2-3 years before release you wont find dev kits. you will find dev targets -> pcs with specs close to what they would like to have in the dev kits.2-1 years is the time for dev kits, but usually 2 years is for internal studios and really really close partners, and a year prior it starts to go more to the generall third party developer.
I don't think it's likely, given that choosing which process node to use to fabricate the SoC is not something a company can decide in a matter of a couple of months, but rather a couple of years. Also, kopite7kimi mentioned that (Ada) Lovelace is similar to Ampere in terms of architecture.
Only a couple were Pro exclusive. Others remained compatible with the current Switch product line & would see enhancements while played on Pro hardware.
If youre to bullish people will come with "unrealistic expectations" =P dont expect more then base XBox One in 2022 going by some here
Do you have any idea if these exclusives are targeting H1 2022 or H2? So we can have a better idea on the possible Switch DLSS release period
1-2 years then, either way it can line up with Nintendo’s next gen system
I'm not sure I get what you're saying
Have seen your video earlier today, and im 100% with you in being confused who this model is aimed at, except exploitation of FOMO/upgrade for people whos switch is dying , and the price... i think that only happened because they asumed the current market (all consoles sold out, GPUs that expensive,...) would accept a 50$ increase...
No specific timing beyond '2022' intent. The exclusives were a bit more vague and only '2022 or later'. But the problem with that thinking is that the games could be being made with future compatibility in mind -- meaning, if they are Switch OG compatible, they don't need to wait for the revision to launch.
Frankly, you made the best case that I heard for there being two models in the works and that that was causing confusion. You convinced me.
I agree completely with your point I think people are getting caught up on stupid names of systems.
It makes business sense. Get production of the screens going. The new shell. All of that.
Considering we have the comic book codename, we should do how differentiate Erista and Mariko switches
OK I see your point now ... and I would agree... but I think in some ways It could be argued that it is in some ways.
I think that would be fine too, just a standard to rally around so we don't get stuck arguing for pages about MARKETING...
It can be either or depending on how Nintendo wants to market it. It will be a big upgrade. Exactly what you might expect a PS4 to PS5 to be
while not every year, tech is still progressing ast, so 2-3 years would have been the time for an iterative aproach. nintendos Generations where ~5.5 years since the N64 .
Absolutely.
It clears up that the chip is not taped out it seems, but at the same time... a Pro/4k/Sequell jsut a year after a Premium 50$ more expensive model just screams "backlash"....
Nintendo will be fine.
True. And i want a big jump if its 5+ years. 128gb at minimum ssd, 8gb ram, NO sub 1080 resolution anymore. docked more then [email protected] inch. (By the way: One Plus Nord, 128GB UFS 2.1, 8GB RAM, 2400x1080 6.44" 90Hz AMOLED... 316€ currently here, Austria/Germany)
I'll agree to that under this enthusiast mindset, but if we eventually get to smartphone mindset, new processor bumps are normal there, and are really just handled by driver changes.
I don't see how it would be confusing. It's gonna be in a different packaging and whatnot.
The difference is these are all the same system family with compatable architectures.
Thanks!
People Dont Use Consoles Same As Phones.
) in a row it's the latter that you want to stand out.
I think your timing is a little fast there. I expect the current model to last another year at least.
What if the LCD remains the sales leader as long as it's on the market?
There wasn't really anything to gain from that 3.0 port. Curiously, the Chinese accessory maker leak that nailed everything else claimed the side ports were 3.0.
Here's a proposition for you.
Yeah. While the announcement initially bummed me a bit, now that the dust has settled it feels like a lot more pieces of the puzzle have fallen into place. Some of them didn't go where I wanted, but that's okay.
Nintendo themselves would probably treat the Dane Switch differently from a marketing perspective considering it'd be the first device from the Switch line to offer a substantial upgrade in terms of performance and visually, regardless of it being a "New 3DS" or a "Switch 2".Differentiating by box is fine when it's an "invisible" change like a Mariko box but you would want your major iterations to be distinctive even just for viral marketing purposes. If you put OG Switch, Switch OLED and Dane Switch(
I think he could be talking about using a very similar, if not the same design, for the shell (as an example, a potentially more premium material for the console housing), but potentially different materials; and potentially the same exact type of screen, but different resolution.
It seems to be the case so far based on the very limited amount of information available so far.
Then people who aren't enthusiasts skip every other system. Just like phones. Enthusiasts buy new ones every time. I was going to stick with my One S for MS gaming as long as it could still play the games I wanted to play on it, but got a wild hair and bought a Series X to replace it. What Microsoft is doing is exactly like cell phones, except the time frames are slightly longer. Sony is starting to get there, and I have full belief that Nintendo will get there.
Then they adjust their pricing strategy. As I said, a full accounting would require a decision tree.
Going back to this post, if clocked equally, a 3080 would theoretically take ~0.41ms at 1920x1080, ~0.61ms for 2560x1440 and ~1.22ms for 3840x2160.I took liberties of charting it on graph to see it more appropriately:
The numbers next to the GPUs represent the amount of tensor cores they have.
I was thinking in taking the current conversation there as it can be more interesting to see how it would scale with lesser tensor cores on a mobile device.
Of these, the most comparable are the 2060 Super and the 3080, in terms of Tensor Core count. And of that, only the UHD 4K values and lower are of importance here for the mobile T239 device.
Edit, more charts!:
Here's the chart of the 2060 Super:
This is the RTX 3080:
Things to note for anyone analyzing these, the first dot represents 1920x1080, the second 2560x1440 and the final dot represents 3840x2160
I will edit this to add a few more.
So, for Turing the formula seems to be that for a close proximity and for Ampere is seems to be that for the close proximity.
Hope this is of any help to anyone
EDIT AGAIN!: These are the the desktop class GPUs, the ones in Orin are different, but in assumption that we have the Desktop class tensor cores in a small device, it should give an idea of how long it takes for it and how it scales. Just to keep in mind, not to make assumptions based on it definitely being the desktop equivalents.
And also, the 3080 is clocked 3.6% faster at the higher bound and 2.08% slower at the lower bound than the 2060 Super
