• Sign in to Neowin Faster!

    Create an account on Neowin to contribute and support the site.

Sign in to follow this  

Nintendo Switch based on older Maxwell Architecture

Recommended Posts

LimeMaster    15,601
2 hours ago, Vandalsquad said:

I think we need to stop using the wii as a reason for power not being a factor with sales at Nintendo, it was a fluke and gimmick forgotten quickly after. The hours those Wii consoles ended up getting used for in the long run compared to the PS3/360 hurt them when people looked at the U. They target these systems at kids and families but families aren't shelling money out for something that doesn't get used.

 

I remember this exact same argument years ago with the launch of the U, it will sell great, Nintendo games will sell the console, It doesn't need power.

 

What did they give us with their IPs but?

 

Pokemon, nothing.

Zelda...? Still waiting even when the console is ending production that may be cancelled?

Rehashed Mario no different than Wii.

Terrible terrible Star Fox.

An admitably decent Mario Kart

 

 

This console will struggle to sell again, and I would be surprised to see another Nintendo console after it as sad as that is if it does do badly.

 

One thing you've got to remember is that it it's a portable system as well. This will be its key strength since it's definitely more powerful than the 3DS.  It will essentially replace the successful 3DS line, which a lot of kids bought.

 

The Switch is not really targeted at adults, but the reveal trailer wasn't very good at conveying that. So it was obvious from the start that the Switch was never meant to be a powerhouse.

 

Will it flop? Let the kids. And if it does, who cares? :p

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Andrew    2,861
3 hours ago, Vandalsquad said:

I think we need to stop using the wii as a reason for power not being a factor with sales at Nintendo, it was a fluke and gimmick forgotten quickly after. The hours those Wii consoles ended up getting used for in the long run compared to the PS3/360 hurt them when people looked at the U. They target these systems at kids and families but families aren't shelling money out for something that doesn't get used.

 

I remember this exact same argument years ago with the launch of the U, it will sell great, Nintendo games will sell the console, It doesn't need power.

 

What did they give us with their IPs but?

 

Pokemon, nothing.

Zelda...? Still waiting even when the console is ending production that may be cancelled?

Rehashed Mario no different than Wii.

Terrible terrible Star Fox.

An admitably decent Mario Kart

 

 

This console will struggle to sell again, and I would be surprised to see another Nintendo console after it as sad as that is if it does do badly.

 

I mean, if you don't like the games on Wii U fair enough, but don't make some pitiful low effort list. There wasn't a Pokémon game? Really? Rehashed Mario? Nothing brand new? C'mon..

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Vandalsquad    515
9 hours ago, LimeMaster said:

One thing you've got to remember is that it it's a portable system as well. This will be its key strength since it's definitely more powerful than the 3DS.  It will essentially replace the successful 3DS line, which a lot of kids bought.

 

The Switch is not really targeted at adults, but the reveal trailer wasn't very good at conveying that. So it was obvious from the start that the Switch was never meant to be a powerhouse.

 

Will it flop? Let the kids. And if it does, who cares?

This is the one thing I'm honestly most confused about is it replacing the ds/gameboy line up all together? or.?. I guess if it does it will be more successful and I'll be more interested it in as well pokemon and all :p

 

8 hours ago, Andrew said:

I mean, if you don't like the games on Wii U fair enough, but don't make some pitiful low effort list. There wasn't a Pokémon game? Really? Rehashed Mario? Nothing brand new? C'mon..

I like Nintendo games I own every console up to the Wii U, just what they've done with their IP's hasn't impressed me and sure other people as well.

 

Pokken Tournament? Come on not a real pokemon game.. They know what they want and still refuse to give it to us. We don't need a throw back to a N64 game. A real pokemon game would move millions of consoles.

Zelda - I'm wrong here?

Mario - I'll give you it's what we all like, but how about a 3D world again in consoles life span?

Star Fox - I'm not wrong here either?

