0.4 is docked at FP32 (0.2 Undoked). And what I read more is people talking about a 3 - 4x that.You're right. Looking at better sources I find 0.471 undocked, 0.786 docked. Hoping for a 5X increase in docked performance is probably optimistic.
0.4 is docked at FP32 (0.2 Undoked). And what I read more is people talking about a 3 - 4x that.You're right. Looking at better sources I find 0.471 undocked, 0.786 docked. Hoping for a 5X increase in docked performance is probably optimistic.
Wasn't the New 3DS replacement by og 3DS owners rate around 30%? Switch should be double of that.
I seriously, seriously doubt they would make a game that was already announced for Switch and make it pro exclusive. Nintendo has done some anti-consumer stuff but they've never pulled anything like that.
-GPU probably somewhere around the XB1 in terms of a flops rating. On the flip side it will be with 7+ years of architecture improvements, so it should be punching above what the XB1 was capable of.
Those sources are also wrong. Switch is about 392 GFLOPS docked, around 196 GFLOPS undocked. Current low end estimate for the device talked about here are something like 500 GFLOPS undocked, 1 TFLOPS docked. And that's a very low end estimate. Could go up to 750 GFLOPS undocked, 1.5 TFLOPS docked towards the higher end.You're right. Looking at better sources I find 0.471 undocked, 0.786 docked. Hoping for a 5X increase in docked performance is probably optimistic.
Really? Wii U gpu was better than the PS360 in real life despite having less flops, so in this case being 7 years and on a far superior uArch shouldn't be that hard at all vs the 2 years the GPU in the Wii U had over the other two systems.this has been said every time since the wii was made and unfortunately hasn't been true
You're not wrong, but I think it will depend on when the thing actually comes out. More than two years after the Pro launches, and I don't think the public will balk at the idea.
this has been said every time since the wii was made and unfortunately hasn't been true
£329-£379
Ironically an ampere flop is actually much less efficient than a Turing flop.Really? Wii U gpu was better than the PS360 in real life despite having less flops, so in this case being 7 years and on a far superior uArch shouldn't be that hard at all vs the 2 years the GPU in the Wii U had over the other two systems.
7 years is the difference between Ampere and GCN 1.0
I seriously, seriously doubt they would make a game that was already announced for Switch and make it pro exclusive. Nintendo has done some anti-consumer stuff but they've never pulled anything like that.
It's a hell of a longshot to say they will be exclusives.At this point it's a longshot to say BOTW2, MP4, Bayo 3 and Splatoon 3 will be Switch Pro titles amd Nintendo have been secretive all this time around them (and other titles) for this reason.
I do agree with the general message here.They'll definitely be at least a singular "Hey look at what this thing can do!" game akin to Xenoblade Chronicles 3D for sure, but I wouldn't expect many of them.
These games will still need to work on the base hardware; they'll just be looking nicer and running better on the Pro hardware.
I feel like some folks are hyping themselves up for some sort of miracle and I feel like they're gonna be disappointed in the end.
The Wii was also an AMD GPU.this has been said every time since the wii was made and unfortunately hasn't been true
this has been said every time since the wii was made and unfortunately hasn't been true
I don't know about that. I mean.. they haven't specifically done that, but they've announced games for one platform that got moved to another one, like Super Paper Mario.I seriously, seriously doubt they would make a game that was already announced for Switch and make it pro exclusive. Nintendo has done some anti-consumer stuff but they've never pulled anything like that.
I wouldn't necessarily call that kind of practice anti-consumer. If Metroid Prime 4 were to be developed and optimized exclusively around this more powerful hardware, then it may have unacceptable performance on the original Switch, making it unsellable (if they did choose to sell an obviously more subpar performing and looking version of the game, like we're talking unacceptable Cyberpunk-levels of performance, that would be more anti-consumer).
However that said, Nintendo will probably not do this (develop games only for Switch Pro) simply due to business reasons, as you are not selling to the majority of the user base and thus making less money. It's likely development will start on the base Switch, and we will then see massive improvements to Image Quality/resolution and framerates and overall performance. The difference will be noticeable enough for most people (core gamers) to feel the need to upgrade. New games will still 'run' on the Switch, but they will be poor in the same way some late 3DS games were (also, current Switch games are already shows that the current Switch is already on it's last legs, barely being able to keep up with more graphically demanding ports, and even Nintendo's own games are getting to that point. I'd go as far to say that choosing to stay with the current Switch, if you do play a lot of Switch games and will do so in the future, is just a bad idea).
