[RUMOR] Nintendo Switch CPU and GPU clock speeds revealed - Polidicks

Hardware really doesn't have lots to do with framerate nowadays, it's mostly a developer's choice to optimize for a range of hardware at a target resolution/framerate according to the game latency requirements. Only the CPU could be a bottleneck and that's only if you use it to do big physics simulations or something intensive like that. I haven't played played Metro 2033 or pretty much any new games because i can't; but i get the feeling that Metro and most other games don't do anything that the HD 3000(for example) couldn't do with reduced graphics if it was profitable to optimize for it.

[QUOTE=EE 20 D0;51552128]Hardware really doesn't have lots to do with framerate nowadays, it's mostly a developer's choice to optimize for a range of hardware at a target resolution/framerate according to the game latency requirements.[/QUOTE] Hmm I dunno man a Intel HD, a 940M and a RX 480 will play games at different framerates Unless you mean something else and I'm missing it

What really matters in the end is market adoption and developer support. If people keep buying Switches, and the dev support is good, then the dev support will hopefully continue to improve which will entice more developers to bring their games to the Switch, which entices more people to buy a Switch. It's a cycle that should fulfill itself. Those two factors account for why the PS2 (with its unconvential hardware layout) and the Xbox 360 (with its PPC based processor) did so well despite their specs being so iffy. And the lacking of one of those factors is why a console might just die out later in its life (as per the supposedly shoddy dev support of the N64 and Wii). If Nintendo and NVIDIA deliver on offering great dev support, and the market embraces the Switch, then I see no reason why it won't be successful in the long run. The only thing I'm worried about concerning the Switch is the whole push to 4K. But then again, Nintendo could just pull a "new 3DS" and release a more powerful SKU at a later date.

I just get annoyed that Nintendo seems to purposely under power their consoles when they can be so much better. Especially when they are attempting to release a console that might have trouble with 1080p/60fps when everything else is starting to move into 4k. But this is just IMO and I understand why they do it.

[QUOTE=Fox Powers;51552171]Hmm I dunno man a Intel HD, a 940M and a RX 480 will play games at different framerates Unless you mean something else and I'm missing it[/QUOTE] Well yeah you get a vastly different budget on both of these cards but what i'm saying is that you can dial down or not do things that aren't essential to the game. If the game used lower polycounts and used shaders sparingly on older hardware would it stop being the same game?.

Nintendo as a console creator should make a console that other devs can put it to good use, where they can put their games without problems. The software and hardware industry gets more powerful every year, so if you don't make a future proof console, you are fucked. In a nutshell, nintendo should make a console for the developers first and foremost.

[QUOTE=RenegadeCop;51552255]For Metro specifically, the graphics play a large role in the immersion, and that game is all about immersion. The lights, fog, etc. One of the most underrated games out there imo[/QUOTE] I hold the belief that consistency and smart design are the only things necessary for immersion, else any game not using micropolygon spectral HDR path traced graphics at vernier acuity resolution in VR at 500 FPS would be incapable of immersing anyone.

I don't expect Nintendo consoles to be as powerful as PS4/Xbone, but I expect them to at least be powerful enough to handle their own games. Every single game I have owned on my Wii U has had slow load times, many have had lagging and low frame rate. It was simply too weak.

couple sketchy things about this article 1. again this is based on the venturebeat article which has been debunked 2. they claim the console is underclocked 40% when undocked, i don't know how anyone would get this information from a devkit, and a lot of the other rumours im looking at (and if i remember, the patents, not going through them to verify) suggest its actually overclocked when plugged in and normal when not

[QUOTE=FordLord;51552393]I don't expect Nintendo consoles to be as powerful as PS4/Xbone, but I expect them to at least be powerful enough to handle their own games. Every single game I have owned on my Wii U has had slow load times, many have had lagging and low frame rate. It was simply too weak.[/QUOTE] That's odd, I really haven't noticed any slowness in games themselves. Only in the OS, which runs like a dog at times. But once I'm in game, it's fine. But I noticed my friends is definitely slower than mine, so I wonder if there is a difference in how its set up.

