Nintendo's Tegra SoC vs Apple's A10 Fusion SoC

I'm curious about the new Tegra processor built for the Switch. I can't find any information on it. I did remember reading a thread that said it is probably comparable to the current generation of Tegra SoCs, but weaker than the next generation Tegra based on the new Volta architecture. It feels like Nintendo missed out on a unique opportunity to create a partnership with Apple and tie their brand to Apple's hype machine by getting a license to use A10 or maybe even a highly modified, more powerful version. Aside from getting on the Apple hype train, they could have had a console much more powerful than it currently is because let's all just say aloud what we already know, nVidia's SoCs suck and they should stick to desktop graphics, no?

No Volta, that would be too expensive, if anything, the only comparison we can assume is the old Tegra X1 but being updated to run cooler.

We really don't know the actual power of the hardware of the Switch. It's an interesting situation since they increase the clockspeeds when docked.

The only stat you really need to know is the Switch is $300 and a new iPhone 7 is $650.

It's not unbelievable to think the iPhones can outperform the Switch. Also, Apple will never license their hardware out. Nintendo didn't miss an opportunity there because that opportunity will have never presented itself.

That sounds like something they do to prevent the Switch from running too hot to handle or extend the undocked Switch's battery life. iPhone 7 costs only about $200 to make, so the $450 premium goes to fattening their bank accounts and certainly of their employees' bank accounts. I would wager that the Switch is extremely cheap to make, probably in the ballpark of $100, $150.

It's a hypothetical partnership and would have made matters much more interesting than coming out with an underwhelming SoC from nVidia.

*sigh* its not even running at Tegra's fullest potential when docked, still downclocked...according to the leaked specs. :(

switch is slower

Out of curiosity I would love to know how long an iPhone 7 battery charge would last while running a PS4 game.

Find out for me.

Apple means nothing really on console level. It's all AMD / Nvidia there. And that's what nintendo wants to sell. The moment they advertise with apple socs people will scream from the roof tops on how terrible it is of a console. Atleast nvidia gives them a bit of a label of being up to date. It's all about perception.

Also, that A10 fusion will most likely never hit it's max performance also, as it will throttle like all mobile hardware big time the moment heat comes forwards, it's also a reason why they downclock the tegra socket and active cool it in the switch. Also battery life time is a thing.

I dunno exactly what the speed of the new apple socket is. But don't forget the tegra is maxwel. Well known architecture for console game engines, and has a lot of stuff on it that can enchance visuals without having a impact. Also a lot more software development support straight out of the gate for there own teams by using nvidia's workshops that are well known also for engines, that are also well known for 3rd party developers.

Absolute better way to go for nvidia then anything else really.

You have to remember that the iPhone only costs $200 to make because Apple owns very large chunks of manufacturing process. It's their own boards, chips, bodies, and multiple other parts. That drastically reduces the manufacturing costs.

Nintendo doesn't have that luxury.

Apple?? It would be better to go with qualcomm, at least to keep the price down. Apple just now started to make they're own gpu's instead of using powervr, though it's probably just a rip off.

Powervr could also have been an alternative.