3DSi speculation
- Thread starter Batou456
- Start date
Exophase
Nothing good will ever come of Exophase.
This is a total waste, you have no technical reason behind your demands and your standards for what is "acceptable" and "reasonable" are completely arbitrary. I guess you consider 8 hours the fair point, but I don't know where this comes from - you could just as well be claiming 20 (which you don't think is reasonable) but it'd all be the same to everyone else. You're just ranting over and over again about something only you care about, a highly subjective parameter, and instead of just accepting that things aren't the way you like you're making a big fuss blaming Nintendo for doing something wrong and insulting other people who don't care. Is it all based on battery life in the past? Battery technology just doesn't improve like everything else does, that's a physical reality and you're going to have eventually accept it. Or maybe instead of yelling at Nintendo for doing new handhelds that don't last as long as the old ones you should be petitioning them to continue supporting old handhelds instead. 3DS has the largest capacity battery of any Nintendo handheld ever so it's not like they totally gimped it.
If you're so conscientious about power utilization I suggest you unplug all of your electrical devices while you're not using them. For instance, your TV, computer, and monitor will consume more electricity while off then a 3DS will while charging. 3DS battery gives about 5Whr, I'll assume it can be charged twice as fast (probably not true), so can take 10Whr while charging. Electricity prices are about $0.10/kWhr. That's 100 hours of charging just to reach 10 cents, to support 200 hours of playing. Saying that any difference matters, no matter how small, is just insane, and I don't really think you're buying this but are just trying to legitimize your stance. And charging is only much of a time investment if you spend none of your time in the day doing anything else, like eating or sleeping.
Last edited by a moderator:
sporkbox
Member
- Joined
- Jan 10, 2011
- Messages
- 186
- Age
- 39
My standard af 8 hours is based off of previous handhelds. 8 hours is about average for the DS line, given medium settings and playing online here and there.
There's little that's subjective about a number. I want 8, the 3DS offers 6.5 at most. I can accept that things are what they are. That does not mean that I shouldn't express myself, however. The 3DS having the largest battery is true, but look at how much the increase is. 250 mAh. How large is the increase in power consumption? Huge, since the specs are higher, the screens are brighter, and I imagine the sound is louder, too. When you increase the capabilities of something by a power of say, 2 or 3, you shouldn't increase battery capacity by a measly percentage. The amount of improvement is uneven. In this case, the system is capable of much more, but you don't get to enjoy it (on the go) as long. That is what deters me most from the 3DS. Anyway, it's dishonest for you to speak for everyone else when you and possible one other person are the only people who have a problem with my "unreasonable", "subjective" ranting.
I'd love to know where you live that has 10 cents/kWh. Where I live is like 14-15. It adds up. For someone who values math, I don't understand why you're so quick to discount the simple fact that 2 > 1. More is more. If I can save a few extra cents by owning a device that needs less time between charges, then I'll do it. I'll get more savings on EnergyStar appliances, non-incandescent light bulbs, etc, but saving is saving. This is like arguing between a 30 mpg car and a 20 mpg car. Same capacity gas tank, but one needs to refill a lot more often. Which is the better buy?
There's little that's subjective about a number. I want 8, the 3DS offers 6.5 at most. I can accept that things are what they are. That does not mean that I shouldn't express myself, however. The 3DS having the largest battery is true, but look at how much the increase is. 250 mAh. How large is the increase in power consumption? Huge, since the specs are higher, the screens are brighter, and I imagine the sound is louder, too. When you increase the capabilities of something by a power of say, 2 or 3, you shouldn't increase battery capacity by a measly percentage. The amount of improvement is uneven. In this case, the system is capable of much more, but you don't get to enjoy it (on the go) as long. That is what deters me most from the 3DS. Anyway, it's dishonest for you to speak for everyone else when you and possible one other person are the only people who have a problem with my "unreasonable", "subjective" ranting.
I'd love to know where you live that has 10 cents/kWh. Where I live is like 14-15. It adds up. For someone who values math, I don't understand why you're so quick to discount the simple fact that 2 > 1. More is more. If I can save a few extra cents by owning a device that needs less time between charges, then I'll do it. I'll get more savings on EnergyStar appliances, non-incandescent light bulbs, etc, but saving is saving. This is like arguing between a 30 mpg car and a 20 mpg car. Same capacity gas tank, but one needs to refill a lot more often. Which is the better buy?
