Emily Rogers: NX console is not x86, blows

I'm not even going to acknowledge that first sentence because it's stupid, you know that it's stupid, and I'd be stupid if I took it seriously. Anyway, in the context of that first sentence, it would be a tiny stretch to "closer the Xbox One that Playstation 4" if it's on-par with XB1, since the first sentence implies that it's between XB1 and PS4. Really, the two statements don't make any sense together, but what can you do? We also don't even know for sure that she was talking about FLOPs in the first place. It's all open for interpretation.

Now, to end your argument that it's a stock TX1, let me remind you of something else Emily said. Yes, she said more than two sentences in that blog! Shocking!

The NX has special, custom-made chips and the overall design of the hardware is very modern.

I don't think the TX1 would count as a custom-made. I don't know though. We're different people. Maybe you do?

It could still be semi-custom version of TX1. I highly doubt Nintendo is getting something 100% custom.

Of course, but the TX1 isn't anywhere close to XB1. At best, it's half as powerful, and it would be a stretch to even call it that. Changing clocks isn't "custom," and other people have said that it's easy to port to, so the core configs for both the CPU (TX1 uses big.LITTLE, which might be a hurdle) and the GPU (more SMs) would have to be very different, to the point that it wouldn't really be TX1 anymore. I also have good reasons to believe that it would be Pascal/Parker based.

What's wrong with "In terms of raw power, numerous sources tell me that NX is much closer to Xbox One than PlayStation 4"?

It's pretty clear NX doesn't match PS4's raw power and placing NX with XBO is stretching it.

For economic reasons, the "custom-made" is copy-and-paste job with a few modifications i.e. object oriented design.

TX1's GPU solution was effectively from Geforce GT 920MX.

TX1 isn't close to XB1 even if you stretch it "by a tiny bit." I also love how you're stating your idiotic opinion as fact. I'll buy you a pack of straws if you want them that badly.

Let's try and make sense of what Nintendo is likely doing. If their intent is to share software across many different form factors then the power gap between all devices can't be too drastic or you're just throwing resources down the toilet as the handheld will be the basis for all software going forward anyways.

IMHO, I don't even know why Nintendo is even bothering releasing a dedicated home console if the handheld is on par or better than Wii U. Just add an HDMI out on the handheld and ship it with a wireless controller and bam you got yourself a nice cheap Nintendo handheld/console hybrid. If all they want is for the NX to be a great secondary system then just keep it a cheap handheld as people who still care about Nintendo games have preferred their handhelds over their consoles ever since the OG Gameboy was released. Seriously, if the same games are available on both the handheld and console how many people are really going to choose a more expensive console over a cheaper handheld?

@emgesp: So, basically, you're throwing out the rumors about ports and power and just using your assumptions?

Either way, it would need 4x the power to go from, say 540p on the handheld to 1080p on the console.

Just because the screen on the handheld might be limited to 540p doesn't mean the NX handheld isn't capable of 720p output with the same visual effects, its just a cost cutting method to go with a lower res screen. So, the NX home console wouldn't need to be 4x more powerful necessarily if that's the case. BTW, a handheld released in 2017/2018 with a 540p screen would be ridiculous when $150 Tablets have 1080p screens these days.

Anyways an XB1 isn't 4x more powerful than the Tega X1. More like 2x. So, either the handheld is using something weaker than the Tegra K1, or the console rumored specs are way off.

@emgesp: The handheld is obviously weaker than the X1 due to power consumption. At best, it would be cut down and heavily underclocked. And I doubt that Nintendo will limit their next console to 720p. It's starting to feel like you're being pessimistic for the sake of being pessimistic. The console should at least be close enough to XB1 to get downgraded ports. The same person who leaked the first PS4k power rumor on NeoGAF said that porting from current gen to NX is easy based on what he's heard.

540p because anything higher is unnecessary. It drastically reduces battery life and effective performance unless games are played at sub-native resolutions, and that just makes it pointless to even have the screen. 540p on a 5 inch screen is fine. Nobody complained about Vita when it released. Are you seriously saying that it should be 1080p just because cheap tablets are? It's a good thing you're not the one there making decisions...

