• 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.

Matbtz

Member
They need more than Mario and Zelda to sell Switch to masses. Ports won't do any good either. They need to money hat the shit out of studios. Beyond Good & Evil, Timesplitters, Star Wars Jedi Knight, Chrono Trigger, Soul Calibur, Megaman Legends, anything they could find. Moneyhat, moneyhat, moneyhat. That's how you sell consoles.

Yep I totally agree with you, that will make the difference (and Pokemon will also help). I hope it is what Nintendo is doing with their massive war chest.
 
Maybe its just me, but as somebody who loves the Vita i am more than happy that the Switch will be able to run games like Skyrim, Mass Effect 3, or downgraded versions of newer games.

What can I say, I like portable devices, and id be willing to sacrifice power to play these games on one.
 
Switch is LESS powerful than an nVidia Shield. Which was released BEFORE the Xbox One and PS4 (July 31st, 2013)?

BWAHAHAHA!

The Tegra X1 Shield was released in May 2015, actually. Compared to that system, the Switch has:

- 50% less CPU clockspeed (2GHz -> 1GHz)
- 25-70% less GPU clockspeed (1GHz -> 768MHz docked -> 307.2MHz undocked).
 
To clear things up for bullshit posters in this thread

Most of us following the leaks were expecting at minimum Tehran X1 specs while docked, not Xbox one performance.

It makes almost no sense to custom fan a chip based on the x1, a 2 year old chip, and then down clock it when docked.

The down clock was always expected in portable mode, but even with the docked clock speeds, a 60% drop is more then anybody really guessed
 
As far as I can tell the Shield TV was fine in terms of thermals. I don't understand why the Switch GPU (when docked) is underclocked compared to it. Especially when the CPU clock speed is also halved, which would lower temperatures.

On top of that, the need for a fan, both docked and undocked. There's no way this is a stock Tegra X1.
 

bomblord1

Banned
Even Laura Kate Dale is saying she's confident the system would outperform the wiiU in handheld mode which would wouldn't be possible running the system with the default X1 configuration at the given clocks.
 
Always figured it would be about as powerful as a Wii U, not sure why people were expecting near xbox one. This is nintendo we're talking about. They made the 3DS.
 
The DF video on this provides some good context: https://youtu.be/PzS4LbH5nmA?t=687

Like I said earlier, it doesn't surprise me given the system's portable ambitions. But I think it doesn't sit well with Nintendo calling Switch a "home gaming system" since that gives people PS4/Xbox One-like expectations instead of say, Apple TV expectations.

Richard mentions that they'll be attending the Switch even next month, so hopefully Nintendo let's them record direct feed footage. It'll give us a very good idea of what the system is capable of since I doubt Nintendo will release hard specs.
 

shark sandwich

tenuously links anime, pedophile and incels
Maybe they should have uh..... Marketed the switch as a handheld first that you could plug into your TV. Cause those specs are... Whew.
IMO they should've designed it as a handheld first. I.e. made the thing no bigger than a 3DS XL.

As it is, it looks like the worst of both worlds: not powerful enough to get uncompromised PS4/X1 multiplats, not small enough to replace 3DS as a handheld game system.

I dunno, maybe it's just a psychological thing. I can get excited for a dock-able 3DS. Not so much a dock-able tablet with detachable controllers.
 
I kinda wish Nintendo would put out a PS4-level console just to definitively dispel the myth that hardware performance is the primary reason for lack of AAA third party support.

Oh well, people will believe what they want to believe. But seriously, buy a PS4/XB/PC if you want those games so badly.
 
We haven't seen a single game except Zelda (that looks amazing) for this thing and people are already panicking.

The WiiU was underpowered too but had awesome games that looked AMAZING. Xenoblade anyone?

Specs don't matter (to me at least).
 

Kthulhu

Member
Pretty astonishing what people expect from a 3-10W device

For real.

Also, to those they think it's DOA, if Nintendo can put out enough solid 1st party titles to sell Switches, they'll be fine.

Let's not give up on this thing before we even know what the launch titles are.
 