 

What other IPs do we want to see Nintendo do really we'll with? Metroid? Animal crossing? Haven't played it, so can't comment but heard its just as bad. I'll give you Smash Bro's as well. But they've dropped the ball this generation on several of their IPs which could be used to create some awesome games and move a ton of consoles for them.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
LimeMaster    15,601
4 minutes ago, Vandalsquad said:

This is the one thing I'm honestly most confused about is it replacing the ds/gameboy line up all together? or.?. I guess if it does it will be more successful and I'll be more interested it in as well pokemon and all :p

Like with the transition from GBA to DS, the Switch will eventually replace the 3DS. Though they'll obviously wait a few years to make sure the Switch is profitable first. 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Andrew    2,861
2 hours ago, Vandalsquad said:

I like Nintendo games I own every console up to the Wii U, just what they've done with their IP's hasn't impressed me and sure other people as well.

 

Pokken Tournament? Come on not a real pokemon game.. They know what they want and still refuse to give it to us. We don't need a throw back to a N64 game. A real pokemon game would move millions of consoles.

Zelda - I'm wrong here?

Mario - I'll give you it's what we all like, but how about a 3D world again in consoles life span?

Star Fox - I'm not wrong here either?

 

What other IPs do we want to see Nintendo do really we'll with? Metroid? Animal crossing? Haven't played it, so can't comment but heard its just as bad. I'll give you Smash Bro's as well. But they've dropped the ball this generation on several of their IPs which could be used to create some awesome games and move a ton of consoles for them.

Why would you expect a "real Pokémon" game on the Wii U? GameFreak have been handheld exclusive since day one. If they had released them on the Wii, GC, N64 etc you'd have a point, but it's not something you should anticipate when deciding to buy a Wii U. However, we may be edging closer to it with Sun/Moon launching on the Switch. The IP however is as active as ever with major sale successes on 3DS.

 

Zelda - yes you are wrong. The new game is just 3 months from release. It took longer than expected but it's not vaporware, and again there has been Zelda games in the meantime on 3DS and HD ports of older titles. Why is it ok for everyone else to do that but not Nintendo?

 

Mario 3D World was on the Wii U. Is it Galaxy 3? No, but repeating the same idea would have drawn its own criticism too. 3D platformers are not exactly at their height of popularity either, so it's no surprise to see less of them. The competitors consoles aren't overflowing with options in the department either. At least with Mario (whether 2D or 3D), you are getting the best of the best.

 

Star Fox received a new entry. Nintendo provided something. That was your complaint. It sucks that many people did not enjoy it and it did not live up to expectations, but that's not what you were talking about.

 

Animal Crossing is a series which performs better on handheld. It may have started out on N64 but it wasn't until the DS version came out that it became a success. The game play is perfect for short bursts of time and New Leaf just received a new update more than 3 years after release. Can't say that about many of the competitors IPs!

 

The only one you have a point on is Metroid. Should we be surprised though? It's probably the most cursed game series in Nintendo's catalog and has never enjoyed sales success. Retro have been working on an unannounced project since 2014 though, so who knows, maybe they are working on bringing Metroid to the Switch. You didn't even mention Donkey Kong, Kirby or Yoshi, or probably their biggest sensation Splatoon. You've mentioned Smash Bros in your reply here, but I don't think you follow it or understand how much of a success it has been. It's finally dethroning Melee for lots of fans as the best in the series. Heck even Toad got his own game and we finally saw a return of Pikmin with another Pikmin game confirmed in development. And last but not least Bayonetta 2, although not first party, is still exclusive as is Xenoblades. Nah, the Wii U was sorted for exclusive 1st party support.

