CrimsonCavalier
Fuzzy Pickles
"Source" claims Switch considerably less powerful than PS4, uses different architecture. Now as you know, I'm the King of "If Nintendo Didn't Say It, I Don't Believe It." But assuming this is true, then we're back to square one.
Now, I'll be the first to admit I'm not a programer, and I know very little of how the hardware directly relates into software development, but I do know that the Switch is using Nvidia, instead of AMD (like the XBO and PS4 use) processors, which set it apart already. I know that the latest AMD processors are better than the latest Nvidia ones. I know that Nvidia had been falling behind in the processor arms race between themselves, AMD and Intel.
I also know that architecture means just as much—if not more—as actual processing power when it comes to making ports between consoles work. The game may end up being able to load faster or have better visuals on a more powerful console, but as long as the architecture is the same, the game will run fine. However, when architectures are different, that is when porting becomes an issue. Nintendo has been stubborn, and has been the only company still using PowerPC (The Wii U used this, while the XBO and PS4 moved on to x86).
Again, I admit I don't know much about this, but if the architecture they're using is old from the start, then how successfully ports are brought to the Switch could be something we need to be concerned about.
I've said this many times: I don't care if the Switch is more powerful than the PS4 Pro or weaker than the base XBO, as long as it's in the ball-park. As long as it's competitive.
Anyways, let's see how this pans out.
Now, I'll be the first to admit I'm not a programer, and I know very little of how the hardware directly relates into software development, but I do know that the Switch is using Nvidia, instead of AMD (like the XBO and PS4 use) processors, which set it apart already. I know that the latest AMD processors are better than the latest Nvidia ones. I know that Nvidia had been falling behind in the processor arms race between themselves, AMD and Intel.
I also know that architecture means just as much—if not more—as actual processing power when it comes to making ports between consoles work. The game may end up being able to load faster or have better visuals on a more powerful console, but as long as the architecture is the same, the game will run fine. However, when architectures are different, that is when porting becomes an issue. Nintendo has been stubborn, and has been the only company still using PowerPC (The Wii U used this, while the XBO and PS4 moved on to x86).
Again, I admit I don't know much about this, but if the architecture they're using is old from the start, then how successfully ports are brought to the Switch could be something we need to be concerned about.
I've said this many times: I don't care if the Switch is more powerful than the PS4 Pro or weaker than the base XBO, as long as it's in the ball-park. As long as it's competitive.
Anyways, let's see how this pans out.