Always figured it would be about as powerful as a Wii U, not sure why people were expecting near xbox one. This is nintendo we're talking about. They made the 3DS.

Only that they are working with a company together that is capable of releasing a tablet with better specs years ago and that for 200$ since the K1 revision.
 

jackal27

Banned
I technically know why, I also know why it matters to a lot of NeoGAF because we're having a discussion here and that's fine, but I still feel compelled to ask:

Who cares?

This is freaking Nintendo we're talking about. How are you not used to this by now? How have you not come to expect this by now? How have you still not seen that the final product will rival and often surpass other hardware in terms of both beauty and performance?

I suppose it may be better to ask:

Why should I care?

I know that Nintendo uses underpowered hardware and I have for 10 years now. I know that Nintendo still makes the best, most creative, most well-designed games in the industry anyway. I know that this is going to be both a home and a portable console. I know this is going to have the combined output of their console and handheld games teams. Why should this affect any of those things?

Even if Titanfall 2 or Dark Souls 3 runs on my Switch, would I really purchase them there when I could likely find them on sale for $10 at that point for my PS4 or even more likely own them already in the first place? Probably not. Would 3rd party (particularly western) developers support Nintendo hardware even if it did match the PS4 in terms of power? Probably not. Would turning the thing into a hardware beast sell more Switch units? Probably not.

All that to say, yeah it is fine to be disappointed, but this hardly warrants some of the freak out I'm seeing. Nintendo consoles are just as strong as other consoles, their strength just lies in other places. Namely, their strong first party support, their couch multiplayer, and their creativity. It's gonna be fine.
 

Powerwing

Member
I am very intrigued by the fan, if it's 50% of tegra X1 cpu-wise and 77% gpu-wise (while docked) , why does it need a ventilation fan ?
 

Oemenia

Banned
Unlike Sony and Microsoft, Nintendo's entire business is games. They do not have the much wiggle room.

Not to mention, third party support is almost certainly a lost cause at this point.
I just hoped Nintendo would've learned from their mistakes because its been happening since the days of the N64.
 

Peltz

Member
The Tegra X1 Shield was released in May 2015, actually. Compared to that system, the Switch has:

- 50% less CPU clockspeed (2GHz -> 1GHz)
- 25-70% less GPU clockspeed (1GHz -> 768MHz docked -> 307.2MHz undocked).
I really just don't understand what Nintendo is thinking. Why cripple their own hardware like this?
 

KingSnake

The Birthday Skeleton
It's still baffling that Switch in handheld mode is running at almost half of the GPU performance of the Nvidia Shield Tablet.

I wonder how the 2.2GHz quad-core A15 CPU on that compares to the 4 A57 clocked at 1 Ghz?

The GPU clocks makes Nate Drake source sound very unreliable, because there's no way somebody would confuse this with Pascal.

And the CPU info should disqualify any info from LCCGeek, really. Those 4 A57 at 1 Ghz are not competitive in any given scenario.
 

TGO

Hype Train conductor. Works harder than it steams.
That a new low, I'd gotten use to Nintendo being a generation behind but 2 generations?
Not that i was going to play BF1 on this. Will wait for the full reveal.
You maybe able to......Not BF1, but the first Battlefield.
 

Matbtz

Member
Even Laura Kate Dale is saying she's confident the system would outperform the wiiU in handheld mode which would wouldn't be possible running the system with the default X1 configuration at the given clocks.

Yes and the few we saw on the switch portable mode, it seems to run smoothly than Wii U
 

ISee

Member
So ~160 Gflops while in portable mode and ~400 Gflops while docked?
That's (about) half of what a GTX 650 can do. Even with medal to the pedal and architectural improvements... 3d party AAA games will have a hard time on the switch.
 

jroc74

Phone reception is more important to me than human rights
Is it possible the differentiation in rumors and this news is because Nintendo lowered specs shortly before release, much like they did with Wii U?

Its possible.

Things change. Motorola was releasing a phone that many thought for sure was gonna be on Verizon because thats where all the better Motorola phones went.