 

As far as 1st party titles go and consistency, you can't fault Nintendo. They have covered nearly every base with good results (with SFZ being the one stain on the record). If people are expecting Mario to completely change formula, or see a new Zelda every Q3/4 season then they've only themselves to blame with such unreasonable expectations. We don't see Halo, Gears, Forza, Killzone, Uncharted or Gran Turismo do it; why must Nintendo? They have what I liken to the Disney's character model of video games. Each one is timeless for a new generation, with usually some innovative updates to classic gameplay. What you and others sound like your asking for is a Disney classic film with Michael Bay productions with Shyamalan writing, which sounds absolutely horrendous :x

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
compl3x    6,290
14 hours ago, Vandalsquad said:

I think we need to stop using the wii as a reason for power not being a factor with sales at Nintendo, it was a fluke and gimmick forgotten quickly after. The hours those Wii consoles ended up getting used for in the long run compared to the PS3/360 hurt them when people looked at the U. They target these systems at kids and families but families aren't shelling money out for something that doesn't get used.

 

I

 

 

While I agree about the Wii, power, at least for consoles, seems to have been historically an irrelevant issue for consumers.

 

Extra Credits did a good video going over how "weaker" systems have beat "stronger" systems generation after generation. If you want power, buy a PC.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
macoman    2,426

I was going to buy a Wii U now that they are more affordable... But then I checked to see if they can play DVD or Blu-ray... They can't... They used a Nintendo proprietary disc player. I can't justify to spend $200 or $300 in a Wii U just for the games. The Switch to me is just a enhanced version of the 3DS XL... It doesn't even have a disc storage, only cartridge.

Sent from my Moto G (4) using Tapatalk

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Vandalsquad    515
4 hours ago, Andrew said:

Why would you expect a "real Pokémon" game on the Wii U? GameFreak have been handheld exclusive since day one. If they had released them on the Wii, GC, N64 etc you'd have a point, but it's not something you should anticipate when deciding to buy a Wii U. However, we may be edging closer to it with Sun/Moon launching on the Switch. The IP however is as active as ever with major sale successes on 3DS.

 

Zelda - yes you are wrong. The new game is just 3 months from release. It took longer than expected but it's not vaporware, and again there has been Zelda games in the meantime on 3DS and HD ports of older titles. Why is it ok for everyone else to do that but not Nintendo?

 

As far as 1st party titles go and consistency, you can't fault Nintendo. They have covered nearly every base with good results (with SFZ being the one stain on the record). If people are expecting Mario to completely change formula, or see a new Zelda every Q3/4 season then they've only themselves to blame with such unreasonable expectations. We don't see Halo, Gears, Forza, Killzone, Uncharted or Gran Turismo do it; why must Nintendo? They have what I liken to the Disney's character model of video games. Each one is timeless for a new generation, with usually some innovative updates to classic gameplay. What you and others sound like your asking for is a Disney classic film with Michael Bay productions with Shyamalan writing, which sounds absolutely horrendous :x

Everyone's view on what they should be doing with their ips and games will change dramatically person to person, I'm not going to argue back on forth on each point except some to try and show the way I feel the way I do about it.

 

I don't expect to be handed anything in life, but we all have wishes. Do the millions of other fans have wishes, would those millions of fans also buy consoles? How is it poor of me to want and wish for Nintendo to do a (real) 3D RPG or MMO of Pokemon, I don't think any Nintendo fan wouldn't want them to do this? I was talking about using their IP's to drive console growth and make them a healthier competitor and this would work. Hopefully they are edging closer and if this is replacing the 3DS then the next pokemon will have to come pretty close to what we want. Sun/Moon has been a step towards the right direction but I would never want them to end 'gameboy' pokemon either.

 

My mistake, I've read several headline rumours saying its been cancelled on Wii U over the last week and most rumors usually hold some truth but I won't say I've looked into it to hard.

 

It's not okay for any company to do it, I've blasted Sony/Microsoft for doing this exact same with re-releases. Its a f'n horrible business practice and I wish it would stop. Sony/Microsoft still do put out new titles a long with the ones they port I guess which doesn't make it any better in the slightest.