I'm not saying 1080p, but sub HD in 2017 is unacceptable no matter if the screen is only 5". Yeah, nobody was mad about the Vita being 540p because it was released in 2012 and didn't have hardware to drive games in 720p+ resolution with the kind of visual flare Sony was aiming for. The NX handheld should be like 2 - 3x more capable than the Vita, so there is no excuse for such low resolution. Also, I have every right to be pessimistic when it comes to Nintendo after the Wii and Wii U.

Don't get involve in this topic if you don't want to discuss this subject. We can only speculate from verified leaker and supply chain's official statements e.g. I was correct with GPU's clock speed for this FinFET generation. NVIDIA is dependent on TSMC.

Since you made this topic personal (again).

1080's 1600Mhz base clock speed is as expected from TSMC and from 980 Ti's base clock speed

Both 1080 and 980 Ti has similar transistor count.

So, it needs to be 720p for the sake of being so, even if there's no benefit to it? :/ Well, that's your opinion.

There are 1080p Wii U games. They wouldn't go backwards on the console side by locking the console at 720p. I think I have to stop here though, since it seems like you're just going to pick and choose what to believe based on what you think Nintendo will do. That makes any arguing pointless.

I don't even know what point you're trying to make here. I am discussing the subject. Are you? Where's the statement saying that the customization is extremely light? You're also combining two statements in a kind of odd way. Her last paragraph indicates that she doesn't believe that it's a clear win for XB1 and that there will be debates over which is stronger. Also, she said "a tiny bit" when talking about he stretch. That sounds like ~1 TFLOP to me, not 0.5. There's also nothing to indicate that a Tegra X1 is being used, and even less an off-the-shelf one with lower clocks or something. The fact that you had to resort to the "it's Nintendo" argument already shows how little you have.

Also, remember the guy who first leaked that PS4k would have 2x the GPU and higher clock speeds? He said that he heard from devs that porting XB1/PS4 games to NX isn't an issue at all. I don't think that would be true of a console running a TX1.

He doesn't know what he's talking about. Porting from x86 to ARM isn't a challenge if the engine supports it, and the vast majority of engines do. It just needs to be fast enough.

Before you say it, he's no longer a leaker. His source was fired, so this is 100% speculation and he's not a technically knowledgeable person.

What's the big deal with "customization"? Would the word "customization" make NX ~= PS4?

If you dismissed Emily's first sentence as being stupid, then there's nothing to discuss. Emily's statements are simple enough.

Emily's statement is pretty clear with NX doesn't match PS4's raw power and placing NX's raw power with XBO is stretching it a bit.

It wouldn't matter if SoC vendor is AMD or NVIDIA or Intel i.e. Nintendo is looking after it's own interest.

There's nothing magical about NVIDIA Pascal..

@ronvalencia: I edited the post. And I'm not saying that it'll equal PS4. And again, she said a TINY bit. You somehow turned that into the grand canyon. Also, you're dismissing her statement about custom chips and saying that it's just a TX1, so you can **** off with the accusations and putting words in my mouth.

Again, Emily's statement

In terms of raw power, numerous sources tell me that NX is much closer to Xbox One than PlayStation 4. Even that might be stretching it a tiny bit.

The context, making NX's position to be closer to XBO's raw power is stretching NX's position a TINY bit.

Custom design is nothing without raw power context.

Read my edit to the other post and reply to that, please. Also, she said "might be," not "is." She doesn't seem completely sure.

If there is no benefit of such resolutions then why does the 4.7" iPhone 6 have a screen res of 720p?

I also never said that the NX home console would be limited to 720p, so I have no idea where you got that.

Because for phones, there's a benefit due to using it mostly for a 2D UI. For a gaming handheld, all that higher resolutions do is use up more power. In other words, you're comparing apples and oranges.

@ronvalencia said:

Since you made this topic personal (again).

1080's 1600Mhz base clock speed is as expected from TSMC and from 980 Ti's base clock speed

Both 1080 and 980 Ti has similar transistor count.

Yeah, I've explained this one several times, but you're going to keep acting like I didn't so you have ammo. That's pretty pathetic. Since you want this to be a "flame war" so badly, the fact that you can't seem to come up with another argument means that I win. Yay. That must sting.

