By adding in the booty slider :3
To clarify, I don't have anything against Console users![]()
I wish however that SE had different versions of the game for Console/PC (Such as Blizzard does, for example) from the start.
It would've split the playerbase but allowed upgrades. No more "Cant do this because of unfair advantage to PC users", that sort of thing.
Wishful thinking of the past aside, by the time the PS4 gets dropped it will be dirt cheap to buy a PC that has more than the min requirements for this game so no one has to quit.
I've stated in the past I think this game looks beautiful, but lacks polish. In terms of solely visual upgrades? Skin texture would be nice. Character models lack depth. I don't want something hyper realistic like BDO for FF14 but something other than the band doll faces we have now.
By the time PS4 gets dropped, almost everyone currently on it will have moved to a PS5 and be happily playing this game on that.
Or, turnover being what it is, none of us will care, because 99.2% of our friends will have moved on to other games, regardless of whether they play on PC or a console.
I started on PS3 -> PS4 -> PCTo clarify, I don't have anything against Console users![]()
I wish however that SE had different versions of the game for Console/PC (Such as Blizzard does, for example) from the start.
It would've split the playerbase but allowed upgrades. No more "Cant do this because of unfair advantage to PC users", that sort of thing.
I'm for one am actually glad they didn't split it. I've made some very good friends over this game which has carried over to others. And this wouldn't have been possible without the "community" aspect of cross-platform. That being said, the game was released when "what was" most relevant at the time, dropping PS3 support will improve the game overall, but I still have my reservations with this being ported over to Switch.
"Never forget 90k" - August 2013
Yoshi please ! <3
I'm a french people and i want FF14 with the Nindendo Switch !
Baguette![]()
Tegra X2 (now seems to be referred to as Tegra P1 as well) is Parker, it has 256 GPU cores.
Both incorrect. Parker uses 2 Denver cores and 4 ARM Cortex A57s. The Denver cores run ARM instruction set, but implement out of order execution and additional VLIW commands in addition to the standard 64-bit ARM instruction set. That's not 12 cores, it's 6.SOC Name - Parker
Process Technology - 16nm finFET
CPU - 12 core CPU
CPU Architecture - 8x Cortex-A57 running @ 2GHz per core
Yes the GPU is a Pascal design, but unlike the GTX1080 which has 2560 cores, Parker has only 256. You're quoting the Tflops attirbuted to the top end Pascal raphics card, not the performance attributed to the X2/P1 (Parker) which is 750GFLOPS (single precision - 32-bit) and 1.5 TFLOPS (16-bit half precision).GPU - PASCAL
Compute TFLOPs - 8TFLOPS
That's probably wrong. Parker is a system on a chip design that supports up to 16GB of LPDDR4 memory, it has a single 128 bit bus, so no provision for separate GDDR5 is available. 8GB is half the max it could have, and no GDDR5 is available. That 4GB of GDDR5 would be likely on a Pascal Graphics card in a PC however. I'd be prepared to believe 8, 12 or 16 GB of LPDDR4 however.System Memory - 8 GB of LPDDR4
Graphics Memory - 4 GB GDDR5
No, 'she' is not.Now, none of this is stated as being ironclad in regards to what consumers should be getting, but if they're working with that kind of horsepower - She's close..
Sorry, no. You're posting incorrect and misleading information.So instead of arguing with me, we could have exchanged information and would have been more then happy to share. Try and have a good evening =)
That's not really true. Dev kits invariably have more memory, and early kits don't use the real hardware, so sometimes they are more powerful than the actual device, sometimes less. However the fundamental point of a dev kit is to run the game as it will run on a consumer device. The additional memory available on Dev Kits is there to provide for the additional overheads of debugging tools.P.S. I'd like to state that dev kits usually run double what consumers can expect from the finished product.
Well, Nintendo says that when they are going after new control schemes or types of play, not attempting to eclipse hardware. Also, the specs you posted are wrong.With that said, Nintendo stated to I believe Forbes that they want to "leaps and bounds over Sony and MS with the Switch" Not sure if they're going to be able to do that, but with even half of the specs listed here - FFXIV would most certainly be able run on it (^-^)
Nvidia.s data on Parker is easily available;
http://www.anandtech.com/show/10596/...parker-details
http://wccftech.com/nvidia-tegra-parker-soc-hot-chips/
http://arstechnica.com/gaming/2016/1...itchs-insides/
P.S. Switch is a hand held unit. It has a docking station that might provide some active cooling so that the SoC can be overclocked for better performance while docked, but the system is fundamentally very similar to an nVidia Shield system and as such *IS* a hand held unit. The dock provides a bit of hybrid capability, but the actual unit is hand held.
|
![]() |
![]() |
![]() |
|
Cookie Policy
This website uses cookies. If you do not wish us to set cookies on your device, please do not use the website. Please read the Square Enix cookies policy for more information. Your use of the website is also subject to the terms in the Square Enix website terms of use and privacy policy and by using the website you are accepting those terms. The Square Enix terms of use, privacy policy and cookies policy can also be found through links at the bottom of the page.