 

I'm not asking for a every quarter Zelda either, I'm asking for one less than every 5 years that's all. And to try and tie it in within the launch or launch window of new consoles to get people in and buying and enjoying said console. We'll all learn more soon anyway and for the love of god hopefully no re-ports of Wii U games.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Andrew    2,861
3 hours ago, Vandalsquad said:

I don't expect to be handed anything in life, but we all have wishes. Do the millions of other fans have wishes, would those millions of fans also buy consoles? How is it poor of me to want and wish for Nintendo to do a (real) 3D RPG or MMO of Pokemon, I don't think any Nintendo fan wouldn't want them to do this?

 

I'm not asking for a every quarter Zelda either, I'm asking for one less than every 5 years that's all. And to try and tie it in within the launch or launch window of new consoles to get people in and buying and enjoying said console. We'll all learn more soon anyway and for the love of god hopefully no re-ports of Wii U games.

I'm sure lots of people would want to see a 3D console (MMO)RPG - It's not wrong or poor of you to want it. I would like to see it too. I'm just saying that faulting a console for not providing one is on you, when we've had 20 years of handheld Pokémon and they've addressed why they develop for the handhelds. Just two example quotes from them:

 

Quote

“I consider handheld hardware you can carry around with you as almost being equal to being with Pokemon, always. I think handheld really matches the idea of Pokemon that we have. Also, you can communicate and transfer data all the time, whenever you want with a handheld. That’s also a match with the Pokemon concept.”

Quote

"You can trade and battle with people you’ve not met before. We think this mode of play is best possible with the Nintendo 3DS. If, for example, the Wii U were to be portable in its own right we’d probably reconsider. But for the moment we think the 3DS is the best device for Pokémon RPGs"

Re that last quote; we've seen the registered trademarks for Switch releases for Sun/Moon. I'm sure it still won't be enough for some people though.

 

And as for new games in less time, you'd better brace yourself for disappointment not only with Nintendo games but Xbox games too. Diminishing returns with expensive development and inflated studio sizes have all but killed quick sequels industry wide. It's simply not feasible financially or timely. So while they could develop and time Zelda for every console launch, you create an "eggs all in one basket" problem where you have a killer launch lineup and a massive drought for 4 -5 years.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
+Asmodai    637

 

Quote

The reason the games aren't coming to Wii U is because the confidence people (consumers, developers) have in it; none.

And why do consumers and developers have no confidence in it?  Consumers have no confidence in it because it doesn't get third party multi-platform games, the highest selling game franchises around.  Consumers want to know if they buy a console IN ADDITION to it's particular exclusives it will also get the major multi-platform games.  Things like the latest Call of Duty, EA Sports games like Madden and Fifa, the latest Grand Theft Auto, etc.  Wii U doesn't get those and so people tend to shy away from it despite it's excellent exclusives.  It doesn't get those because it's not a simple port for developers like it is between the other two due to a radically different performance level.  It's simply not worth the effort.

 

Quote

The Wii, for example, had waaaaaay too many games and it was anything but a powerhouse.

The Wii sold tons because it created the motion gaming gimmick that became a HUGE fad for a while.  Microsoft and Sony tried to copy it with Kinect and Move but Nintendo invented the genre.  Catching a fad like that isn't something you can do every generation.  The Wii just struck the right chord with consumers and the Wii U's tablet controller gimmick did not.  Maybe the dockable gimmick of the Switch will be able to capture some of that fad magic but I wouldn't bet on it.  Who knows what the masses are going to get excited about.

Quote

At this point in time the return in pretty graphics is quickly diminishing. It's not like the leap from PS1 to PS2 or even PS2 to PS3. PS3 to PS4 is really not all that great.

