Nintendo has yet to confirm the exact specifications of what powers the Nintendo Switch. However, according to IGN, the upcoming console is comparable to how Wii was when stacked against its direct competitors at the time – PlayStation 3 and Xbox 360. Similarly, the Switch is apparently far behind PlayStation 4 and Xbox One in terms of power. An excerpt regarding this topic is as follows:
“At the time of this writing, Nintendo has not officially confirmed the exact specifications of the Nvidia Tegra-based chipset that powers the Switch. That said, it’s fairly clear that the Switch is almost as far behind the power curve of its competitors as the original Wii was when it first came out. For example, Breath of the Wild, which was developed simultaneously on the Wii U, seldom quite makes it all the way to 30 frames per second in TV mode, and it even dips far south of that when lots of particles or physics objects are on screen at once. That it suffers from these performance issues despite a lack of anti-aliasing does not bode well for the system’s long-term capabilities – or its prospects for landing ports of big-budget AAA games.
“The limitations of the cartridge-based media may be compounding this issue. Even the massive, sprawling world of Breath of the Wild is housed in a tiny 13.4GB file, and on a big, 1080p screen, it becomes fairly obvious that many of the textures have been heavily compressed. We can’t be certain if that’s a consequence of larger game cards being more expensive for Nintendo to manufacture or of limited video RAM on the Switch, but regardless of the cause the symptoms are noticeable. The art style hides it well in Zelda’s case, but this may be a concern going forward, especially for potential multi-platform ports.”
That’s a seriously shitty way of measuring a console’s power. But hey, this is IGN. If you want people who actually know what they are talking about look up Digital Foundry, now that’s people who don’t go around screaming like monkeys at shiny pieces of software they can’t understand.
you can spell ignorant without IGN
No you can’t!
IGN has always been over critical and known for their low scores given to good games.
They do make a good Nintendo podcast though.
And yet they gave Sonic Free Riders a 7.5 even though that Kinect game was awful mostly because the controls didn’t work.
I don’t care. I just want games.
If BotW was made specifically for the Switch from the start, I have NO doubt it would be able to handle a solid 1080p 60fps.
This is little more than IGN being huge downers when it comes to anything Nintendo.
It’s always best to just IGNore them, honestly.
The biggest problem was not putting Jose Otero (basically head of IGN’s Nintendo division) in charge of the review. Vince may more regularly participate in the tech sector, resulting in him being chosen for a review of new hardware, but Jose has probably spent the most time of anyone on staff with the Switch. His amount of Switch experience may have resulted in a better-structured review.
I’ve pointed out before that the “too much water” fiasco blown out of context, but I can say with full confidence that this review IS everything people assumed that Pokémon review to be. Vince’s opinion here is one that can be held (“An Outsider’s Opinion” editorial), but it shouldn’t be the representative take of an entire major website.
I agree. I don’t think Vince should’ve ever been chosen to review the Switch. He appears often in ign videos and podcasts. He’s a big Sony fan and I’ve seen him take shots at Nintendo more than once.
I’m not saying it’s impossible for him to be impartial and give a fair, honest review; but based on the behavior I’ve observed, I wouldn’t be willing to accept his word up front.
They had to make it at 900p 30fps so they can release a HD remaster at 1080p 60fps for their nextgen console lol
If Nintendo can’t port their own fucking games, what the hell were all of you doing calling 3rd parties “Lazy?”
classic ign
Um, the rumors clearly state around 4GBof RAM in the Switch while PS4/XBO have 8…
That’s not rumor, that’s fact. But the Switch allows for up to 3.25gb for games and 3 of its 4 cores for games. It’s just under the Xbox One technically speaking but significantly more powerful than the Wii U…
Yup, exactly.
That’s just sad. There’s nothing great about that at all. Xbox one is last gen. You guys really think a console deserves a spot in next gen if it can’t outperform previous ones?
Considering it’s a handheld
Well, the Wii console was pretty good, but it can be competitive like the 3DS. Besides, I wanna see how Project Scorpio be completed with Nintendo Switch.
Nope Wii was thrashy thrash. Just an overclocked Gamecube.
they are trying so hard to prove themselves.
This was my biggest issue with Vince’s review. This was not the only thing he seemed to pull out of nowhere/reframe in it, but it’s the most glaring. He has no tangible proof to back up that claim, and if he’s just assuming that to be the case then his assumption is doing serious damage to the Switch’s PR presence.
A couple other points while we’re here:
– He claimed a lack of a native ethernet point results in the “con” of “having to” use a 802.11 AC Wifi connection. Note that said connection is the fastest and most reliable wireless protocol currently available, so lack of parity with an ethernet connection shouldn’t be an issue with Switch.
– Note that the average of 3-6 hours is just about the same range we got with 3DS XL/2DS (New went to 7). It’s the same battery life with significantly more powerful hardware. That is no small feat.
*port
Well for me it looks gorgeous like seriously I’ve seen the splatoon 2 gameplay and it looks really really vivid and in high frame rate, it moves very smooth. I have a ps4 and to be honest I haven played any game that looks like that and I have played uncharted 4 which looks cool, mortal combat x and some others I can’t remember their names.
I don’t think it’s an accurate comparison honestly the Wii had horrible graphics compared to ps3 and Xbox. The switch will have games that look great. It’s stronger than the wiiu and that was capable of handling Xenoblade Chronicles x which looks amazing imo. It’s underpowered that’s for sure but not to that extent
That’s it. Wii was 20x less powerful than an x360. The Switch is less than 3x less powerful than an XB1.
They are out of touch. They are an unreliable source of data.
I don’t follow IGN from like 15 years so it’s a problem that I don’t get.
