All is confirmed the Nintendo Switch is powered by stock Nvidia Tegra X1, same chipset used in Shield TV. The most surprising is the retention of 4 Cortex A53 processor cores, which have no use in the Nintendo switch as they can't be operated at the same time when Cortex A57 cores are running due to the ARM big.little configuration setup.

After subsequent processing of the GPU from the Nintendo Switch, we have determined that the processor is the Nvidia Tegra T210. The T210 CPU features 4 Cortex A57 and 4 Cortex A53 processor cores and the GPU is a GM20B Maxell core.

http://techinsights.com/about-techinsights/overview/blog/nintendo-switch-teardown/

Nvidia Tegra X1 features

• 8 core CPU (4 x Cortex A57 and 4 x Cortex A53)
• GPU is a GM20B Maxell core

A comparison to Shield TV. Switch specs on the left, and Shield TV on the right. The clock speeds are reported from Eurogamer, which are very much true.

• RAM: 4GB vs 3GB
• CPU: 1Ghz vs. 2Ghz
• GPU: 3 modes:307.2Mhz/384Mhz/768Mhz vs 1Ghz

Shield TV is clocked higher initially in both CPU and GPU, but don't forget Shield TV can't keep these clock speeds up for long, it throttles down to the exact switch's dock clockspeeds. Which further supports a stock X1.

 

[Mr. Wizard]

I like how you're picking a fight with someone who should technically be on your side. After several pages of peace it seems a shitstorm was in order.

I wasn't picking a fight with anyone how did you come to that conclusion?

 

[s157]

People focus too much on hardware when it comes to Nintendo. They forget that their strength is in the software. Even so, hardware is not the deciding factor to a console's success, generally speaking.

Ya good luck with that...

inb4 haters

Sounded like you were mocking him.

Oh wait, /s is a thing in these boards, I totally forgot.

 

[Mr. Wizard]

Sounded like you were mocking him.

Oh wait, /s is a thing in these boards, I totally forgot.

<sarcasm>

Ya good luck with that...

We've already tried to reason with people without success.

inb4 haters

Caution the haters and trolls will be coming...
</sarcasm>

 

[Foxi4]

Technically their current eMMC setup does allow them to change memory sizes easily without a mobo change. Imo Nintendo won't use a standard format like m.2 because they don't want it to be easy to dump. If they did use a standard like that people could potentially just plug it into their computer to get a dump. Where with their proprietary format it makes it a bit more difficult, but not impossible.
Should they have given more than 32gb? Yes. But imo Nintendo would be insane to use a standard, non-proprietary storage interface, especially given what we could do on 3ds with simple raw read/write access to nand.

Nobody says that it has to be a primary partition. By the way, the PS3, 360, PS4 and XBO all use standard as all hell 2.5" HDD's and that didn't aid anyone in hacking them. If Nintendo's security is so bad that they need to make everything proprietary at the cost of convenience for the user then it's security they need to address, not the design.

 

[s157]

<sarcasm>

We've already tried to reason with people without success.


Caution the haters and trolls will be coming...
</sarcasm>

Yeah that was my misread. Oops Thought that this:

Ya good luck with that...

inb4 haters

was mocking this:

People focus too much on hardware when it comes to Nintendo. They forget that their strength is in the software. Even so, hardware is not the deciding factor to a console's success, generally speaking.

and that the proceeding incoming haters would be the ones angry at your (non-existent) mocking of it, which I thought you said just so you could start a random flame war.

 

[Mr. Wizard]

Nobody says that it has to be a primary partition. By the way, the PS3, 360, PS4 and XBO all use standard as all hell 2.5" HDD's and that didn't aid anyone in hacking them. If Nintendo's security is so bad that they need to make everything proprietary at the cost of convenience for the user then it's security they need to address, not the design.

I didn't find using an sdcard on the switch an inconvenience, unlike my PSP.

--------------------- MERGED ---------------------------

@s157 I'm the last person that would think that. I still use dosbox to run dos games.

I remember hacking my original xbox and installing Mandrake on it when my PC was stolen just to get back online lolz. I still have it with the chameleon mod and flash module.

http://www.geek.com/games/linux-mandrake-9-for-xbox-released-550489/

I love making devices do shit they were never intended to do. FIGHT THE POWER!