I disagree entirely with this.  Consoles are already slighting behind the curve.  In the PS1 and PS2 days there was a fixed target for the display... and NTSC/PAL TV that didn't really change in resolution.  That changed when TVs when digital.  The Xbox 360 and PS3 ran primarily at 720p, the PS4 and Xbox One target mainly 1080p so they barely hit what the first gen digital TVs were designed for.  Right now people are buying 4k TVs and it takes a lot of GPU power to display 4k with HDR and even the PS4 Pro can't do it natively (we'll have to see about Project Scorpio next year).  If you don't think a full 4k native resolution game with HDR support will look significantly different from a game running on a launch Xbox One then I just don't know what else to say to you.  That difference is going to be HUGE, easily similar to the PS1 to PS2 or PS2 to PS3 and that's not even across generations if Project Scorpio DOES hit it next year (It's still considered an Xbox One).  Also, maybe not important for Nintendo since they don't seem to be interested in VR (because their hardware can't handle it?) but if a console DOES want to support VR the current offerings are pretty underpowered in the VR arena and you're going to notice huge differences as they bump up the hardware for that particular application.

 

Quote

I'm not saying it's not difficult to develop a game for X86 and then port it over to ARM, but I can tell you if the numbers make sense they'll bloody well do it. If Switch is for some reason the next Wii (everyone, their dog, and their grandma have one) then I 100% guarantee you the games will come, no problem.

If Switch hits some crazy fad nerve for the average consumer and sells in insane numbers then it absolutely will become worth it for developers to port the games to it, even if it is a lot of work.  You need to get over this mentality though that Nintendo can just create that kind of fad with every console generation they create, that was likely a one time deal with the Wii not the business as usual for them.  They couldn't do it with the Wii U and I doubt they'll do it with the Switch, time will tell though.

 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Vandalsquad    515

Digital Foundry have the 'apparent' end specs,  confirmed to developers now. Thought's? we'll try keep this topic alive and civil :D

 

 

This leaked spec actually appeared on Twitter before Nintendo's official reveal. Thought by many to be out of date or fake, we can confirm that Nintendo has briefed developers recently with the same information. One source tells us that the 4K30 aspect of the spec was not part of the developer presentation, but everything else was. We can assume that the clock-speeds are theoretical maximums, and not the 768/307.2MHz combo we've confirmed as locked in retail hardware.

 

CPU: Four ARM Cortex A57 cores, max 2GHz

GPU: 256 CUDA cores, maximum 1GHz

Architecture: Nvidia second generation Maxwell

Texture: 16 pixels/cycle

Fill: 14.4 pixels/cycle

Memory: 4GB

Memory Bandwidth: 25.6GB/s

VRAM: shared

System memory: 32GB, max transfer rate: 400MB/s

USB: USB 2.0/3.0

Video output: 1080p60/4K30

Display: 6.2-inch IPS LCD, 1280x720 pixels, 10-point multi-touch support

 

-----------------------------------------------------------------

 

Hadn't heard about 16gb being the standard game card size, hopefully keeps developers on their toes with not wasting space.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
+Asmodai    637
9 hours ago, Vandalsquad said:

Digital Foundry have the 'apparent' end specs,  confirmed to developers now. Thought's? we'll try keep this topic alive and civil :D

 

This leaked spec actually appeared on Twitter before Nintendo's official reveal. Thought by many to be out of date or fake, we can confirm that Nintendo has briefed developers recently with the same information. One source tells us that the 4K30 aspect of the spec was not part of the developer presentation, but everything else was. We can assume that the clock-speeds are theoretical maximums, and not the 768/307.2MHz combo we've confirmed as locked in retail hardware.

 

CPU: Four ARM Cortex A57 cores, max 2GHz

GPU: 256 CUDA cores, maximum 1GHz

Architecture: Nvidia second generation Maxwell

Texture: 16 pixels/cycle

Fill: 14.4 pixels/cycle

Memory: 4GB

Memory Bandwidth: 25.6GB/s

VRAM: shared

System memory: 32GB, max transfer rate: 400MB/s

USB: USB 2.0/3.0

Video output: 1080p60/4K30

Display: 6.2-inch IPS LCD, 1280x720 pixels, 10-point multi-touch support

 

-----------------------------------------------------------------

 

Hadn't heard about 16gb being the standard game card size, hopefully keeps developers on their toes with not wasting space.