Emily is not sure if NX's raw power position being close to XBO is a stretch or actual.

This is why I applied 2X for TX1's Ice Storm Unlimited scores.

Read. My. Edit. Do that, or just admit that you're an idiot.

A UI is composed of graphics that you interact with just like gaming, so how is there a difference? Also, you act like all people do is look at the UI, no they are using apps that benefit from the higher resolution as well.

iPhones seem to get pretty decent battery life even with 720p displays, so again your excuses fall flat.

You seriously need to stop damage controlling for Nintendo, its getting really pathetic now.

A preference is damage control? You can **** right off with that. How long does that iPhone last when gaming by the way?

I guess that I have to agree with you or else I'm a fanboy. Go **** yourself. I don't want to bother with you anymore if that's how you're going to be.

Here you are again by turning this topic into personality based debate.

You missed my statement on applying 2X for TX1's Ice Storm Unlimited scores i.e. get TX1 SoC and double LDDR4 64bit memory width into LDDR4 128bit version, 256 CUDA cores into 512 CUDA cores.

I supplied TSMC's official statement on 20 nm to 16 nm FinFET+ improvements in this topic. I expected for you use that information to figuring out NX's general GPU power as part for this topic's discussions.

The only idiot is you.

Nah, you're pretty dumb. You said that kids like to carry home consoles in their backpacks. Probably the dumbest argument I've read in my life. If it's able to receive XB1 ports, I don't think that a 128-bit bus is going to cut it.

He also made a video about the Nintendo employees.

He doesn't know anything. I don't care what he says from now on.

My statement for kids backpack was based from original Wii console which is smaller than Wii U and the general 1st party Nintendo games i.e. they are not Witcher 3 with 18+ Adult themes.

In the Japanese home market. Wii U is not mobile friendly.

Use case examples

Japanese bullet trains has per seat power source. TX1's small size would be excellent for this use case.

Rumored NX has memory flashcards which are smaller than DVDs.

Original Wii travel case.

With sufficient CPU power, Geforce GT 920M can run XBO ports with reduce graphics details. GT 920M is slightly faster than 920MX/TX1.

Geforce GT 920M has 64bit bus i.e. Maxwell's delta color compression is pretty good.

The main key for XBO ports is the CPU. Visuals can be scaled down easily, but the game play/simulation modeling refactoring is harder to scale down.

Most ultrabooks has crappy GPUs and they still play XBO ports i.e. Intel CPU is sufficient for unaltered game play/simulation modeling. You can't do this with Wii U's crappy CPUs.

Wii U tried to be "big console" like XBox and it failed.

To compete against Sony, platform vendor has to go big SoC or go home, but there's a market segment that both XBO and PS4 doesn't address i.e. cheap $199 portable friendly gaming with sufficient raw power i.e. NX should deliver ultrabook PC graphics without the expensive price tag.

The only dummy is you.

You have a preference with lower resolution screens?

As far as battery life is concerned depending on the game you can get about 3 - 4 hrs straight, so pretty much 3DS level of battery life, but there are games with much better visual fidelity on iOS than 3DS, so its acceptable. The NX handheld will likely be able to house a bigger battery than the iPhone 6 anyways, so battery life with a 720p screen should not be an issue.

I don't want 3DS battery life. :/ I'd prefer better battery life than that and more effects in games. I also want to be certain that all games run at native res. 720p is the absolute max it should be, not the minimum.

Well its kinda hard to get great battery life with such a small form factor, unless one is willing to take a huge hit on graphical performance. NX handheld should be able to be more powerful than the Vita without being uber expensive.

@ronvalencia said:

@techhog89 said:

@ronvalencia said:

@techhog89 said:

@ronvalencia said:

Emily is not sure if NX's raw power position being close to XBO is a stretch or actual.

Read. My. Edit. Do that, or just admit that you're an idiot.

Here you are again by turning this topic into personality based debate.

You missed my statement on applying 2X for TX1's Ice Storm Unlimited scores i.e. get TX1 SoC and double LDDR4 64bit memory width into LDDR4 128bit version, 256 CUDA cores into 512 CUDA cores. The only idiot is you.