There are many good source of information: Eurogamer/Digital Foundry, Nintendo Life, etc.
You really need good sources for your information, in every aspect of your life, not just videogames.
They should put that in the review by-line. “Switch is comparable to Wii in terms of raw power”
Think of all the hate-clicks!
stop, the full power of the system hasn’t been revealed yet.
its a standard x1, no its not. just added 25% more power to the handheld.
it can run ue4 without any issues.
wheres matt and bozon at least they had half a brain!!
Zelda is a port, its nintendos fault for not making it 1080p and including hd rumble. then they could shut all the haters up!!
there was talk of it being 90% of xbox1, nobody mentioned it
don’t need a lot of ram bc of cartridges, cartidges r expandable when needed!!!
That doesn’t make a lick of sense. It’s a bold, and undoubtably incorrect, claim.
IGN is fake news.
~Peach
All the comments on IGN are attacking on Switch..the switch is fucked for good now on IGN site
Meh, the comment section section on ign is nothing but trolls and haters. They are as filthy casual as filthy casuals can be… All they play as Call of Duty and Battlefield and such and are about as out of touch with real gaming as the people who voted a reality tv celebrity for president …. 😋
now it’s the opposite. people are attacking ign.
Funny enough, IGN post stuff from Digital Foundry… doesnt bother to look at their review… then again a reviewer looking at a review lol
My advice for most people, go read through the Digital Foundry Review.
It was never going to survive there. That place is infested with Sony fanboys, and it just keeps gettimg worst.
Its a hell of place to have fun though lol.
That place is worse than YouTube and that is no small feat
Ign used to be a pretty decent site way back when I was knee high to a grasshopper ….
So, I’m confused. I just watched a Zelda review, and IGN was very positive about it.
So they can’t be all bad yeah?
They are bad because they are unreliable. How can you compare the Switch to a Wii? It’s just a lie. You do remember that a Wii was just a GameCube overclocked, right?
Reliability is important, I agree with you there!
I’m not siding with IGN, but to play devil’s advocate, I understand what they were saying. They were not saying the Switch is like the Wii in a literal sense, it was meant to be a way to measure the difference between two consoles.
Everyone can remember being left in the dust with Standard definition if you owned a Wii compared to a next gen console. So they are comparing the Switch, coming in Just at minimally acceptable HD resolutions, and comparing that to 4K HD gaming. It’s a big difference from a technical stand point.
From a practical standpoint, I think their argument loses it’s legs. No matter how you crunch the numbers, the “Jaggies” you’d see playing wii games on an HD TV were annoying as Hell. At least with Switch, (and even WiiU for that matter, which has the same resolution) you at LEAST were gaming in HD, and you were more missing realistic textures, shadow & particle effects… things that if a game is fun enough, you can live without for the most part. – In that regard, I don’t think people will be as frustrated with the Switch resolution as we were with the Wii resolution.
So Devil’s advocacy aside, I think IGN’s assessment doesn’t really mean as much as they think it does.
It’s a miserable difference. SD content was horrible on LCD, Wii was 20x less powerful. Switch is 3x less powerful and max out 90% of televisions. Also 4k is bullshit on 40″ TVs.
That comparison made completely no sense. Switch runs on the same development tools. Wii didn’t. Etc.
Wii was just bad looking. Switch games are really pretty.
Yeah, I think 4K is way over rated. I don’t even know if I could tell the difference. Developers are going to be forced into putting effort into gameplay and making games fun instead of just bumping up resolution. I’d rather have a fun, beautiful game at 1080p than a mediocre game at 4K.
I can’t (tell the difference) if not close up. It does even seems that Nintendo isn’t pushing anti-aliasing requirements so developers can squeeze all the power they can from the console. They can port almost any game. It just can’t be that defined (with shaders, textures, etc.).
Eventually portability would be more important than max definition at some point. Wii, PS2 and PSOne did win those wars… it’s about ‘cutting through’ more than definition. Though I’m very picky on aesthetics, so if the Switch was just rubbish I wouldn’t have considered (like I did with the 3DS). Every hardware out there for me isn’t enough, and actual top graphics doesn’t look real, just plasticky. At least Switch is very well drawn plastic (high artistic sense).
I was referring to the ppl in the comments section. As Phazoonn mentioned it’s about as bad if not worse than youtube’s comment section. Can’t speak for the guys at ign as I stopped visiting quite a long time ago.
I don’t understand how people can complain about the switch lack of power. Yes it’s behind it’s competitors. But it’s a HANDHELD. It’s amazing it can output what it does for being so portable.
It’s not a handheld though. It’s a hybrid home console that you can take on the go. A handheld usually means a scaled back and smaller experience. Not your full fledged console game which is what the Switch does offer on the go.
And IGN once again shows how irrelevant it really is these days…
The fact that he’s blaming the cartridges for “lower quality graphics” proves he doesn’t know what he’s talking about
Actually, that statement holds weight. A small cartridge can only hold so much, so the need for compression is a must if its going to fit on a small cart.
Nintendo are kings when it comes to compression, but only so much can be done before loss of quality starts to show. The reason why PS4 and XBO games are so big is because of that reason, they arent compressed. So a 40GB game doesnt lose quality and its texture remain untouched. A bigger cart wouldve ment less compression.
Vince is one of the smarter people at IGN, but that reason alone is the reason why he SHOULDNT have reviewed the switch. Hes to technical, hes always looking at raw power and how its used. Hes even stated in the past that his biggest pet peeve on games is framerate, and hes tougher on games that dont have locked frames. We all knew from the getgo that the switch wasnt goin to be a beast of a machine, so comparing it to the other twins shouldnt have been a thing in the first place.
