0.75 TFlops, with perhaps a bit of customization and different clockspeeds.

What could help, is the use of FP16 to potentially add another 20-30 percent, but that comes at a cost.

The game has to be compatible to such uses, it creates less desirable graphical effects (i.e. errors), and of course a dev would have to be willing to put in the extra effort.

We all know that devs, for monetary reasons, want to use the best path to create their game or port their game to a system. When you start throwing additional hurdles, it becomes less likely they will use it.

But it's not like this 'special sauce' is anything unique. Devs have access to PPU to do the same thing on PS4 and XB1... guess what, it's not used nearly enough even for devices that are the lead platform. So this will be no different. Sometimes, partially used, usually by Nintendo.

In other words, what matters, is what is the raw power that is easily accessible to devs, and that's approximately 0.75 TFlops. But also remember, they have to get the game running 'on the go', which means whatever power that uses, is the base that has to be met. 0.3? 0.5?

So people need to think about that when considering all 3rd party support has to overcome the following hurdles.

#1 FP16 won't be used very much, and when it is, will introduce undesirable effects, and in many cases it can't be used at all. Even if it can be and wants to be used, it would likely top out around ~0.85-0.95 TFlops.

#2 Devs will have the added complexity to get their games running on with power as low as 0.3-0.5 TFlops in order to get it running 'on the go', which many won't or can't do.

#3 Devs will have to fit their game into a much smaller ram pool. Wii U held back 1 GB, I doubt Switch uses any less, and if so, not by much. It also could take up a decent bit more. So basically devs which have had 5-5.5 GB's to play around with their games now have to fit it in 2.5-3 GB's.

#4 They still have to get around issues that will arise with using Nvidia instead of AMD, as both the CPU and GPU are different standards.

#5 Any memory deviation beyond just size, but bandwidth issues like use of ESRAM or anything else will also create hurdles. It's not just about having a certain sized pool of memory to access, it's also about the device's ability to get data into and shuttling it around that creates potential issues.

#6 With cartridges being used, and no hard drive support (that even Wii U had... fun fact: I'm using my PS4 harddrive for my Wii U), that it will be very hard to put things like the new CoD which also has options for the remaster and runs about 88 GB's. Pretty hard to put that on a Switch with a MicroSD card limit of 128GB's. (even if they up it to 256, that would take up a huge amount). What about future DLC? So digitally it wouldn't be a good situation. As for physical, wouldn't they then need two 64GB cartridges? That's added cost. Who pays for it? This is for a Call of Duty game in 2016, what about the games a couple years from now? File sizes aren't getting smaller.

Devs have to navigate all these hurdles (and maybe more) on a device that is starting with 0 install base, a decent portion of the Switch users will already have or plan to get a PC/XB1/PS4/Pro/Scorpio. So a 3rd party port, with these additional hurdles and COST to overcome them, will not yield that many sales for what amounts to the 6th/7th best version of their games. (6th=Docked mode, 7th=on the go). All on a device that is likely to sell for $299-399, which makes it as or more expensive then PS4, XB1S, and PS4 Pro.

I would also like to say that if they need to use separate assets, like say two sets of textures (one for when docked, and one for 'on the go'), that means it will take more memory. So if one argument is... well instead of using high textures it'll use medium, well that will save some memory. But if you need to put in low and medium textures, then that decrease really won't be there. So 2.5-3 GB's is a concern.

Nintendo's device looks to have issues that could once again drive away 3rd party support beyond simply raw power (which is an issue too).

Evolving doesn't mean much when you are too low to begin with. If the system is always outmatched in these ways, it will be a device consistently too quirky to support with AAA 3rd party devs. Say in 2021 they get a Switch Two revision to 2 TFlops, whereas the base case for Call of Duty then might be PS4 Pro/Scorpio while PS5/XB2 are out, and Switch Two is still outside of everything.

January hasn't arrived and we still getting news

So the chipset should be capable of 1.5tflops, but due to battery limitation they'll downclock to achieve 1tflop which will be capable of xb1 caliber games at 720p resolution. So in theory, they could remove the downclocking when its docked to achieve the 1080p most people are worried about today. Correct?

I love how people are grasping at straws saying the ns is a console when much of what they showed was on the go, main processing power is in the HANDHELD.

Nintendo philosophy: sell over priced, underpowered tech, purely off nostalgia.

Im getting one but to think the ns will play current gen games on the go is laughable at best.

The ns will be good for playing next gen HANDHELD nintendo games. Which is great. Why cant that be good enough? Nintendo has already stated they arent in competition with other 7th gen consoles. So what makes people think it would run current gen games?

Nintendo games are not really graphic intensive... Here's hoping for 1080p/ 60fps for and 720p/ 60fps for the tablet and at least 5-8 hours of battery life.

The Nintendo Switch will be more powerful than people think. I own a Shield Portable and a Jxd Singularity S192 which both featute Nvidias Tegra 4 and K1 Processors, and punch well above their weight class!

Different architecture means console ports will prob not happen. Then again it means a lot of android ports. Would help grow the tablet market since these chips are popular in gaming tablets already. It's basically a Shield tablet with Nintendo ip's (which isn't a bad thing the shield tablet rocks). I'm in if it costs 250 or less, any more and il wait and see. Been burned by the New 3ds, WiiU, and the Wii. Fool me twice and all that.

Wish we could get killer x86 mobile chips for a steam portable. A 8 inch tablet with slide in controllers like this powerful enough for all games on medium settings would be a dream. Until then this is something. It really makes me want a pc handheld though.

Tell me again how the multiplatform strategy was supposed to fix everything. Look at your results and compare them to Nintendo, which keeps thriving with exclusives. Your loyal fans are gone. And let’s not forget the pile of IPs you purchased only to let them rot.

The worst thing is this is down from last years numbers/expectations which was down from the previous years numbers/expectations. You think about how long “down” has been a consistent part of the communication and you realize those subscriptions are what’s holding that boat together. The price cut of gamespass is still a price raise in a string of price raises. They are trying to use players to offset the missing revenue. Now call of duty is out of gamespass, which is literally WHY they bought the company. To draw people to the subscription. They realized they missed a boatload of money and that wasn’t sustainable. Now you pay for it like you would have if they never bought the company… so why buy the company? Mind you those billions still need to be paid back. Yeah it gives you a chance to say we make the biggest FPS… but the internal conversations must be brutal at high level on topics that really matter. Like revenue. Profitability. And ROI for the shopping spree.

Is this like the 10th quarter in a row they're down 33% on hardware how is that even mathematically possible. You would think their mediocrity would Plateau