Nah, you're pretty dumb. You said that kids like to carry home consoles in their backpacks. Probably the dumbest argument I've read in my life. If it's able to receive XB1 ports, I don't think that a 128-bit bus is going to cut it.

My statement for kids backpack was based from original Wii console which is smaller than Wii U and the general 1st party Nintendo games i.e. they are not Witcher 3 with 18+ Adult themes.

In the Japanese home market. Wii U is not mobile friendly.

Use case examples

Japanese bullet trains has per seat power source. TX1's small size would be excellent for this use case.

Original Wii travel case.

Loading Video...

With sufficient CPU power, Geforce GT 920M can run XBO ports with reduce graphics details. GT 920M is slightly faster than 920MX/TX1.

Geforce GT 920M has 64bit bus i.e. Maxwell's delta color compression is pretty good.

Loading Video...

The main key for XBO ports is the CPU. Visuals can be scaled down easily, but the game play/simulation modeling refactoring is harder.

Most ultrabooks has crappy GPUs and they still play XBO ports i.e. Intel CPU is sufficient for unaltered game play/simulation modeling processing. You can't do this with Wii U's crappy CPUs.

The only dummy is you.

Nintendo didn't make those bags, so your point was still irrelevant. It was a stupid point to make. Deal with it and move on.

Oh look, you cherrypicked a game again. That's running at 30FPS, friend. That's half the frame rate of the XB1 version. How does a 30FPS XB1 game run?

About 25FPS average at a lower resolution. It would require a lot of extra time to optimize this as well. And this is with a considerably faster CPU than XB1. NX's CPU is rumored to be significantly faster than XB1's, but would still be slower than the CPU used here by a good margin. Combine that with the UMA and how that may limit bandwidth to the GPU, and it would be running around 20FPS. So, I don't think an X1 can work. 128-bit bus also doesn't work because, with LPDDR4, it would only have around 50GB/s of total system bandwidth. Remember that Bonaire gets away with a 128-bit bus as well, but only due to GDDR5. The same goes for the GTX 750 non-Ti (the closest desktop GPU to what I expect from NX). With LPDDR4, a 256-bit bus just makes more sense.

Either way, I don't think that 720p is necessary. It's like saying that all flagship phones should have 4k screens now just because it's possible. I didn't have issues with 720p on a 5.5-inch screen a couple of years ago, so I don't see the benefit to 720p on the handheld besides a bigger number. We need to stop increasing resolutions just for the sake of doing so. It's getting dumb. 540p is sharp enough. Your average person isn't even going to know unless you tell them.

Its not about resolution per say, but pixel density which anyone with decent vision can see the difference. Preferably you want a resolution to match the size of the screen where one cannot discern individual pixels. Pixel density goes a long way to really improve the viewing experience.

@emgesp: I'm aware. 540p at 4-5 inches is sufficient, just like how phones never needed to go past 1080p for any pocketable screen size (6 inches and under), but did so only because bigger numbers sell. The market has become jaded. Don't fall for the hype.

Well, I guess if we just use 3DS as a point of reference then yeah a 540p display on a similar size screen would be a huge improvement lol. I don't know I'm just so use to screens with great pixel density it'd be hard to go back to something inferior.

720p wouldn't be enough at 5 inches in that case anyway. :P We also don't know if there will be a small SKU and a large SKU again. 540p at 4 inches would be nothing to complain about. 275 PPI is decent. I wouldn't expect a retina display from Nintendo, realistically.

@emgesp: Its a lonely life at such high resolutions, not much to take advantage of it.

Well if it's a 4" screen then no it won't be an issue, but I was hoping they just stick to 5". Don't they sell more 3DS XL's than the smaller ones, or am I mistaken?

You're not mistaken, but if they don't switch back to having only one screen they may still want a smaller version. They may even want to be able to have a super cheap one like 2DS.

From http://www.thinkgeek.com/product/itvi/

• Officially-licensed Nintendo merchandise.

Nintendo license their IP to backpack manufactures i.e. a form of out-sourcing. Nintendo is strict with licensing their IP.

Your point was was a stupid point to make. Deal with it and move on.

