TheGreyHulk
Member
This. So much this
It's also worth mentioning that AMD flops <Nvidia Flops in roughly a 4:6 ratio. An Xbox one runs at 1.2Tflps. (AMD) which would equate to .8Tflps (Nvidia) on the current X1 we have mobile devices hitting .5Tflps (Nvidia)
Obviously we can't know how much Nintendo will look to priotrize Power Draw/clock speeds vs Performance. However with the advances to 16nmFF and Pascal we know that a Pascal Tegra chip will be significantly more efficient then the X1. We also know that the NX is likely to have a better CPU then the Xbox one.
A device with a better CPU then an Xbox one and say 80% of its GPU power isn't an unreasonable assumption to be priced at 200USD (especially if Nvidia gave Nintendo a great deal)
whoa... where are you getting this AMD flops < Nvidia flops thing from. This is pure nonsense. flops are just a generic way of saying what that chip is capable of at a given spec, but performance of the actual chip can vary based on many factors such as a lack of memory bandwidth, architecture inefficiencies, etc, etc...
this is why flops aren't always a good way to measure actual performance, but it doesn't just mean "nvidia flops > amd flops" because amd chip x is only 80% as fast as nvidia chip x even though both are rated for the same "flops"