 

Those specs are nearly identical to the Tegra X1 launched in Q2 2015 and used most notably in the nVidia Shield Android TV console (which is rumored to be replaced in January at CES 2017... before the Switch launches) and the Pixel C tablet that have been on the market for a while now.  If it's a "custom" Tegra as was rumored those particular specs don't give any indication of where Nintendo customized it (Unless they dropped the 4 low powered A53 cores which would be odd for a portable device).

 

Two noticeable differences, one good, one bad, that I see (besides the A53 omission from the specs) is that the other devices noted above only have 3GB of RAM so this would be the first with 4GB (good) and the Shield Android TV supports 4k60 for video playback while oddly this seems to only support 4k30 despite using what appears to be the same SoC (bad).  Not that it's going to matter if Nintendo doesn't allow support for streaming video apps like Netflix, YouTube, Amazon Prime, etc. because no GAME is going to do 4k on this device.

 

 

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
DirtyLarry    2,094

Nintendo has and always will be Gameplay > Graphics.

It is the way it is, and the way it always will be.

In order to achieve the portability of the Switch and to keep the price range in the area of people would actually want to purchase the Switch, sacrifices had to be made on the processing power side of things.

This will have zero effect on how much fun one can have playing their games. Just how good it may or may not look.

Clearly this is not the console, nor have they ever been, for graphics enthusiast.

I am not sure how or why people expected Nintendo to now compete in the visuals department when they never have. With a portable console no less.

It just is not a realistic expectation whatsoever.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
DConnell    6,581
On 12/14/2016 at 9:39 PM, Co_Co said:

Nintendo is for children and has been for a long time. 

Perhaps, but there's nothing wrong with that. :)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
DConnell    6,581
28 minutes ago, DirtyLarry said:

Nintendo has and always will be Gameplay > Graphics.

It is the way it is, and the way it always will be.

 

IMO all consoles should be that way. But I'm the guy who still plays Atari 2600 games, so obviously graphical richness isn't my top priority. :laugh:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
+Asmodai    637
25 minutes ago, DConnell said:

IMO all consoles should be that way. But I'm the guy who still plays Atari 2600 games, so obviously graphical richness isn't my top priority. :laugh:

I agree they should be that way as well.  People here (heck one the internet in general) seem to go from one extreme to another though.

While consoles should all be "Gameplay > Graphics" that doesn't mean Graphics should be 0.

You're certainly not alone in your love of the classic systems though as Nintendo already has a product for that.  The NES Classic is selling like hotcakes and stores are having trouble keeping them in stock.  It's an excellent product.

As for graphics I agree with you that people who think it needs to be a 4k console like the upcoming Project Scorpio are missing the point and I'd never expect Nintedo to try to compete with Project Scorpio or even the already out PS4 Pro on specs.  Heck I wouldn't even expect them to compete with the 3+ year old launch PS4 with it's more powerful (than the Xbox One) GPU and GDDR5 RAM.

 

That said if they are going to shift to using what seems to be essentially off the shelf mobile SoCs (a shift I think is actually a GREAT idea as that's where all the chip innovation is going on right now and it saves them in R&D over designing some custom chip) then I'd like to see them at least use the suppliers current product line and not a 2 year old offering.  2 years may be nothing in the console space but this is a mobile SoC and that's HUGE in mobile.  Apple, Qualcomm, Samsung, etc. (all the major players in the mobile space) release new and significantly updated products every year (they're NOT just a rebadge of last years model like video cards often seem to be).

 

I think most of the industry watchers expected the final Switch to use the current Pascal based Tegra over the 2 year old Maxwell based one when it was announced they'd be using a Tegra.  It's not some crazy pie in the sky notion like a 4k handheld from the "graphics is everything" crowd.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
LimeMaster    15,601
3 hours ago, Asmodai said:

I agree they should be that way as well.  People here (heck one the internet in general) seem to go from one extreme to another though.