@techhog89 said:

Oh look, you cherrypicked a game again. That's running at 30FPS, friend. That's half the frame rate of the XB1 version. How does a 30FPS XB1 game run?

You asked for XBO ports and you got a well known XBO port.

28nm 920M's 732 GFLOPS is faster than 20 nm TX1's 500 GFLOPS.

If you apply TSMC's 40 percent extra speed for 20 nm TX1's 500 GFLOPS, it yields 700 GFLOPS.

@techhog89 said:

About 25FPS average at a lower resolution. It would require a lot of extra time to optimize this as well. And this is with a considerably faster CPU than XB1. NX's CPU is rumored to be significantly faster than XB1's, but would still be slower than the CPU used here by a good margin.

Let's materialize "NX's CPU is rumored to be significantly faster than XB1's" statement based on actual parts i.e. I seen that rumor from NeoGAF.

http://www.anandtech.com/show/9956/the-silver-lining-of-the-late-amd-opteron-a1100-arrival

From the early reports, performance is somewhere between 80 to 90% of the Atom C2750 (Eight 2.4 GHz Silvermont cores at 2.4-2.6 GHz). Even if AMD has used the delay to tune the A1100 significantly, it is very unlikely that the chip will be able to beat the Atom chip by any tangible margin.

For IPC, AMD Jaguar similar to Intel Silvermont cores.

That's ARM Cortex A57 vs Intel Silvermont.

@techhog89 said:

Combine that with the UMA and how that may limit bandwidth to the GPU, and it would be running around 20FPS. So, I don't think an X1 can work. 128-bit bus also doesn't work because, with LPDDR4, it would only have around 50GB/s of total system bandwidth. Remember that Bonaire gets away with a 128-bit bus as well, but only due to GDDR5. The same goes for the GTX 750 non-Ti (the closest desktop GPU to what I expect from NX). With LPDDR4, a 256-bit bus just makes more sense.

750 non-Ti has 512 CUDA cores and I did stated 512 CUDA cores.

PCB trace lines for 256 bit is not small and FinFET doesn't solve this problem. You are looking at a big box game console solution with 256 bit bus PCB.

The reason for TX1/Wii/Wii U's 64bit bus is to reduce PCB cost, layers, size and power consumption. PCB issue is Nintendo's problem not NVIDIA's. NVIDIA Shield TV's PCB was designed for reduce PCB cost, layers, size and power consumption.

Due to historical Nintendo's low cost PCB approach, note why I based my statements from TX1 's rock bottom PCB price.

I remember during Wii U's rumors that fanboys has stated Power7 CPU and RV770 GPUs and the actual Wii U has the cheap ass versions.

With Nintendo, I expect cheap ass 64bit PCB solution and smallish SoC.

Almost half of Wii U's main chip's 146 mm^2 is consumed by EDRAM.

NVIDIA TX1 SoC. Most of the chip area size is consumed by the GPU.

TX1's is slightly larger than 121 mm^2 chip and there's 256 CUDA cores. Each block has 128 CUDA cores.

A customized TX1 could have the following 384 CUDA core variant i.e. 3 block variant.

@ronvalencia: So, your argument is just "it's Nintendo" and nothing more. Okay then. And licensed by Nintendo =! made by Nintendo. If Nintendo never made a case themselves, it means that carrying the console in a bag wasn't a consideration of there's.

The CPU rumor came from someone who correctly leaked the GameCube and Wii CPUs. She has a proven track record for leaking hardware. Even Rogers can't make such a claim quite yet. But of course you're just going to throw that away, since it doesn't match your "it's Nintendo" argument.

There's GDDR5 with 64 bit memory bus.

To bad for you, the majority of TX1's +121 mm^2 chip area size is consumed by the GPU.

Wii U's main chip is 146 mm^2 area size.

@ronvalencia: Why did you repeat that? What's your point? The rumor comes from a reputable source with a better hardware track record than Rogers, so I give exactly zero fucks about your guesses. Until someone says otherwise, the CPU should be faster. Also, Nintendo does not like only having slow memory, so you're fucking clueless if you think they'll stick to a 64-bit interface without anything faster. Why do you think they used eDRAM in Wii U when it would have been cheaper not to? It would also need 8GB RAM to get ports, and that's not possible with LPDDR4 on a 64-bit interface. Nintendo doesn't skimp on memory capacity. It won't be an off-the-shelf X1 running at different clocks, end of story.