--------------------- MERGED ---------------------------

I also use sheepshaver to play "Glider" on MacOS 9, the first game I ever played on my macintosh classic.

Oh and I still haven't managed to beat "Leather goddesses of phobos", I refuse to use a guide. That was the first dos game I ever played.

--------------------- MERGED ---------------------------

Games make great games, look at the 3DS the resolution is horrible compare to PSP but look how many they sold.

 

[Foxi4]

I didn't find using an sdcard on the switch an inconvenience, unlike my PSP.

PSP games were around 512MB-1GB, Switch games are 10-16GB, unless we're talking minigames, and while my PSP happily accepted an 8GB SD through an adapter, I don't thing I'll be able to add a whole lot of storage to the Switch, despite my best intentions.

 

[s157]

Yep, I misunderstood. My bad. Thought you thrived on salt, considering how easy it is to turns things into flaming shitstorms here.

Back on track, I would assume nintendo decided on using flash memory due to perhaps getting an extremely good deal in bulk quantities. Gotta cut costs whenever possible. A rather unsavory strategy employed by all businesses.

 

[sarkwalvein]

PSP games were around 512MB-1GB, Switch games are 10-16GB, unless we're talking minigames, and while my PSP happily accepted an 8GB SD through an adapter, I don't thing I'll be able to add a whole lot of storage to the Switch, despite my best intentions.

How not?
You can put up to 2TB into that.
Just wait until 2020 or so for it to be afforable and then you are good to go. /s

 

[Mr. Wizard]

I wish I could remember a games I used to play on mac, played at work with a bunch of people on lan, it involved king of the hill style play with soldiers and grenades

PSP games were around 512MB-1GB, Switch games are 10-16GB, unless we're talking minigames, and while my PSP happily accepted an 8GB SD through an adapter, I don't thing I'll be able to add a whole lot of storage to the Switch, despite my best intentions.

I don't get it, you needed an adapter to even add a cheap sdcard to the psp to hold 8 games yet you are defending it? Whereas the Switch can hold 12+ games on a 200GB sdcard? Which can be swapped out using multiple cards (no adapter necessary). And waaaay easier to swap out than on my N3DSXL.

 

[Foxi4]

Yep, I misunderstood. My bad. Thought you thrived on salt, considering how easy it is to turns things into flaming shitstorms here.

Back on track, I would assume nintendo decided on using flash memory due to perhaps getting an extremely good deal in bulk quantities. Gotta cut costs whenever possible. A rather unsavory strategy employed by all businesses.

My guess is that they used eMMC because that's what they've always used. Nintendo is very resistant to change, rarely changes suppliers and gets nice and comfy with particular hardware manufacturers, forging long-term relationships.

I don't get it, you needed an adapter to even add a cheap sdcard to the psp to hold 8 games yet you are defending it? Whereas the Switch can hold 12+ games on a 200GB sdcard? Which can be swapped out using multiple cards (no adapter necessary). And waaaay easier to swap out than on my N3DSXL.

I didn't *need* an adapter, I could've just as easily bought a stick, an adapter was just cheaper, and it was dual slotted so I could mount two SD's. This way you could very easily expand storage to 128GB and beyond, I just never needed this much storage. I would also love to show me your treasure trove of 200GB SD cards - that's not a real capacity. You might be thinking 256GB, maybe?

 

[Mr. Wizard]

My guess is that they used eMMC because that's what they've always used. Nintendo is very resistant to change, rarely changes suppliers and gets nice and comfy with particular hardware manufacturers, forging long-term relationships.

Yup, once someone (management) "knows a guy" to get stuff from it's hard to persuade them otherwise.

 

[s157]

My guess is that they used eMMC because that's what they've always used. Nintendo is very resistant to change, rarely changes suppliers and gets nice and comfy with particular hardware manufacturers, forging long-term relationships.

That's a terrible irony considering how drastically different each console has been with its predecessor. Nintendo does seem to like innovating, but it's also true they are stubborn to change as well in specific areas.

 

[Mr. Wizard]

My guess is that they used eMMC because that's what they've always used. Nintendo is very resistant to change, rarely changes suppliers and gets nice and comfy with particular hardware manufacturers, forging long-term relationships.

