Shield I was like ...hmmm...
 

dark10x

Digital Foundry pixel pusher
Weaker than Shield TV?

Nvidia are experts selling crap to console companies (remember PS3 GPU...)
PS3 was an emergency situation, though, after Toshiba's GPU plans didn't work out. NV had to ready a solution within a very short time frame.
 
Fuck me, I expected low specs from Nintendo but not that low!

aa0.png
 
This thing is going to run 1st party games @1080 on my 1080p screen and will double as a handheld @720. I wasn't expecting anything else. Were you?
 

Pachimari

Member
I fail to see what is so bad about this? As long as we don't get worse looking games than Wii U. I was expecting to have Wii U levelled games on Switch.
 
Sooo...
"CPU: NX>>>>>XBO>PS4"

"Quad core cortex A57 @ 1GHz"

Are, um, we talking about that...Because statement 2 rings statement 1 very, very wrong.

Again this article is not confirming anything beyond clock speeds. It says explicitly that SM count and CPU core count/type are still unknown.
 
Nintendo decided to call it a home console. That's a PR mistake IMO.

I would argue that the message of being a home console was more to ensure people they weren't completely going out of the home market, but if these speeds are true I not so sure what the problem calling it a handheld first would be.
 

Raide

Member
For a handheld, it should be pretty damn good. For a home console, it's poor. How it will manage trying to cover both bases is anyone's guess but third parties won't like the idea of having to throttle everything down, so the performance could be all over the place.

Soon find out. Just being able to play a potential new Monster Hunter is enough for me.
 
Man, Nintendo better bring their A-game regarding first-party content. Especially during the first 18 months. This is going to be a first-party device, plain and simple . No third party is going to support this with multiplatform software, outside of a handful of Japanese publishers and one or two western pubs at launch.

I'm totally fine with this, but Nintendo better have dozens of games lined up for the first year or so. Also, Christ, they really need to hit $199 if they can.
 

KingBroly

Banned
Man, Nintendo better bring their A-game regarding first-party content. Especially during the first 18 months. This is going to be a first-party device, plain and simple . No third party is going to support this with multiplatform software, outside of a handful of Japanese publishers and one or two western pubs at launch.

I'm totally fine with this, but Nintendo better have dozens of games lined up for the first year or so.

They probably won't.
 

Rouse

Member
Being a Nintendo fan is basically the equivalent of being an Arsenal one. Every time a new system is announced I hear how it won't be too far behind and they won't make the same mistakes again, but in the end, it's disappointingly weak and we're forced to accept it. Just like Arsenal, I hear how it's always gonna be our season and then the same mistakes happen again and we're forced to accept it.

Hahahahahah!!! Nailed it!

But two bad results hasn't ended your season though. It still could be your year...!!!
 
A Nintendo console should not be anyone's primary gaming platform, unless you only care about Nintendo first-party titles.

It didn't take Nostradamus to predict that Switch wasn't going to change that.
 

Ladekabel

Member
I think some people put to much in the "It's a console first" statement. Contrary to the WiiU, Nintendo sees still life in the 3DS since there are still games coming for it. Or the Switch is the third pillar.
 

MAX PAYMENT

Member
Man, Nintendo better bring their A-game regarding first-party content. Especially during the first 18 months. This is going to be a first-party device, plain and simple . No third party is going to support this with multiplatform software, outside of a handful of Japanese publishers and one or two western pubs at launch.

I'm totally fine with this, but Nintendo better have dozens of games lined up for the first year or so.

Maybe indies will embrace it.
 

Piers

Member
You understand that it's the games that matter in the end right?

Buying it for Nintendo games is fine, but the Wii U's bread and butter was suppose to be playing recent PS360 games with the advantage of off-TV play. Aside from poor sales, ass CPU really hampered the few third-party games the system got.

And Wii U made it quite clear by now how necessary third-party support is.
 
...
everyone in here has seen Breath of the Wild, Mario Kart 8 and Splatoon, right?

And what I'm hearing here is that we'll be playing with the same performance as a Wii U while portable, and up to 2.5x as powerful when docked.

And people are disappointed? Because of the numbers?

You understand that it's the games that matter in the end right?

Yeah, but we haven't had a good panic in a while, so.

You know.

Sometimes people just need a good panic.
 
I'll take an underclocked tablet as my next Nintendo console, but I hope that the system is priced accordingly. The biggest consumer benefit of Nintendo's "use old hardware" strategy is that it makes things cheaper.

We'll wait and see. I'd like to rejoin with Nintendo again. Though the software quality will have to be there of course.
 

Grenchel

Member
...
everyone in here has seen Breath of the Wild, Mario Kart 8 and Splatoon, right?