AGREED! Furthermore IGN are a bunch of graphic whores anyway. They’ll play & love a sequel to 2006’s voted worst game of the year Conan the Barbarian if it gets that 4K make over. Screw Gameplay!! Lol
& for the record. I still don’t see the huge leap in graphical power from last gen (PS3 Xbox 360 etc..) to now. There’s a difference but it’s not what everyone makes it out to be. Now we’re taking another step with the PS4 Pro to this monster called The Scorpio? …..sigh.
With all these so called massive graphic upgrades I hope some developers remember to give us GREAT GAMEPLAY! Lol
Speaking of graphic whores, kinda reminds me of Nintendo fans wanting the Switch version of Zelda just for a small bump in graphics, and not giving two shits that Nintendo castrated the gameplay.
I see how it is. Hypocrites. Almost all Nintendo fans will blindly follow, even when it controdicts exactly what Nintendo and Zelda stand for.
Well I’m not blind, and I see how things are.
These cartridges can fit those big sizes though. And he specifically used Breath of the Wild as an example and they’re the same file size on Wii U and Switch.
I know bigger ones can, but last we heard, these cartridges are only 16GB, take away about 2GB after formatting, and that only leaves you with about 14GB on that card. BotW is 13.4GB so compression was a must. And like I previously said, you can only compress so much before it becomes noticeable.
Of course they can always used a bigger cart, but but manufacturing millions of bigger carts is going to eat into their profit, which is probably why theyre only offering 16GB carts right now.
I have to take time tomorrow to read the full review. Judging from this excerpt though, it sounds like he made quite a few assumptions and overlooked some details. The second paragraph in particular makes it seem like he didn’t consider the situation surrounding BotW.
BotW was built for the Wii U and was ported to Switch. The file size difference between the two versions is only 0.4 GB. The size of BotW isn’t a result of Nintendo compressing the game to fit it on Switch media. It’s a result of the game being a Wii U title that simply wasn’t greatly changed for a Switch release. If the game was compressed, than it’s likely that it was compressed for the sake of the Wii U, rather than for the Switch. As far as I know, no information has been released concerning the size of Switch game cards. I think it’s a mistake to assume that the Switch cards may have some significant limitations just yet.
If I remember correctly, the standard capacity, at least at launch, is supposedly 16GB. By comparison, Blu-ray disks are about 25GB per layer. Supposedly however, I recall a statement claiming that there will also be other capacities available to developers, but I cannot recall reading about what those other capacities may be. The class 3 MicroSDXC card I picked up to expand the storage is 128GB, and is physically smaller than the Switch game cartridges are, so I do not think that the physical size of the cartridge is really a limiting factor as I have seen other comments suggest.
Ok I hadn’t heard that. If that’s the case I suspect there will be multiple game card sizes similar to how the 3DS had 1GB, 2GB, and 4GB cards. After all, Dragon Quest Heroes 1&2 has been revealed to be about 32GB. If Nintendo is going to have games that big on the system, they need to be able to offer a physical storage medium that can hold that much data.
I think the like/dislike ratio on the video speaks for itself. The reviewer was an idiot.
I’m so glad BotW also launches for WiiU, that way I can test the waters, altough I can see how the switch won’t recieve much AAA ports at this point, we’ll see
Inaccurate. It’s probably near 75% the power of Xbox One. However, The Switch is Nintendo’s next gen offering which people seem to forget. It’s not supposed to compare to X1 or Ps4. It’s supposed to compare to Xbox Scorpio and PS4 Pro. When compared to those though it’s pretty far behind. The Scorpio will have something like 12x the power of the Switch and probably cost close to the same. Im going to get a Switch but if you can only afford 1 console I would wait for PS4 PRO and pick up BOTW for WiiU.
Zelda…tomorrow bitches.
who are you and what have you done with Fred?
The PS4 Pro and XBox Scorpio are nothing more than upgrades to the current consoles, much like the DSi was to the DS and the New 3DS was to the 3DS. They’re being upgraded in their quest to push 4K and VR gaming. Other than that, they’re the same bloody experience. They’re not considered next-gen consoles, just like nobody is calling the Switch a 9th generation console.
I would pick up a gaming PC then play Zelda on cemu which most likely outperforms even the switch version on the emulator.
The switch is around 30% of the Xbox one Power and that’s when it’s docked as it’s much less than 30% when mobile mode period……….
NINTENDO SWITCH WILL NEVER GET FULL CURRENT GEN AAA GAMES PORTS AS ITS NOT POWERFUL ENOUGH TO SUPPORT THEM PERIOD……
The TEGRA X1 chip inside the Switch has a maximum processing power of 512 gflops in 32 bit operations and that’s running at its maximum CPU & GPU clocks and unfortunately even when DOCKED THE SWITCH DOESNT RUN ANYWHERE NEAR MAX CLOCKS which means on average when docked the Switch will be well below the 512 gflops and for comparison Xbox one has 1300 gflops (1.3 tflops) so the SWITCH WHEN DOCKED IS AROUND 30% the power of an Xbox one ALSO FOR COMPARISON THE WII U has 352gflops so the SWITCH WHEN DOCKED IS BARELY MORE POWERFUL THAN A WII U and then the real kicker is that when used as a handheld in mobile mode the Switch runs only 40% the power of Docked mode which is only 200gflops and that’s if we’re using the maximum power of the TEGRA X1 512 gflops running max clocks while we know the switch doesn’t run anywhere near max clocks so yea guys I’m not sure who the fanboys think they’re fooling but SWITCH IS WOEFULLY UNDERPOWERED lol also for comparison again
THE GALAXY S7 has 498gflops of power which is more than the SWITCH WILL HAVE EVEN WHEN DOCKED and The of course the IPHONE 7 has around 670gflops so yea THE SWITCH IS LESS POWERFUL THAN INDUSTRY LEADING SMARTPHONES N YET NINTENDO IS TRYING TO FOOL PEOPLE WITH THIS 3rd party support lmao
Yea it has two 3rd party games which would be considered major AAA ports, however both Skyrim and FIFA are based on last gen xbox 360 ports and they’re even downscaled a little bit at that lol
THIS IS WHY SWITCH ISNT GETTING
TITAN FALL 2
Mass effect andromeda
Battlefield 1
Call of duty
Witcher
Fallout 4
Rise of the Tomb Raider
Resident Evil 7
Final Fantasy 15
Etc………..