While consoles should all be "Gameplay > Graphics" that doesn't mean Graphics should be 0.

You're certainly not alone in your love of the classic systems though as Nintendo already has a product for that.  The NES Classic is selling like hotcakes and stores are having trouble keeping them in stock.  It's an excellent product.

As for graphics I agree with you that people who think it needs to be a 4k console like the upcoming Project Scorpio are missing the point and I'd never expect Nintedo to try to compete with Project Scorpio or even the already out PS4 Pro on specs.  Heck I wouldn't even expect them to compete with the 3+ year old launch PS4 with it's more powerful (than the Xbox One) GPU and GDDR5 RAM.

 

That said if they are going to shift to using what seems to be essentially off the shelf mobile SoCs (a shift I think is actually a GREAT idea as that's where all the chip innovation is going on right now and it saves them in R&D over designing some custom chip) then I'd like to see them at least use the suppliers current product line and not a 2 year old offering.  2 years may be nothing in the console space but this is a mobile SoC and that's HUGE in mobile.  Apple, Qualcomm, Samsung, etc. (all the major players in the mobile space) release new and significantly updated products every year (they're NOT just a rebadge of last years model like video cards often seem to be).

 

I think most of the industry watchers expected the final Switch to use the current Pascal based Tegra over the 2 year old Maxwell based one when it was announced they'd be using a Tegra.  It's not some crazy pie in the sky notion like a 4k handheld from the "graphics is everything" crowd.

Thing is, they have been working on the Switch for years now, so the Maxwell architecture was probably the most up to date one when they had started designing the system. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Draconian Guppy    13,037
4 hours ago, DConnell said:

IMO all consoles should be that way. But I'm the guy who still plays Atari 2600 games, so obviously graphical richness isn't my top priority. :laugh:

why not both?

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
+Asmodai    637
6 minutes ago, LimeMaster said:

Thing is, they have been working on the Switch for years now, so the Maxwell architecture was probably the most up to date one when they had started designing the system. 

That's pretty much always true with consoles.  They pretty much always take years to develop and the first dev kits almost never have the final chips in them.  You don't build consoles with what hardware is available to the public when you START the multi-year development process.  But sure, no doubt Maxwell was what was available when they started.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
LimeMaster    15,601
19 minutes ago, Asmodai said:

That's pretty much always true with consoles.  They pretty much always take years to develop and the first dev kits almost never have the final chips in them.  You don't build consoles with what hardware is available to the public when you START the multi-year development process.  But sure, no doubt Maxwell was what was available when they started.

Well it seems that Nintendo always do use the initial chips. Sometimes it's benefited them & sometimes it hasn't.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
+Asmodai    637
6 minutes ago, LimeMaster said:

Well it seems that Nintendo always do use the initial chips. Sometimes it's benefited them & sometimes it hasn't.

Their prior chips where custom designs, they didn't use what appears to be off the shelf mobile parts.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
LimeMaster    15,601
7 minutes ago, Asmodai said:

Their prior chips where custom designs, they didn't use what appears to be off the shelf mobile parts.

Their custom designs were still based off chips that are widely available though.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
+Asmodai    637
Just now, LimeMaster said:

Their custom designs were still based off chips that widely available though.

That can be said of any console.  The PS3's "custom" Cell was still based off of IBMs widely available Power chips.  It's not like console makers ever make chips COMPLETELY from scratch.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
johnnyq3    43
4 minutes ago, LimeMaster said:

Their custom designs were still based off chips that widely available though.

The 360's processor was a beefed up Powermac processor.  With the demo unit using a Mac G4 or G3 shell to hold the hardware.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
LimeMaster    15,601
2 minutes ago, Asmodai said:

That can be said of any console.  The PS3's "custom" Cell was still based off of IBMs widely available Power chips.  It's not like console makers ever make chips COMPLETELY from scratch.

That's a good point. I didn't really consider that when replying,

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
Sign in to follow this  

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.