--------------------- MERGED ---------------------------

I didn't *need* an adapter, I could've just as easily bought a stick, an adapter was just cheaper, and it was dual slotted so I could mount two SD's. This way you could very easily expand storage to 128GB and beyond, I just never needed this much storage. I would also love to show me your treasure trove of 200GB SD cards.

I have 3 x 128GB, one in my phone, one in my gateway and one in my Switch. Even though I plan on buying carts for the Switch I just stuck that one in there cause it was lying around doing nothing.

And PSP sdcards were proprietary and double the price. And the PSP didn't even support cards that big.

 

[Foxi4]

That's a terrible irony considering how drastically different each console has been with its predecessor. Nintendo does seem to like innovating, but it's also true they are stubborn to change as well in specific areas.

Drastically different? They've used the same core design since the Gamecube, the Switch is the first to break the cycle of IBM PPC7xx + ATI/AMD Radeon. The consoles could very well be siblings, you can see it if you take one look at each die.

I have 3 x 128GB, one in my phone, one in my gateway and one in my Switch. Even though I plan on buying carts for the Switch I just stuck that one in there cause it was lying around doing nothing.

And PSP sdcards were proprietary and double the price.

Memory Sticks, not SD cards. They were not proprietary, memory stick was an open format. Proprietary would mean only Sony made them specifically for the PSP, which is false - loads of electronics used MS and MSPD's. You might be thinking about the Vita, that console had proprietary memory cards.

 

[Mr. Wizard]

Drastically different? They've used the same core design since the Gamecube, the Switch is the first to break the cycle of IBM PPC7xx + ATI/AMD Radeon. The consoles could very well be siblings, you can see it if you take one look at each die.
Memory Sticks, not SD cards. They were not proprietary, memory stick was an open format. Proprietary would mean only Sony made them specifically for the PSP, which is false - loads of electronics used MS and MSPD's. You might be thinking about the Vita, that console had proprietary memory cards.

RISC was the best back then before ARM came along.

 

[sarkwalvein]

I would also love to show me your treasure trove of 200GB SD cards - that's not a real capacity. You might be thinking 256GB, maybe?

http://www.saturn.de/de/product/_sandisk-ultra-2011879.html

 

[Foxi4]

RISC was the best back then before ARM came along.

Define "back then". Surely by the time the Wii U came along I would've made sense to switch architectures, at that point IBM closed the PPC7xx roadmap and relegated the line to networking applications. They worked on a new PPC7xx exclusively because Nintendo insisted on using one.

http://www.saturn.de/de/product/_sandisk-ultra-2011879.html

That's bizzare, I've never seen one like this. The standard progression model with memory would be 1 - 2 - 4 - 8 - 16 - 32 etc. Good find though, I guess you learn something new everyday.

 

[Mr. Wizard]

Drastically different? They've used the same core design since the Gamecube, the Switch is the first to break the cycle of IBM PPC7xx + ATI/AMD Radeon. The consoles could very well be siblings, you can see it if you take one look at each die.
Memory Sticks, not SD cards. They were not proprietary, memory stick was an open format. Proprietary would mean only Sony made them specifically for the PSP, which is false - loads of electronics used MS and MSPD's. You might be thinking about the Vita, that console had proprietary memory cards.

You mean a dead format. They may not have been proprietary back then but they sure as hell weren't popular, never had to use one before or after the PSP, good riddance. I'm glad SD won that war.

 

[s157]

Drastically different? They've used the same core design since the Gamecube, the Switch is the first to break the cycle of IBM PPC7xx + ATI/AMD Radeon. The consoles could very well be siblings, you can see it if you take one look at each die.

I meant design or gameplay more than hardware. Or at least controller type, which would affect gameplay. From the standard controller type that the GC had, to the odd motion controls of the Wii, to the almost handheld or second screen of the WiU, to the handheld/home console hybrid of the Switch. Hardware would be one of the aspects Nintendo is stubborn upon.

To be fair though, all their consoles could easily handle the previous generation either by using the same controller of the past or by using an additional controller, The switch is similar in that it can simulate the Wii mote with the joy-cons and such.