Inside info seemed to suggest that too. Until it came out for AT&T. Another thing ppl were surprised at was Motorola releasing a family of phones, something they never really did before.

All that was either missed, got changed or not shared by the insider.
 

Buggy Loop

Member
Yeah.. one "source" tells us it's over 1TFLOP (still unlikely) and the other puts the figure towards the opposite end of the performance spectrum.

500 engineering hours. Someone tweet Jen-Hsun Huang to congratulate him, clearly, if they managed to convince Nintendo to have lower than TegraX1 performance, 2 years later, and still charge 500 engineering hours to Nintendo, they made the best technological heist of the 2010's
 
Did we reslly expect anything less from Nintendo? I sure didn't although I wanted something different. Nintendo bowed out of the arms race a long long time ago.

Nintendo is known for its awesome games and they will continue to do the same on Switch. This will of course alienate the 3rd party devs who will refuse to dumb down their franchises for the Switch and in turn it may push away gamers who just want one box and prefer it to be Nintendo for all their gaming needs.
 
Is it possible the differentiation in rumors and this news is because Nintendo lowered specs shortly before release, much like they did with Wii U?

Has there ever been actual proof of that regarding Wii U?

The dev kit specs have apparently stayed consistent, so I doubt it, in any case.
 

Octavia

Unconfirmed Member
Yeah, that downclock is weird. The Nexus 9 from two years ago has the Tegra in it and that thing is a thin little tablet.

However, besides the downclock I'm not at all surprised by the (guessed) price to performance. The Nexus 9 is still $325 and considering Nintendo's special hardware, R&D, and custom manufacturing with a most likely lower price than that, a modern Nexus 9 like performance specialized for gaming makes sense to me.
 
It's still baffling that Switch in handheld mode is running at almost half of the GPU performance of the Nvidia Shield Tablet.

I wonder how the 2.2GHz quad-core A15 CPU on that compares to the 4 A57 clocked at 1 Ghz?

The GPU clocks makes Nate Drake source sound very unreliable, because there's no way somebody would confuse this with Pascal.

And the CPU info should disqualify any info from LCCGeek, really. Those 4 A57 at 1 Ghz are not competitive in any given scenario.

Seems like all GAF insiders had bad sources. Or Nintendo changed things at the last minute (which I doubt, but hey, who knows).
 
They need more than Mario and Zelda to sell Switch to masses. Ports won't do any good either. They need to money hat the shit out of studios. Beyond Good & Evil, Timesplitters, Star Wars Jedi Knight, Chrono Trigger, Soul Calibur, Megaman Legends, anything they could find. Moneyhat, moneyhat, moneyhat. That's how you sell consoles.
The PS4 and the Xbone has completely disproven this hypothesis. Hell, so did the WiiU. Exclusives no longer sell consoles.
 
Lmao. If this is true how are they able to run Skyrim or the rumored Dark Souls III port? At 5fps?

Still, this sounds SO Nintendo that I believe it.

Search "[Game Name] 820M" on YouTube if you want to get an idea of how Switch will run games in portable mode. GeForce 820M is 96 shaders @ 650MHZ so 124GFlops. About ~80% of Switch's GPU in portable mode. It plays 360/PS3 gen games just fine, but newer games are not pretty.
 

Nameless

Member
Nice to see Nintendo not getting a pass for limiting themselves with woefully subpar hardware. Can't wait to hear the price of this thing. As someone who doesn't care about portability, they can especially fuck right off if it's a cent over $199.99
 
Did we reslly expect anything less from Nintendo? I sure didn't although I wanted something different. Nintendo bowed out of the arms race a long long time ago.

Nintendo is known for its awesome games and they will continue to do the same on Switch. This will of course alienate the 3rd party devs who will refuse to dumb down their franchises for the Switch and in turn it may push away gamers who just want one box and prefer it to be Nintendo for all their gaming needs.

Yeah, the bolded part is never going to happen anyway.

If this is true, Nintendo is going handheld first. Which kinda makes sense if you compare their handheld sales to their console sales.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top Bottom