And what I'm hearing here is that we'll be playing with the same performance as a Wii U while portable, and up to 2.5x as powerful when docked.

And people are disappointed? Because of the numbers?

You understand that it's the games that matter in the end right?

I'm not disappointed in the slifhtest, to be honest. this is line with with Nintendo's in almost forever.

But with every new console there's a general hope that Nintendo is going to release a power house , a third party friendly platform, something that is going to push them back in front of the race.

It's all a dream, and I think lately we are finally seeing Nintendo accepting their fate with very interesting products.
 
So there is a significant difference between portable-mode and console-mode. Even more than I expected: 2.5x. That would give devs the power to go from 720p to 1080p.

I wonder if it is 3 SMs in the GPU to get the system closer to the base TX1. Anyway, worse case scenario, this seems to only be littlr below people's general expectations. There are also a few details that we don't know that can make a difference.
 

NEO0MJ

Member
We're getting a system significantly more powerful than Wii U, with modern architecture capable of running down-scaled current-gen games, and it's all possible not even plugged in, running on a battery.

Honestly, what were people expecting/ what are people really complaining about?

No, you're not getting a portable Xbox One for $249. lol. Please come back to earth.

People were expecting them to get the latest portable GPU offering, not something that, by the Switch's release, will be over a year old.
 

dark10x

Digital Foundry pixel pusher
I fail to see what is so bad about this? As long as we don't get worse looking games than Wii U. I was expecting to have Wii U levelled games on Switch.
Wii U was outdated at launch and made it difficult to translate games being made for more powerful machines. Nintendo lost out on support from third parties since Wii U conversions would always require a ton of work and ultimately look and run worse. The Switch being underpowered suggests once again that we may not see big third party titles on Switch.

It needs to be successful enough to pull in support. That should yield games specifically made for Switch.
 
To play what? Captain Toad 2D: Textile Edition? Mario Party 12? Another 2D Donkey Kong? Etrian Odyssey 3 Untold?

Then Nintendo should brace themselves for worst ending possible. This is a company whose one out of every 3 game is a crappy Mario spinoff. They can even hit 10 million mark without even a little third party presence.

So you want a powerful Nintendo handheld, which it looks like you are getting, but you're having a meltdown because it will play Nintendo's games?

I will take 720p Animal Crossing, Fire Emblem, Pokemon, etc while also getting portable Splatoon, Smash Bros, Mario Kart, Zelda, 3D Mario, etc.
 

Aldric

Member
lf this thing isn't dirt cheap and doesn't have an amazing launch lineup (and no, Wii U remasters don't count) l'm out. Really not looking forward to five more years of Wii U level graphics.
 

Pie and Beans

Look for me on the local news, I'll be the guy arrested for trying to burn down a Nintendo exec's house.
It's not just marketing, this IS a replacement for Wii U. Otherwise, we might as well just say Nintendo has left the console business.

I mean yeah, thats whats happened? I guess people still feel Nintendo PR doesn't/couldn't lie to them.

The WiiU was Nintendo's last home console. Now they're trying to shore up their handheld side and see if they can remain in hardware.
 

Manoko

Member
People expecting 199$ price point forget two things:

-Nintendo is known to overprice their hardware to sell their console on a profit.
-With a hybrid/handheld console, you have to pay for battery and most importantly the screen.

This will be 249$ at the very least, with that cheap ass hardware inside.
 

KAL2006

Banned
I know the likely rumour $250/£200 will most likely be true.

But it would be way more successful if Nintendo targeted impulse buyers and went for handheld price range.

$200
£160
 
D

Deleted member 752119

Unconfirmed Member
Man, Nintendo better bring their A-game regarding first-party content. Especially during the first 18 months. This is going to be a first-party device, plain and simple . No third party is going to support this with multiplatform software, outside of a handful of Japanese publishers and one or two western pubs at launch.

I'm totally fine with this, but Nintendo better have dozens of games lined up for the first year or so. Also, Christ, they really need to hit $199 if they can.

Yep. They need to hit $199.99 and kill it software wise or this is doomed. Even with that it's not a sure thing with their decling sales trends gen over gen bar the Wii. Interest in their type of games may continue to wane.
 

hiim_haz

Banned
I don't know what any of this means.

So it's not that powerful...? I mean, I kind of expected that considering Nintendo's past few consoles and handhelds. It doesn't make a huge different to me.
 

takriel

Member
It's gonna be interesting to see how much this news matter after the January event.

Will the Switch be another Wii U flop because of its specs? Or will it manage to capture gamers in ways other than raw power?
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top Bottom