*** Nintendo Switch ***

Would that not mean a price increase and thus another negative though? Seems any company is kind of stuck between a rock and a hard place with it. Personally I think a modular approach would work well with hardware.

It might mean a price increase but i wouldn't mind paying more for a decent system. On the assumption it was using a pascal based X2 i was pretty confident that this would have some really great 3rd party titles including ports from last gen consoles and emulated gamecube/wii games available from nintendo store. With the current specs, gamecube emulation is dubious let alone any decent 3rd party ports. I might not buy it if that is the case.
 
It might mean a price increase but i wouldn't mind paying more for a decent system. On the assumption it was using a pascal based X2 i was pretty confident that this would have some really great 3rd party titles including ports from last gen consoles and emulated gamecube/wii games available from nintendo store. With the current specs, gamecube emulation is dubious let alone any decent 3rd party ports. I might not buy it if that is the case.

Nor would I, hence why I kind of wish a modular approach was possible, therefore, your average mum could get your basic version for the kids and enthusiasts could opt for the extra specs to suit their needs. Akin to a low/med/high/ultra setting on PC.
 
If it can run Dark Souls 3, then how can it be using an X1 which isn't powerful enough to run that game? It must be using a more powerful chip than the X1.
 
If it can run Dark Souls 3, then how can it be using an X1 which isn't powerful enough to run that game? It must be using a more powerful chip than the X1.

Nobody said it was running at the same fidelity as it is on other systems, it could technically look like a PS3 game and still be 'running Dark Souls 3'
 
So for a MOBILE device Nintendo have opted for a larger,slower and more power hungry process? I'm on my phone, someone sort me a GIF that's fitting to this great idea.
 
So for a MOBILE device Nintendo have opted for a larger,slower and more power hungry process? I'm on my phone, someone sort me a GIF that's fitting to this great idea.

Oeelidy.gif


uDNqsKs.gif


X4WIDWW.gif
 
Latest rumours of the extreme downclock on the Switch CPU & GPU has completely killed the hype. Thought it was too good to be true it was sounding like Nintendo were going to actually be good again. :(
 
Seems people had some unrealistic expectations, you do this to yourselves :p

Just wait for the game reveals, if you want to play the games then buy the console, simple.

So for a MOBILE device Nintendo have opted for a larger,slower and more power hungry process?

Remember, the X1 is a MOBILE chip. Going by the Eurogamer article, we dont know what manufacturing process is being used just that clock speeds are similar to Tegra X1.

This 'Tegra X2' that keeps getting referred to here doesn't even exist yet.

It's likely to be a custom X1, and closer to the current pascal production line than the original maxwell line in terms of features and manufacturing process.
 
I find it amazing how much peoples opinions continued to get swayed by both rumours and potential specs.

When it comes to specifications we can only speculate. Everyone knows that Nintendo won't be going after power like Sony & MS. That's their race, let them have it.

Also, until official specifications are released, just take everything with large pinches of salt. We're just a couple of weeks away from an official announcement/debut from Nintendo which should include official hardware specs etc. I seriously doubt it's going to be weaker than the Wii U. Has any manufacturer ever released a console weaker than its predecessor? Nope...can't see them about to begin starting that.

What we can be sure of is that anything they do release will run great.
 
Why is everyone getting their knickers in a twist about the specs?

Nintendo were never going to be anywhere near competitive on specs. They haven't done since the GameCube so why would anyone fantasise otherwise?

As stated above, ignore the specs as they are not at all relevant, and if you like the games then buy the system.
 
I can honestly say that all this spec talk doesn't bother me in the slightest. The Fallon video showed me how good Zelda is going to look on this thing and I fully expect the new Mario 3D World to be of the same high standard.

Roll on Jan/March is what I say.
 
Why is everyone getting their knickers in a twist about the specs?

It's a fair concern. Low specs means little 3rd party support and one of the major issues with Nintendo consoles since they stopped competing on spec is large game droughts between big releases. The best Nintendo consoles - by a country mile - were the ones that competed on tech. I'd argue that's partly due to them being better at making games back then and making more games that targeted core gamers, but it's also because their consoles had genuinely great games made by other developers. If the Switch could stand alongside the PS4 and XB1, we'd be getting that, and it would attract gamers across the spectrum. If it only attracts people who want to play Mario, Zelda and Pokemon, it won't come close to reaching it's potential.
 
Seems people had some unrealistic expectations, you do this to yourselves :p

Just wait for the game reveals, if you want to play the games then buy the console, simple.



Remember, the X1 is a MOBILE chip. Going by the Eurogamer article, we dont know what manufacturing process is being used just that clock speeds are similar to Tegra X1.

This 'Tegra X2' that keeps getting referred to here doesn't even exist yet.

