"Full Die Shot" Analysis of Nintendo Switch 2 SoC Indicates Samsung 8 nm Production Origins

[TheLostSwede]

So these components are a graphics driver now? Lol, you don't even know what these are.
Here is a hint for you, The Switch runs on custom FreeBSD based OS.

No it doesn't, it uses some FreeBSD components, but it's not a FreeBSD based OS.

Despite popular misconceptions to the contrary, Horizon is not largely derived from FreeBSD code, nor from Android, although the software licence and reverse engineering efforts have revealed that Nintendo does use some code from both in some system services and drivers.

Yes thats why NVIDIA with their tens of thousands of engineers take over a month to design the a smaller GPU out of the bigger one, where it should be just minimal work.

That is minimal work when it comes to these kind of things, it still doesn't cost 100's of millions of dollars, as then no-one would be making chips.

Thats why AMD pulled out of making big die GPUs even though they are making >$200 profit per GPU.

Now you're mixing things up again. Designing a chip = not cheap, modifying a chip to make other versions of it = relatively cheap.

BTW the variants you are telling about in the ARM chips are called binning, its the same die.

Nope, go look them up, they're not even using the same chip packaging.
The various Jetson Orin chips come in three different SKUs, of which there are differently binned chips per SKU, but since there's one 12-core, two 8-core and three 6-core SKUs, with wildly different GPUs, you don't simply bin things like that as you'd end up with super expensive chips at the bottom-end on the stack.

Lol, Sony and Microsoft both do pay upfront.

Yes, because it's 100% custom made chips for them, what's so hard to understand here?

Nintendo always sells hardware for profit, unlike Sony and Microsoft who rely more on software and services.

As that may be, it's unlikely to be a very big profit.
That also explains the big price jump for the hardware this time then.

No there wasn't any proof of anything in any of my replies, I've must posted some random shit then, I blame my 6.5 core PS5, my Android running Switch, my preordered minimal work Switch 2 and the random guy on the internet die shots and analysis for that.

Mostly, yes, plus being rude.
You clearly have zero insight into how the chip making business works, nor the manufacturing business, yet pretend to be a know-it-all.
I don't know every detail about this product, but I've been working as a tech journalist and in hardware development for most of my working life, so yes, I know a thing or two.
And yes, I still believe the SoC is the major cost of the Switch 2, as none of the other components are particularly costly, with the second most expensive component being the UFS storage, where I'd hazard a guess of around $25-30 at the kind of quantities we're talking here, since the size can be had for under $45 per chip if you order a reel, different brand though.
That is also a lot cheaper to produce compared to the SoC.

 

[alawadhi3000]

No it doesn't, it uses some FreeBSD components, but it's not a FreeBSD based OS.

No they are wrong, its must be Android.

That is minimal work when it comes to these kind of things, it still doesn't cost 100's of millions of dollars, as then no-one would be making chips.

Add NVIDIA to the list of companies that should hire you then, you really seem to be the person who will revolutionize the industry.

Now you're mixing things up again. Designing a chip = not cheap, modifying a chip to make other versions of it = relatively cheap.

Making a smaller T239 out of T234 = modify a chip = very cheap.
Making a bigger version of Navi 48 = designing a new chip = expensive.

Got your Android based logic buddy.

Nope, go look them up, they're not even using the same chip packaging.
The various Jetson Orin chips come in three different SKUs, of which there are differently binned chips per SKU, but since there's one 12-core, two 8-core and three 6-core SKUs, with wildly different GPUs, you don't simply bin things like that as you'd end up with super expensive chips at the bottom-end on the stack.

All of them are T234, if you learned anything from NVIDIA Mr. tech journalist and hardware developer then you'll know they use a different codename if the chip is different.

"Unlike the fully unlocked Jetson AGX Orin 64 GB, which uses the same GPU but has all 2048 shaders enabled, NVIDIA has disabled some shading units on the Jetson Orin NX 8 GB to reach the product's target shader count. It features 1024 shading units, 32 texture mapping units, and 16 ROPs. Also included are 32 tensor cores which help improve the speed of machine learning applications."

Ouch, even your employer disagree with you.

I wonder why NVIDIA didn't make a new smaller chip for the Orin NX since its just minimal work and very cheap, lol.

Yes, because it's 100% custom made chips for them, what's so hard to understand here?

Hmmm where do I start? Probably your logic, explanations ...etc.

As that may be, it's unlikely to be a very big profit.
That also explains the big price jump for the hardware this time then.

Inflation + tariffs, at least for the US price.

Mostly, yes, plus being rude.
You clearly have zero insight into how the chip making business works, nor the manufacturing business, yet pretend to be a know-it-all.
I don't know every detail about this product, but I've been working as a tech journalist and in hardware development for most of my working life, so yes, I know a thing or two.
And yes, I still believe the SoC is the major cost of the Switch 2, as none of the other components are particularly costly, with the second most expensive component being the UFS storage, where I'd hazard a guess of around $25-30 at the kind of quantities we're talking here, since the size can be had for under $45 per chip if you order a reel, different brand though.
That is also a lot cheaper to produce compared to the SoC.

You can believe whatever you want, it doesn't make it true.

 

[chrcoluk]

I would think without watching the DF video the obvious answer to the 6.5 PS5 core thing is to avoid scheduling bottlenecks.
Its akin to affinity tuning on the PC where you make sure the cores available to the games are "fully" available. Rather than competing with background services.