People seem very up in arms about this, remember that Nintendo is going to cater to 1080P gaming which makes sense with the docked station and a 720p gaming solution while undocked. The MHz isn't too noticeable as they need to run low to make sure they can run for far longer battery wise. Either way, I expect that maybe the third party support won't be too substantial with such ideas that Nintendo has, especially with the need of coding two versions (One for the docked version and another for the undocked version) I mean, I am just happy that we get a proper Nintendo machine which gimmick isn't actually obtrusive or beginner unfriendly and if it all comes to it flopping, I still got a device that will run Virtual Console on the go.

[QUOTE=Untouch;51552451]couple sketchy things about this article 1. again this is based on the venturebeat article which has been debunked 2. [B]they claim the console is underclocked 40% when undocked[/B], i don't know how anyone would get this information from a devkit, and a lot of the other rumours im looking at (and if i remember, the patents, not going through them to verify)[B] suggest its actually overclocked when plugged in and normal when not[/B][/QUOTE] Is there any difference? Personally I trust Digital Foundry to not put out [I]completely[/I] unfounded claims, and what's so unbelievable about 300MHz on the go and 750MHz docked? The X1 maxes out at 1GHz (in the sense that Nintendo isn't going to push it out of its comfort zone both due to yields and efficiency reasons) or thereabouts, and if you wanna save on battery, it makes sense to go low. Maybe these rumours aren't true, but they aren't completely "out there", and I don't really see many great reasons to be overly sceptical. Even if they are completely wrong on all specifics, I doubt you'll see the Switch be much faster than this. It has a pretty strict power envelope, it needs to last for a decent amount of time, and it shouldn't weigh a ton. That puts some pretty tight limits on what you can manage hardware wise.

[QUOTE=Untouch;51552451]couple sketchy things about this article 1. again this is based on the venturebeat article which has been debunked 2. they claim the console is underclocked 40% when undocked, i don't know how anyone would get this information from a devkit, and a lot of the other rumours im looking at (and if i remember, the patents, not going through them to verify) suggest its actually overclocked when plugged in and normal when not[/QUOTE] Where has it been debunked?

[QUOTE=RenegadeCop;51553640]Slippery slope, you don't need whatever that is, but you need fog effects and lighting to give the impression the metro is a dark and spooky place. That's part of design, too.[/QUOTE] That was an attempt at reductio ad absurdum and despite looking a bit like gibberish actually a possible way of rendering pretty nice graphics. (but you'd need a [I]slightly[/I] better and bigger computer than today's for that) When i said consistency and smart design i also thought of optimization implicitly being there; after all you only need to render/compute what you will see/use. Artists and programmers can get clever with ways to fool and immerse you while using sparse resources, that's a big part of what computer graphics is. You don't need a completely accurate simulation of fog and lighting; approximations appropriate to the machine the game runs on work just fine, and nowadays i don't believe you'd need to give up so much fidelity for it to be detrimental to the experience (like running the entire game in wireframe); better optimization/algorithms can go [URL="https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7BBSOJudnvM"]a[/URL] [URL="https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RTxwfRl_I0U"]long[/URL] [URL="https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WpwlZgQPCpk"]way[/URL]. Since the whole thing is subjective i think arguing about this is a bit silly since words are just that and i don't see myself pulling something like that from the links to prove a point by showing it could be done (no time, no knowledge) and this optimizing the crap out of it part only comes if the game itself absolutely needs it which i think most games don't.

consoles still can't do proper 1080p anyway (900p and dynamic resolutions) so it doesnt really matter if the switch can't not to mention its a portable

[QUOTE=Firetornado;51551496]Ok. When dealing with nintendo, you gotta focus on the games the system has, not the hardware.[/QUOTE] Unless you focus on the latter you won't have much reason to focus on the former unless you've got a hard-on for Mario, Zelda, Pokemon, and Animal Crossing.