Switch will never have any of those games as it’s simply not powerful enough to support them and it’s NOT THAT I AM A HATER OK I WANTED NINTENDO TO SUCCEED I WANTED THEM TO BRING A AWESOME CAPABLE N POWERFUL CONSOLE THAT BLEW THE DOORS OFF THE COMPETITION OR AT THE VERY LEAST BRING A CONSOLE THAT WAS AS CAPABLE OR AT LEAST AS POWERFUL AS THE XBOX ONE & PS4 and considering those are 4 year old consoles which launched in 2013 THIS SHOULD HAVE BEEN A GIVEN THE NEW NINTENDO WOULD HAVE BEEN ABLE TO MATCH THOSE SYSTEMS BUT UNFORTUNATELY WE GOT SMARTPHONE LEVEL POWER THATS GONNA BE EXTREMELY DIFFICULT TO EVER RECEIVE ANY REAL 3rd party AAA current gen games ports as it’s not gonna happen this is why developers such as respawn are laughing CAUSE LETS BE HONEST WITH OURSELVES GUYS IT FEELS LIKE THE NINTENDO SWITCH IS A BAD JOKE AS ITS 2017 this is sad and very pathetic
There is nothing wrong with Jose.. I’ve watched him speak, and he is obviously a Nintendo fan, but he is not afraid to speak out the faults he sees.. I pre-ordered the fucking thing, and I am even sceptical of it. I know I’m paying for a tablet that is not even close as powerful as a ps4, with half ass battery life, and gimmicky portability capabilities that include mini controllers.. This thing will never please your eyes like a 4k ps4 game will, so just get it for a better reason than that.
1. Many of his complaints were crap, such as him complaining you can’t lay it sideways.
2. Did you seriously like your own comment?
Liking my own comment was an accident, so it it’s there I guess I did :/ who gives a fuck? I do in fact have a v10, everything I touch has been off since i began using it.
And judging by the rest of your comment, I highly doubt you preordered it.
I pre-ordered it from gamestop. Supposed to be delivered at my doorstep by friday. You judge wrong, sir.. Or m’am.
Lol
Xbone= 1.2-1.3 TF (AMD)
Switch= 1 TF (nvidia)
Nvidia flops better than AMD flops, CPU is faster than PS4. Everything considered it’s likely little below Xbone in power in a very SMALL form factor, that’s striking to normal thinking humans unlike the individual who did the review
IGN= Can’t spell IGNorant without them.
Nah, we are talking FP32. XB1 is 1300, Switch is 500.
I say enough for an hybrid console, a very good achievement.
I ain’t really been on ign for about 6 years lol they got some reviews right but they so power and graphix based. Shame… They used to be good many years ago and their girls they had were hot lol
That’s a load of Bullz. Xbox 360 and PS3 took pride in Unreal Engine 3. Wii couldn’t even run it.
The Switch runs UE4, much like the PS4 and the XboxOne…. Many games running on those consoles can run on the Switch.
But the statement would be true if you have to compare a Switch to a PS4 pro or Xbox Scorpio
DUDE STOP DRINKING KOOLAID OK JUST BECAUSE NINTENDO SWITCH IS ABLE TO RUN CODE ON UNREAL ENGINE 4 doesn’t mean it’s able to run full fledged unreal engine 4 games alright there’s is a big difference and the reality is it’s NOT POSSIBLE TO GET CURRENT GEN AAA 3rd party ports in their current form as the SWITCH CANT RUN THEM AS DEVS WOULD HAVE TO SCALE BACK THE GAMES WELL INTO LAST GEN FORM AS THE SWITCH IS BARELY ABLE TO HANDLE FULL FLEDGED LAST GEN X360/PS3 ports…….
THE NINTENDO SWITCH WILL NEVER GET FULL CURRENT GEN AAA GAMES PORTS AS ITS NOT POWERFUL ENOUGH TO SUPPORT THEM PERIOD……
The TEGRA X1 chip inside the Switch has a maximum processing power of 512 gflops in 32 bit operations and that’s running at its maximum CPU & GPU clocks and unfortunately even when DOCKED THE SWITCH DOESNT RUN ANYWHERE NEAR MAX CLOCKS which means on average when docked the Switch will be well below the 512 gflops and for comparison Xbox one has 1300 gflops (1.3 tflops) so the SWITCH WHEN DOCKED IS AROUND 30% the power of an Xbox one ALSO FOR COMPARISON THE WII U has 352gflops so the SWITCH WHEN DOCKED IS BARELY MORE POWERFUL THAN A WII U and then the real kicker is that when used as a handheld in mobile mode the Switch runs only 40% the power of Docked mode which is only 200gflops and that’s if we’re using the maximum power of the TEGRA X1 512 gflops running max clocks while we know the switch doesn’t run anywhere near max clocks so yea guys I’m not sure who the fanboys think they’re fooling but SWITCH IS WOEFULLY UNDERPOWERED lol also for comparison again
THE GALAXY S7 has 498gflops of power which is more than the SWITCH WILL HAVE EVEN WHEN DOCKED and The of course the IPHONE 7 has around 670gflops so yea THE SWITCH IS LESS POWERFUL THAN INDUSTRY LEADING SMARTPHONES N YET NINTENDO IS TRYING TO FOOL PEOPLE WITH THIS 3rd party support lmao
Yea it has two 3rd party games which would be considered major AAA ports, however both Skyrim and FIFA are based on last gen xbox 360 ports and they’re even downscaled a little bit at that lol
THIS IS WHY SWITCH ISNT GETTING
TITAN FALL 2
Mass effect andromeda
Battlefield 1
Call of duty
Witcher
Fallout 4
Rise of the Tomb Raider
Resident Evil 7
Final Fantasy 15
Etc………..
