Nvidia has a long history in mobile of over-promising on performance and power consumption. Given the expected ship date of this product it would not be surprising for it to be only slightly faster (or quite possibly a bit slower) than products that will ship in the interim. See: Every single Tegra.
I am a total novice when it comes to chip design; but aren't there obvious tradeoffs with any architecture? Isn't it really hard to have a silver bullet that is super powerful / wide in its processing path and efficient for power?<p>I would imagine that for mobile, the "insert favorite gpu metric here" per watt would be more important than the aggregate metric.
It would be fantastic if convergence devices like Ubuntu Edge could use this in both a mobile as well as a "docked" power state.<p>The way I'm envisioning it, the processor would detect when the device is docked in a full power desktop or notebook configuration. At that point it would switch to a higher power profile for PC gaming and work station class as computing tasks.
I would really like to be excited by this, but since the stretch goal for the mobile industry is building the next plants vs zombies, my expectations are minimal.
It's telling how they mention incredible performance/power ratio only in passing, but focus their pitch on the unified architecture across different classes of machine (mobile to supercomputer), rather like Fred Brooks' 360 project at IBM.
This needs to be in the next OUYA or version 2.0 of the rumored Google console. I'd pay $200 for such a console with a great controller. Not sure about SHIELD. Portable consoles are not really my thing, and that extra screen and battery adds a lot to the cost, but I imagine it would be a lot more compelling with it, too.