[QUOTE=gk99;51554574]Unless you focus on the latter you won't have much reason to focus on the former unless you've got a hard-on for Mario and Zelda games.[/QUOTE] You must be blind to all the games that released on the 3DS and Wii U. "yes nintendo you should scrap the switch and cookie cutter another ps4/xbox one console that'll work out for you" [editline]19th December 2016[/editline] * where neither can do full 4k despite numerous claims as such and will likely struggle with proper 1080x60fps again, too!

[QUOTE=oskramorir;51551667]The Switch is the first nintendo console in 10 years without a gameplay gimmick[/QUOTE] I'd argue detachable controllers and the entire idea of a console/handheld hybrid is a gimmick in itself.

[QUOTE=Demache;51553154]That's odd, I really haven't noticed any slowness in games themselves. Only in the OS, which runs like a dog at times. But once I'm in game, it's fine. But I noticed my friends is definitely slower than mine, so I wonder if there is a difference in how its set up.[/QUOTE] Lego City Undercover has very rough framerates and lag. Super Luigi U tends to lag at times. Epic Yarn isnt bad, but could be smoother. Mine is the 32Gb system. [editline]19th December 2016[/editline] [QUOTE=Map in a box;51554588]You must be blind to all the games that released on the 3DS and Wii U. "yes nintendo you should scrap the switch and cookie cutter another ps4/xbox one console that'll work out for you" [editline]19th December 2016[/editline] * where neither can do full 4k despite numerous claims as such and will likely struggle with proper 1080x60fps again, too![/QUOTE] I have a Wii-U, there aren't many 'good' games worth buying. 3DS has good ones, Wii-U is a lot of cheap crap that is overpriced. I've bought a few wii-u games brand new, just to go back and get a refund the next week.

[QUOTE=RenegadeCop;51551652]I'd like to get out of the 30fps/720p gaming era as soon as possible.[/QUOTE] Have you guys seen the Zelda level remakes on unreal engine? I'm sorry but I want Nintendo's games to look like that. They look cartoony and I just don't like their art style anymore. I'd love Nintendo if the did a Zelda remake and actually made it look as good as unreal engine levels. I'm a graphics person and another thing is that Nintendo doesn't seem to be doing hard core games like golden eye anymore it's all directed at little kids and shit. They're no good anymore for people like me and I won't buy one console just for Mario games.

You're the minority then. Me and several others thoroughly enjoyed Wii U games -- namely Bayo 2 which is commonly tounced as one of the best games of its year.

[QUOTE=RenegadeCop;51551652]I'd like to get out of the 30fps/720p gaming era as soon as possible.[/QUOTE] can we just let 2160p become the standard for everything now PLEASE [editline]19th December 2016[/editline] [QUOTE=TheCactusman;51551911]I'm sorry, but are you really saying you get eyestrain from anything below 1080p? I mean, you know stretched resolutions are a thing? I'd rather run a stretched 720p30fps Runescape than a 1080p 2fps Runescape (I'm giving a random fps value there, but my point is that it's lower than 30fps)[/QUOTE] Just because YOU deal with it doesn't mean everyone else should people don't buy decent computers to play their favorite games at 30fps :v: [editline]19th December 2016[/editline] Even 1080p is a bit blurry looking to me Optimizing for 1080px60fps doesn't mean you're focusing on anything other than a game running well if a game can run at 1080px60fps on a console it should be able to run on anything. And a game that runs well can be made into a better game via smoother gameplay and all that. 60fps is a "Stanard" because at 30 fps games don't control as well, and as a result, it pretty directly effects gameplay.

[QUOTE=Wii60;51554472]consoles still can't do proper 1080p anyway (900p and dynamic resolutions) so it doesnt really matter if the switch can't not to mention its a portable[/QUOTE] But it does matter, everytime a new game is released on console with a subpar 1080p/60fps a lot of people complain about it, so why would it be any different with the Switch that has the advantage of having new hardware.