Switch will never have any of those games as it’s simply not powerful enough to support them and it’s NOT THAT I AM A HATER OK I WANTED NINTENDO TO SUCCEED I WANTED THEM TO BRING A AWESOME CAPABLE N POWERFUL CONSOLE THAT BLEW THE DOORS OFF THE COMPETITION OR AT THE VERY LEAST BRING A CONSOLE THAT WAS AS CAPABLE OR AT LEAST AS POWERFUL AS THE XBOX ONE & PS4 and considering those are 4 year old consoles which launched in 2013 THIS SHOULD HAVE BEEN A GIVEN THE NEW NINTENDO WOULD HAVE BEEN ABLE TO MATCH THOSE SYSTEMS BUT UNFORTUNATELY WE GOT SMARTPHONE LEVEL POWER THATS GONNA BE EXTREMELY DIFFICULT TO EVER RECEIVE ANY REAL 3rd party AAA current gen games ports as it’s not gonna happen this is why developers such as respawn are laughing CAUSE LETS BE HONEST WITH OURSELVES GUYS IT FEELS LIKE THE NINTENDO SWITCH IS A BAD JOKE AS ITS 2017 this is sad and very pathetic
I call complete rubbish on this article, saying the Switch is just as behind the PS4/XB1 as the Wii was behind the PS3/XB360. If you look at pure GFLOPS count, the Switch is pushing somewhere in the ballpark of 1/2 to 3/4 the power of the XB1, taking into account the custom Tegra, and how FP32 and FP16 are utilized. The Wii, on the other hand, was pushing probably 1/16 the GFLOPS that the XB360 was. Even the Wii U is out-powering the XBox 360 but pushing about 1/4 the power of the XBOne and 1/5 the power of the PS4.
Now look at the CPU side of Wii vs. XB360: The Wii had 1/3 the cores and had under 1/4 the MHz rating. The Wii U, less than half the cores of PS4/XB1 on an antiquated version of PowerPC, so that makes MHz clock rates moot, and performance even worse. Switch, on the other hand, is pushing a quad-core vs. 8 core and a much more modern architecture than its predecessor. Modern ARM-based CPU’s (of which powers Tegra) are catching up to x86 in the performance arena. The Jaguar cores powering the XB1/PS4 are little more than low-power budget notebook CPUs, competitive with a high-end Intel Atom or low-end Celeron. The only thing special about the XB1/PS4 CPUs is the fact that they’re 8-core setups rather than the stock quad, and that really only improves multi-processing capabilities. The speculated ARM Cortex-A57’s in a stock Tegra X1, clock-for-clock, are pushing very close to what the low-power x86 CPUs are pushing. So I give Switch roughly half the CPU power (assuming Foxconn’s November leak to be true, and closer to final production specs) of PS4/XB1.
Again, the Switch is pushing a total of about 1/2-3/4 the power of an XBox One, and it’s doing it at roughly 1/8 the wattage. That in itself is a hell of an achievement, and a testament to how well modern mobile technology is coming along. So saying the Switch is as far behind the curve as the Wii was is complete and total rubbish. It’s not even as far behind the curve as the Wii U is.
Shite IGN once again:
1) The frame rate drops might not have to do with the system itself, but to do with the streaming of the game onto the TV. This could likely be fixed with a Day One patch.
2) Textures are compressed? Seriously? IT’S AN ARTISTIC GAME NOT REALISTIC IGN
Wii did quite well for itself being underpowered. Why should this effect Switch? People apparently aren’t that obsessed with power.
*Looks at the Wii U sales*
Oh really now?
Again, I call rubbish on this article when looking at the game media being used. Yes, dual-layer BD-ROMs can hold up to 50GB while the “current” largest Switch Game Cards hold up to 32GB (nothing says 64GB won’t happen in the future). However, calling game cards slow compared to optical media is completely ignorant and baseless. Cartridge-based media has always been faster than contemporary optical media, which is one reason the Nintendo 64 used faster cartridges vs. the slow CD-ROMs that Sega Saturn and PS1 used, despite having 1/10 the capacity.
The Playstation 4 runs a 6x BD-ROM drive (XB1 probably has something similar), which pushes 27MB/s read transfer rate, far slower than the hard disk drive the system runs (likely in the 80-100MB/s range). Why do you think PS4 and XB1 games install to their internal hard drives?
Now flash-based MicroSD cards can run a good 80-90MB/s read transfer rate if you’re looking at a decent SanDisk or Samsung card. That puts it right up there with the laptop-grade internal hard disk drives of the XB1 and PS4. And I can guarantee you that the ROM-based Switch game cards are going to be faster than the flash memory found in MicroSD cards. If that isn’t enough, the internal memory of the Switch (rumored at 400MB/s) is also going to be far faster than any hard disk drive.