Also, all consoles have official bags so your stupid bag point is 100% moot.

@techhog89 said: @ronvalencia: Why did you repeat that? What's your point?

LCGeek alluded to 15-30% stronger than PS4's CPU. That's not "considerably faster CPU".

@techhog89 said:

Until someone says otherwise, the CPU should be faster.

One should expect ARM Cortex A57 CPU to have faster clock speed than PS4's 1.6Ghz CPUs, but that's not "considerably faster CPU".

@techhog89 said:

Why do you think they used eDRAM in Wii U when it would have been cheaper not to? It would also need 8GB RAM to get ports, and that's not possible with LPDDR4 on a 64-bit interface.

For a given chip budget, Wii U's eDRAM compromised the GPU size with less CU. Nintendo traded with less CU count for very high memory bandwidth.

From XBO vs PS4 result, larger CU count is better than very high memory bandwidth. Running optimized shader programs runs within the SM/CU's SRAM domain. Note why NVIDIA linked TX1 with 64bit memory bus and didn't bothered with super fast embedded memory i.e. the priority is maximum SM count for a given budget.

TK1's DDRL3 has 8 GB support, but that's too slow.

The maximum storage for LPDDR4 is 6 GB from Samsung's 12 Gbit (for certain Qualcomm 820 devices).

For PS4, game developers has 5 GB. http://www.eurogamer.net/articles/digitalfoundry-ps3-system-software-memory

Your "It would also need 8GB RAM to get ports" assertion is wrong.

Both XBO and PS4's OS allocation is worst than my Windows 10 8 inch tablet with 2GB of memory.

@techhog89 said:

Nintendo doesn't skimp on memory capacity. It won't be an off-the-shelf X1 running at different clocks, end of story.

Again, PS4 game developers has 5 GB of memory. http://www.eurogamer.net/articles/digitalfoundry-ps3-system-software-memory

If Nintendo's OS allocation is bloated as XBO and PS4, then it's 4 channel 32bit LPDDR4 memory setup would be required or Samsung releases another higher rated storage LPDDR4 memory modules.

32bit LPDDR4 channel is not PC's 64bit DDR4 channel.

http://gadgets.ndtv.com/mobiles/news/vivo-xplay5-elite-with-6gb-of-ram-snapdragon-820-soc-launched-808856

SnapDragon 820 with 6GB of LPDDR4

https://www.qualcomm.com/products/snapdragon/processors/820

SnapDragon 820 has two 32bit channels of LPDDR4

LPDDR4 configuration

MCH1 = two module with 1.5GB (12Gbit) each,

MCH2 = two module with 1.5GB (12Gbit) each.

That's 6 GB with two 32bit LPDDR4 memory channels.

Pascal has improved memory compression over Maxwellv2.

Wii U's custom job has an IGP that is nearly off-the-shelf from RV730.

You can get Intel IGP's 14nm FinFET EDRAM size and estimate NX's SoC size with EDRAM.

Asian fabs has bullshit nm density with Samsung's 14 LPP FinFET being less bullshit than TSMC's 16nm FinFET+.

@techhog89 said:

Also, all consoles have official bags so your stupid bag point is 100% moot.

You are forgetting Nintendo's 1st party game core audience, so your stupid "all consoles have official bags" is 100% moot..

http://www.gamesindustry.biz/articles/2013-12-18-nintendo-targeting-wii-u-marketing-to-kids-families

From http://www.wiipeddler.com/products/Official-Nintendo-Wii-Carry-All-Case.html

PS4's travel case are targeted for older age segment i.e. similar to business laptop case.

There are marketing presentation difference between PS4 and Wii/WiiU.

You can't avoid Nintendo's target for the young generation.

This whole thing sounds like a giant farce now. I remember the rumors about 3ds having an Nvidia chip. Personally I don't see one reason why Nintendo would work with Nvidia, they're more expensive and with the PS3 flat out made an inferior chip.