[QUOTE=apierce1289;51554751]Have you guys seen the Zelda level remakes on unreal engine? I'm sorry but I want Nintendo's games to look like that. [/QUOTE] Oh Jesus Christ don't remind me of that disgusting trash. Are you talking about those Youtube videos of people shoving cartoony models onto jarring realistic Unreal Engine demos? :sick: [QUOTE=apierce1289;51554751]They look cartoony and I just don't like their art style anymore. I'd love Nintendo if the did a Zelda remake and actually made it look as good as unreal engine levels. I'm a graphics person and another thing is that Nintendo doesn't seem to be doing hard core games like golden eye anymore it's all directed at little kids and shit. [/QUOTE] You can't be serious. Do you honestly think that since Mario has a cartoon artstyle that it's for little kids? That's extremely narrow minded, that's like immediately assuming Cuphead or South Park: Stick of Truth is inherently for children. I can give you Nintendo not making many [I]M-rated [/I]games, I guess. But besides, games looking more realistic doesn't mean they have better graphics. What looks better today, Shadow of the Colossus on PS2 or Call of Duty: World at War on PS2? [QUOTE=apierce1289;51554751]They're no good anymore for people like me and I won't buy one console just for Mario games.[/QUOTE] I can at least agree that Nintendo should be more accepting to 3rd parties. But "people like you" who just focus on if Lebron's sweat has better aliasing between different consoles should not be the people that they care about. I agree that they should definitely make a more powerful system, but this idea of "make every artstyle realistic" is just asinine.

[QUOTE=J!NX;51554782]2160p[/QUOTE] :dogwow: I don't see 3.072 GHz being possible or sane.

[QUOTE=EE 20 D0;51554840]:dogwow: I don't see 3.072 GHz being possible or sane.[/QUOTE] Consoles will eventually become powerful enough that all games run natively at genuine 2160p, it's only a matter of time that, or close to 2160p. Upscaling doesn't count. PC's are getting there so.

That number is more or less what the clock would need to go up to if the switch's hardware was unchanged to do 4K at the same graphical quality as the 720p mode. I see cooling being an issue at that speed.

[QUOTE=Atlascore;51554938]Yeah.. in 10 years, if we're lucky. We're at the end of 2016 and consoles are [I]still[/I] struggling with 100% adoption of 1080p, let alone 60 fps, consoles that can do legit 4k are quite a ways off, which is sad. And even when we get those 4k capable consoles we'll still have those stupid companies that want to push ~next gen graphics~ over resolution and good framerates, we're practically guaranteed to see tons of sub 4k games that struggle to hit 30 fps shit out onto the market. I really despise this industry some times.[/QUOTE] Not to mention by the time we get "true 4K gaming" consoles, the industry will already be pushing 8K TVs as the next big thing. And, to be honest, most consumers (not saying you guys) are just fine with upscaled 1080p/4K and can barely tell the difference. So yeah, I don't see developers dropping the upscaling shtick anytime soon, especially if it results in similar visuals with potentially better performance than the true resolution.

There are faster handhelds then this already in the market and they can't make something that's comparable? Why even get a switch when you can get something like a GPD Win and play n64,ps1,ps2,xbox,Wii,WiiU and PC games? Hope they announce some killer games for its launch because Zelda isn't going to cut it when I can just play it on my WiiU.

[QUOTE=dark soul;51555156]There are faster handhelds then this already in the market and they can't make something that's comparable? Why even get a switch when you can get something like a GPD Win and play n64,ps1,ps2,xbox,Wii,WiiU and PC games? Hope they announce some killer games for its launch because Zelda isn't going to cut it when I can just play it on my WiiU.[/QUOTE] A GPD Win is still a general purpose computer. Its a jack of all trades, and master of none. I guarantee that with proper optimization, the switch will pull off far better graphics and battery life, then an equivalent game on the GPD Win. Not to mention its running Windows, which adds a whole other realm of complexity. Also where are you getting that you can play Xbox and Wii U games on a GPD Win? There's no Xbox emulator, and the Wii U emulation is still incomplete at best, if the little Atom could even keep up.