It's likely to be a custom X1, and closer to the current pascal production line than the original maxwell line in terms of features and manufacturing process.

Sounds like you haven't heard the latest news. I was expecting a Tegra X1 and Tegra X1 performance, it seems like we are going to actually get a HEAVILY downclocked X1 so it won't perform anywhere near as good as it should and could.

Clock-speeds are a crucial piece of information required to get some idea of Switch's capabilities beyond the physical make-up of the Tegra processor. As many have speculated, the new Nintendo hardware does indeed feature two performance configurations - and the console is categorically not as capable in mobile form, compared to its prowess when docked and attached to an HDTV. And we can confirm that there is no second GPU or additional hardware in the dock itself regardless of the intriguing patents that Nintendo has filed suggesting that there might be. With battery life and power throughput no longer an issue, the docked Switch simply allows the GPU to run much faster. And to put it simply, there is a night and day difference here.

Where Switch remains consistent is in CPU power - the cores run at 1020MHz regardless of whether the machine is docked or undocked. This ensures that running game logic won't be compromised while gaming on the go: the game simulation itself will remain entirely consistent. The machine's embedded memory controller runs at 1600MHz while docked (on par with a standard Tegra X1), but the default power mode undocked sees this drop to 1331MHz. However, developers can opt to retain full memory bandwidth in their titles should they choose to do so.

As things stand, CPU clocks are halved compared to the standard Tegra X1, but it's the GPU aspect of the equation that will prove more controversial. Even while docked, Switch doesn't run at Tegra X1's full potential. Clock-speeds are locked here at 768MHz, considerably lower than the 1GHz found in Shield Android TV, but the big surprise from our perspective was the extent to which Nintendo has down-clocked the GPU to hit its thermal and battery life targets. That's not a typo: it really is 307.2MHz - meaning that in portable mode, Switch runs at exactly 40 per cent of the clock-speed of the fully docked device. And yes, the table below does indeed confirm that developers can choose to hobble Switch performance when plugged in to match the handheld profile should they so choose.

http://www.eurogamer.net/articles/digitalfoundry-2016-nintendo-switch-spec-analysis
 
Latest rumours of the extreme downclock on the Switch CPU & GPU has completely killed the hype. Thought it was too good to be true it was sounding like Nintendo were going to actually be good again. :(

You were never getting close to home gaming on a mobile device. What do people expect here. Anyway specs don't matter. Let Nintendo do it's thing.
 
It's a fair concern. Low specs means little 3rd party support and one of the major issues with Nintendo consoles since they stopped competing on spec is large game droughts between big releases. The best Nintendo consoles - by a country mile - were the ones that competed on tech. I'd argue that's partly due to them being better at making games back then and making more games that targeted core gamers, but it's also because their consoles had genuinely great games made by other developers. If the Switch could stand alongside the PS4 and XB1, we'd be getting that, and it would attract gamers across the spectrum. If it only attracts people who want to play Mario, Zelda and Pokemon, it won't come close to reaching it's potential.

I'd say that most people's main reason for buying a Nintendo console is to play Mario, Zelda and Pokemon.
 
I'd say that most people's main reason for buying a Nintendo console is to play Mario, Zelda and Pokemon.

Sure, but we also used to get the other games too. That's the point. I bought a snes, N64 and GC expecting to get all kinds of great games, and did. With the Wii and WiiU we got less of the great Nintendo games, of those we did get there was more focus on party gaming than core, and sod all 3rd party support. A big step back. And while I love the big IPs as much as anyone (have been a militant Nintendo fanboy for 30 years now!) I appreciate how important it is having a wide audience for a console to flourish. And even more so with a console so obviously aimed at local and online social play. Can't get very social if none of your friends have one.

Look at it this way - if we have more 3rd party support we'll have more mainstream gamers buying into the system. And with that more chance Nintendo start producing titles that target these core gamers - stuff like Metroid Prime, 1080, F-Zero etc. They used to be so much more than Mario, Zelda and Pokemon.
 
Last edited:
You were never getting close to home gaming on a mobile device. What do people expect here. Anyway specs don't matter. Let Nintendo do it's thing.

I was just expecting full Tegra X1 performance, a significant step up from Wii U but not XB1 levels, but we aren't even getting that now
 
It's a fair concern. Low specs means little 3rd party support...

And what made you think Nintendo would change their direction? What evidence did Nintendo give to suggest that? (not necessarily directly aimed at you)

The Switch is exactly what everyone expects (or at least should) from Nintendo given their history and design ethos. I really don't see where the fantasy that it was going to be a super powerful portable came from, as it's just not how they do things.
 
The Fallon Zelda demo looked great to me. If I can play that at home or on the move then I am more than happy. Game looked nice and more importantly it looked like fun.
 
Back
Top Bottom