However, its important to note, this is Nvidia tech we're talking about here. The jump in tech from the Tegra X1 to this new DLSS-capable NVIDIA mobile SoC will absolutely destroy any comparison point between Switch>Switch Pro vs 3DS>New 3DS. I don't think people should be making similar comparisons too much cause the 3DS tech and the vendor that Nintendo went with for the 3DS were always shitty and low tech, and definitely not as scalable or future proof, even by 2011 standards. NVIDIA is whole different beast and Nintendo gamers are very lucky that Nintendo went with them for the Switch, the advantages (exclusive access to the most advanced cutting-edge tech like DLSS and powerful mobile SoC's) are already notable.
I don't know about that. I mean.. they haven't specifically done that, but they've announced games for one platform that got moved to another one, like Super Paper Mario.
It's anti-consumer announcing a game for one platform and then years later saying "just kidding, it's not coming to that platform".
You're selling people a product under false pretenses.
Really? Wii U gpu was better than the PS360 in real life despite having less flops, so in this case being 7 years and on a far superior uArch shouldn't be that hard at all vs the 2 years the GPU in the Wii U had over the other two systems.
7 years is the difference between Ampere and GCN 1.0
I don't know about that. I mean.. they haven't specifically done that, but they've announced games for one platform that got moved to another one, like Super Paper Mario.
There was some but I don't remember exactly. The game was announced at Wii's big E3 so it was kind of weird.Holy shit how did I never know that.
Was there a big uproar about that?
the wii was merely overclocked, literally no change in architecture whatsoever. as i said above, latte was xenos with more stuff tacked on. switch, i believe had to be powered down to be able to accomodate for the handheld portion.
NopeI thought that was always a Wii game or at least announced as one?
this has been said every time since the wii was made and unfortunately hasn't been true
There was some but I don't remember exactly. The game was announced at Wii's big E3 so it was kind of weird.
It's anti-consumer announcing a game for one platform and then years later saying "just kidding, it's not coming to that platform".
You're selling people a product under false pretenses.
Dinosaur Planet?
Also, MP4 is kind of a special case. It was announced suuuuuuuuper early, and then production was totally rebooted a long time after that initial announcement. Anybody buying a Switch solely for MP4 over the last couple of years is being foolish.
But they are about 10x as powerful and have better ecosystems, better online/voice/party work and get games that run far far better on their hardware.That's one way to look at it. Another way to look at it is that XSX/PS5 cost $100 more and they aren't even portable.
It's anti-consumer announcing a game for one platform and then years later saying "just kidding, it's not coming to that platform".
You're selling people a product under false pretenses.
And....portability for switch means zero to me personally. I never use it portably.
at least one, according to one insider hereWill it have exclusive games tho? Cause other than that it's just prettier switch games if devs even make use of all that power.
Apple's to oranges. Both types of product have their niche in the market and will sell easily. The more variety we have in gaming systems the healthier the market is in general.But they are about 10x as powerful and have better ecosystems, better online/voice/party work and get games that run far far better on their hardware.
And....portability for switch means zero to me personally. I never use it portably.
But they are about 10x as powerful and have better ecosystems, better online/voice/party work and get games that run far far better on their hardware.
And....portability for switch means zero to me personally. I never use it portably.
Hold up, really? There are rumours about exclusive switch pro games? That sounds exciting.
ayeHold up, really? There are rumours about exclusive switch pro games? That sounds exciting.
Exclusive as in won't run on the base Switch, but will be on other platforms.Hold up, really? There are rumours about exclusive switch pro games? That sounds exciting.
I do agree with the general message here.
People should not be viewing this hardware as a successor. It's a revision and will be treated as such. Will it get some exclusive releases? Yes; but most will remain compatible across Switch OG and Switch Pro/Revision.
Holy shit how did I never know that.
Was there a big uproar about that?