So yeah, “The limitations of cartridge-based media…” is just ignorant and wrong.
I don’t get all the hate. When a publication, that covers all console, isn’t praising something to the sky, then they’re automatically trolls & haters. When they always easily give every game a 9/10 and above, they can’t be taken serious. I guess ppl will always complain, especially on the internet.
It’s true that taking a port of a game to measuer that system’s performance is a pretty stupid thing to do, but the bottom line still is, that the Switch will have to be measuered by its software and the formfactor, not its specs. And if you take a look at the specs though, you just won’t be very happy.
For me, the system’s obviously capable of delivering beauty and that’s enough for me.
And I actually am a graphic whore. Playing through Uncharted 4 was really a constant jawdropper, but I still wouldn’t take that in exchange for an experience like Zelda, that is just so much more interactive and fun. Still it might always be about those two things, either you’re going for AAA-visuals, or for AAA gameplay.
They aren’t fair nor reliable. That’s the point.
No one here is saying that the Switch is perfect, but they should say the right things, not stupid comparisons like ‘Switch -> Wii’ or ‘Zelda has bad textures because of cartridges’. Those are certainly wrong assumptions.
I liked the rest of your opinion. Certainly graphics does count and the Switch delivers. Not obviously like a 100 watt machine, but Mario Kart 8 is still very good looking, like Mario Odissey, etc.
The Switch is a very powerful handheld console no doubt. However, it does appear to be a relatively weak home console. It is a hybrid so I expected it to be weaker than xb1 or ps4 but power does matter to gamers and developers so I guess we will have to wait and see. Personally I would have loved for the system to have the X2 instead of the older X1 but that would have bumped the price up even more which depending on how you look at things it may not be worth it. So far I do put it somewhere along the lines of Wii to ps3/xbox360 parity in terms of power but Nintendo has already stated a long time ago that they aren’t gong head to head with them in the power department anymore. Scorpio will run circles around the Switch when it comes to power but that isn’t that big of a deal unless the Switch will miss out on a lot of ports and 3rd party games which absolutely matters. Hopefully Nintendo will keep investing in the marketing department as it is doing a bang up job so far to make the console look quite appealing to the masses and gamers alike. For the as Switch to do well it needs good quality games and the console needs to sell well to get them. I am getting the Switch in a couple of months and so far I am still hyped for it and already have my eyes on quite a few games being released this year.
X2 isn’t out yet and the system was already in its definitive form last July. It can be something in between eventually, but judging by its low battery score I would not bet it. Probably still an X1. An X1 capable of running UE4. It’s good.
Simply ludicrous.
1.) Breath of the Wild is a launch game that was originally built for Wii U.
2.) It’s an open-world game with a full physics system, dynamic weather, temperature, and advanced A.I. It’s a miracle it even runs on Wii U.
3.) It’s 720p/900p and 30 fps. That basically the standard resolution and framerate for open world games on Xbox One (which is more powerful, remember).
4.) IGN clearly has no clue how hardware development works. Simply cramming in powerful components isn’t enough to get a game to run smoothly – it’s all about optimisation, and smart use of programming.
The Wii U had games like Mario 3D World, Bayonetta 2, and Mario Kart 8 that ran at 60fps, whilst games like Smash Bros and Fast Racing NEO were 1080p on top of that. Yet, there were many PS4 games that only ran at 30fps, like Ratchet & Clank (despite being 60 fps on PS2), Uncharted 4 (even though Naughty Dog said 60 fps was the future), Bloodborne and The Order: 1886.
5.) I can’t believe people still obsess over console specs. If power is that important, go and play on PC. Is power important? Of course. However, most critics are misinformed with their opinions regarding game development – not to mention the business-side of the gaming industry. Their are an innumerable amount of reasons why Nintendo does what it does, and the company has had 35 successful years in gaming – they know what they’re doing. As long as their games are fun, smooth and pretty to look at, then that’s all that matters. I mean, Switch is a bloody tablet that runs Zelda, Xenoblade 2 and Mario Odyssey!
Third parties are a more complicated situation, admittedly, but it seems they’re making the right moves so far, with Unreal 4 and Unity. IMHO, the indies are the third parties of the future – and Nintendo should focus on accommodating them. Triple A publishers are stagnating – both creatively and financially.
SERIOUSLY BRO STOP DRINKING THE BULLSHIT NINTENDO SWITCH KOOLAID ALRIGHT THE FACT IT CAN RUN UNREAL ENGINE 4 DOESNT MEAN ANYTHING OK IT JUST MEANS THE ARCHITECTURE OF THE SYSTEM HAS THE CAPABILITY TO DEVELOP USING UNREAL ENGINE 4 TOOLS BUT IT DOESNT MEAN THE NINTENDO SWITCH GAMES WILL HAVE THE ABILITY TO PRODUCE GAMES WHICH ARE ABLE TO TAKE ADVANTAGE OF THE GRAPHICAL CAPABILITIES OF THE ENGINE IN ANY SIGNIFICANT MANNER AS ITS ALREADY BEEN CONFIRMED BY NUMEROUS DEVELOPERS THAT THE SWITCH CAN ONLY ACCESS THE TOOLS OF UNREAL ENGINE 4 IN THE SENSE THAT ITS POSSIBLE TO CREATE BASIC GAMES SUCH AS A GAME LIKE 1-2 SWITCH FOR EXAMPLE WITH A VERY LIMITED GRAPHICAL RESOURCES BUT SAID THE SWITCH ABSOLUTELY CANT RUN CURRENT GEN GAME PORTS USING THE ENGINE AS ITS STRUGGLING JUST TO BE ABLE TO RUN THE 5 YEAR OLD XBOX 360 / PS3 version of SKYRIM as the switch version has been downscaled about 20% from the original last gen Xbox 360 port in order to be able to get the game to run on the limited hardware of the SWITCH………
Ok seriously Listen guys I’m not a hater and just like IGN the truth is we all wanted Nintendo to bring something both innovative but also at least capable enough enough in terms of power in order to compete at least enough to receive current gen ports of major AAA 3rd party Games, however unfortunately the reality isn’t what we were expecting as we were all almost positive Nintendo had learned their lesson after the failure of the Wii U but it’s clear not only did they not learn from their mistakes but they seem to have made an even bigger mistake this time around AND SO DONT BLAME IGN OR MYSELF FOR CHOOSING TO TELL YOU THE WAY IT IS AND SPEAK THE TRUTH INSTEAD OF TRYING TO SUGAR COAT THE WOEFULLY UNDERPOWERED NINTENDO SWITCH ok let me explain what I mean and why it is IGN said what they did…….
THE NINTENDO SWITCH WILL NEVER GET FULL CURRENT GEN AAA GAMES PORTS AS ITS NOT POWERFUL ENOUGH TO SUPPORT THEM PERIOD……
The TEGRA X1 chip inside the Switch has a maximum processing power of 512 gflops in 32 bit operations and that’s running at its maximum CPU & GPU clocks and unfortunately even when DOCKED THE SWITCH DOESNT RUN ANYWHERE NEAR MAX CLOCKS which means on average when docked the Switch will be well below the 512 gflops and for comparison Xbox one has 1300 gflops (1.3 tflops) so the SWITCH WHEN DOCKED IS AROUND 30% the power of an Xbox one ALSO FOR COMPARISON THE WII U has 352gflops so the SWITCH WHEN DOCKED IS BARELY MORE POWERFUL THAN A WII U and then the real kicker is that when used as a handheld in mobile mode the Switch runs only 40% the power of Docked mode which is only 200gflops (UPDATE NINTENDO HAVE BOOSTED THE MOBILE POWER BY AROUND 25% WHICH PUTS THE MOBILE MODE POWER AORUND 65% OF DOCKED MODE & SO INSTEAD OF AROUND 200 gflops ITS NOW GONNA BE AROUND 250 gflops WHICH IS STILL VERY LOW and that’s if we’re using the maximum power of the TEGRA X1 512 gflops running max clocks while we know the switch doesn’t run anywhere near max clocks so yea guys I’m not sure who the fanboys think they’re fooling but SWITCH IS WOEFULLY UNDERPOWERED lol also for comparison again
THE GALAXY S7 has 498gflops of power which is more than the SWITCH WILL HAVE EVEN WHEN DOCKED and The of course the IPHONE 7 has around 670gflops so yea THE SWITCH IS LESS POWERFUL THAN INDUSTRY LEADING SMARTPHONES N YET NINTENDO IS TRYING TO FOOL PEOPLE WITH THIS 3rd party support lmao
Yea it has two 3rd party games which would be considered major AAA ports, however both Skyrim and FIFA are based on last gen xbox 360 ports and they’re even downscaled a little bit at that lol
THIS IS WHY SWITCH ISNT GETTING
TITAN FALL 2
Mass effect andromeda
Battlefield 1
Call of duty
Witcher
Fallout 4
Rise of the Tomb Raider
Resident Evil 7
Final Fantasy 15
Etc………..
Switch will never have any of those games as it’s simply not powerful enough to support them and it’s NOT THAT I AM A HATER OK I WANTED NINTENDO TO SUCCEED I WANTED THEM TO BRING A AWESOME CAPABLE N POWERFUL CONSOLE THAT BLEW THE DOORS OFF THE COMPETITION OR AT THE VERY LEAST BRING A CONSOLE THAT WAS AS CAPABLE OR AT LEAST AS POWERFUL AS THE XBOX ONE & PS4 and considering those are 4 year old consoles which launched in 2013 THIS SHOULD HAVE BEEN A GIVEN THE NEW NINTENDO WOULD HAVE BEEN ABLE TO MATCH THOSE SYSTEMS BUT UNFORTUNATELY WE GOT SMARTPHONE LEVEL POWER THATS GONNA BE EXTREMELY DIFFICULT TO EVER RECEIVE ANY REAL 3rd party AAA current gen games ports as it’s not gonna happen this is why developers such as respawn are laughing CAUSE LETS BE HONEST WITH OURSELVES GUYS IT FEELS LIKE THE NINTENDO SWITCH IS A BAD JOKE AS ITS 2017 this is sad and very pathetic
Oh my… the Commander will be furious…
This review is… harsh. Digital Foundry has a full video review of the hardware and isn’t even nearly as pessimistic.
https://youtu.be/g_OjR09FBUI
People are graphics whores, until it’s your only excuse to buy a Nintendo switch, then it’s ok to be a graphics whore and slam the WiiU and anyone who is pissed Nintendo removed gameplay functionality.
Pretty much how I feel right now:
[youtube https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=D_aQupiaCSA&w=560&h=315%5D
http://www.baagames.com/wp-content/uploads/2014/11/toomuchwater1.jpg
Hahahahaha!
at this point, you just learn to live with it.
So Nintendo squeeze an Xbox One into a tablet and that’s still a bad thing? Wow.
Listen guys I’m not a hater and just like IGN the truth is we all wanted Nintendo to bring something both innovative but also at least capable enough enough in terms of power in order to compete at least enough to receive current gen ports of major AAA 3rd party Games, however unfortunately the reality isn’t what we were expecting as we were all almost positive Nintendo had learned their lesson after the failure of the Wii U but it’s clear not only did they not learn from their mistakes but they seem to have made an even bigger mistake this time around AND SO DONT BLAME IGN OR MYSELF FOR CHOOSING TO TELL YOU THE WAY IT IS AND SPEAK THE TRUTH INSTEAD OF TRYING TO SUGAR COAT THE WOEFULLY UNDERPOWERED NINTENDO SWITCH ok let me explain what I mean and why it is IGN said what they did…….
THE NINTENDO SWITCH WILL NEVER GET FULL CURRENT GEN AAA GAMES PORTS AS ITS NOT POWERFUL ENOUGH TO SUPPORT THEM PERIOD……
The TEGRA X1 chip inside the Switch has a maximum processing power of 512 gflops in 32 bit operations and that’s running at its maximum CPU & GPU clocks and unfortunately even when DOCKED THE SWITCH DOESNT RUN ANYWHERE NEAR MAX CLOCKS which means on average when docked the Switch will be well below the 512 gflops and for comparison Xbox one has 1300 gflops (1.3 tflops) so the SWITCH WHEN DOCKED IS AROUND 30% the power of an Xbox one ALSO FOR COMPARISON THE WII U has 352gflops so the SWITCH WHEN DOCKED IS BARELY MORE POWERFUL THAN A WII U and then the real kicker is that when used as a handheld in mobile mode the Switch runs only 40% the power of Docked mode which is only 200gflops (UPDATE NINTENDO HAVE BOOSTED THE MOBILE POWER BY AROUND 25% WHICH PUTS THE MOBILE MODE POWER AORUND 65% OF DOCKED MODE & SO INSTEAD OF AROUND 200 gflops ITS NOW GONNA BE AROUND 250 gflops WHICH IS STILL VERY LOW and that’s if we’re using the maximum power of the TEGRA X1 512 gflops running max clocks while we know the switch doesn’t run anywhere near max clocks so yea guys I’m not sure who the fanboys think they’re fooling but SWITCH IS WOEFULLY UNDERPOWERED lol also for comparison again
THE GALAXY S7 has 498gflops of power which is more than the SWITCH WILL HAVE EVEN WHEN DOCKED and The of course the IPHONE 7 has around 670gflops so yea THE SWITCH IS LESS POWERFUL THAN INDUSTRY LEADING SMARTPHONES N YET NINTENDO IS TRYING TO FOOL PEOPLE WITH THIS 3rd party support lmao
Yea it has two 3rd party games which would be considered major AAA ports, however both Skyrim and FIFA are based on last gen xbox 360 ports and they’re even downscaled a little bit at that lol
THIS IS WHY SWITCH ISNT GETTING
TITAN FALL 2
Mass effect andromeda
Battlefield 1
Call of duty
Witcher
Fallout 4
Rise of the Tomb Raider
Resident Evil 7
Final Fantasy 15
Etc………..
Switch will never have any of those games as it’s simply not powerful enough to support them and it’s NOT THAT I AM A HATER OK I WANTED NINTENDO TO SUCCEED I WANTED THEM TO BRING A AWESOME CAPABLE N POWERFUL CONSOLE THAT BLEW THE DOORS OFF THE COMPETITION OR AT THE VERY LEAST BRING A CONSOLE THAT WAS AS CAPABLE OR AT LEAST AS POWERFUL AS THE XBOX ONE & PS4 and considering those are 4 year old consoles which launched in 2013 THIS SHOULD HAVE BEEN A GIVEN THE NEW NINTENDO WOULD HAVE BEEN ABLE TO MATCH THOSE SYSTEMS BUT UNFORTUNATELY WE GOT SMARTPHONE LEVEL POWER THATS GONNA BE EXTREMELY DIFFICULT TO EVER RECEIVE ANY REAL 3rd party AAA current gen games ports as it’s not gonna happen this is why developers such as respawn are laughing CAUSE LETS BE HONEST WITH OURSELVES GUYS IT FEELS LIKE THE NINTENDO SWITCH IS A BAD JOKE AS ITS 2017 this is sad and very pathetic
I would love to see an iPhone try to run BOTW
iphone 7 or 7 plus would easily run Zelda at full 1080p 30fps with ease as the iPhone 7 is nearly 200 gflops more powerful than a Nintendo Switch as the TEGRA X1 inside switch is a 512 gflops 2015 smartphone / tablet chipset which was great for its time for tablets but in 2016 the A10 fusion chip of the apple iphone 7 or iPad surpassed the TEGRA X1 quite handidly as it’s nearly 35% faster in almost all benchmarks for games……. I ain’t trying to be a hater just stating facts dude okay the Nintendo Switch isn’t even running anywhere near max clocks of the TEGRA X1 even when docked which means it’s not even capable of the full 512 gflops of the TEGRA X1 because that’s the maximum power of the chipset when it’s ran at maximum clock speeds so say what you will bro but all 2016 high end smartphones are on par or slightly more powerful than Switch and then iPhone 7 is about 35% faster and then 2017 high end smartphones running the new snapdragon 835 chipset will be about 25% more powerful than Nintendo Switch and the iPhone 8 launching around October will have nearly 840 gflops of processing power which will be well over 350 gflops more powerful than Switch And that’s a huge margin
This is a measure of Power and Time. Just with those 2 variables, of course the Switch will be behind. Change the variables to something like Innovation and Time, and the tables turn.
Sure the Switch is way less powerful, but look at Xbone for example. If you were to play the original Xbox and compare it to Xbox One, the only differences that you’ll notice are: better graphics and wireless controller.
From what I gather the Switch is a lot weaker than the competition, but BOTW is a poor benchmark as it’s ported from the Wii U