Exophase
Nothing good will ever come of Exophase.
sporkbox, larger capacity batteries take more space, there's a limit to density on these things. For whatever reason the average joe consumer buying a handheld cares a lot about size and in particular thickness, this is demonstrated in product reception over and over again... So maybe something like Pandora can get away with using a huge thick battery but for something like 3DS that's a big compromise and as far as Nintendo is concerned probably not one that's worth it.
The argument you're making about impact on power bill is more like arguing between a 30 mpg car and a 30.001 mpg car. But whatever..
The argument you're making about impact on power bill is more like arguing between a 30 mpg car and a 30.001 mpg car. But whatever..
Okay, I did some research to get to the bottom of this.
Basically the 3DS goes from 2W with everything on to 0.75W with the backlight at minimum, and at 0.63W low for DS compatibility mode. The DSi XL consomes 0.4W for a 10 hour burn and 0.5W for an 8 hour burn, otherwise varying from 1W to 0.24W.
If the ARM11 dual core is made with TSMC 40G and at 800MHz that should be consuming 0.17W at full burn based on ARMH's data, and the chatter is the PICA200 at 65nm would be consuming 0.1W at the full stock frequency of 200MHz. Note there is a good chance things are clocked lower then this. The total for this is liable to be along the lines of 0.25W for the processing elements if Nintendo took advantage of current modern silicon processing. This does represent enough power to account for the difference between 3DS and DS compatibility mode by itself. That does however still leave us with a pair of screens that even with power conservation mode's smart dimming are drawing almost as much power as a entire DSi XL does.
So looking at the flipside the ARM9 in the DSi line should be consuming around 0.02W, or less, on 90nm process with the way it's known to be clocked. Meaning that unlike with the 3DS the processors aren't meaningfully competing with the screens for energy.
So it looks like two things happened. First Nintendo switched to higher resolution screens with more powerful backlights, which as a result can consume considerably more power. The positive for this backlight is good contrast ratio which is important for creating a good 3D effect. On top of this they went with a rather powerful set of processing elements, which actually contribute meaningfully towards the power draw. They attempted to compensate for this with as big of a battery as they could get away with, but were limited mainly by size profile limitations.
When they do their process update to 28nm they should be able to get the processing elements under 0.1W which with no screen refinements would make for an around 1.85W max and a 0.6W min with a 2.7 to 8.3 hour battery life if everything else if kept the same. If they can increase the screens efficiency due to continuing improvements in LEDs and screen technology enough to slice off 100mW the battery range should now be 2.9 hours to 10 hours. These numbers should of course be taken with a grain of salt as we don't know the actual specifications.
Incidentally with TSMC 40G a Cortex A9 quad core at 800MHz should be consuming a full Watt and would be consuming 3.8W if run up to 2GHz. Add onto that the processing assets the Vita is talking about otherwise and they clearly are going to need to have a much larger, and heavier, battery to get near a 3DS' current battery life.
Basically the 3DS goes from 2W with everything on to 0.75W with the backlight at minimum, and at 0.63W low for DS compatibility mode. The DSi XL consomes 0.4W for a 10 hour burn and 0.5W for an 8 hour burn, otherwise varying from 1W to 0.24W.
If the ARM11 dual core is made with TSMC 40G and at 800MHz that should be consuming 0.17W at full burn based on ARMH's data, and the chatter is the PICA200 at 65nm would be consuming 0.1W at the full stock frequency of 200MHz. Note there is a good chance things are clocked lower then this. The total for this is liable to be along the lines of 0.25W for the processing elements if Nintendo took advantage of current modern silicon processing. This does represent enough power to account for the difference between 3DS and DS compatibility mode by itself. That does however still leave us with a pair of screens that even with power conservation mode's smart dimming are drawing almost as much power as a entire DSi XL does.
So looking at the flipside the ARM9 in the DSi line should be consuming around 0.02W, or less, on 90nm process with the way it's known to be clocked. Meaning that unlike with the 3DS the processors aren't meaningfully competing with the screens for energy.
So it looks like two things happened. First Nintendo switched to higher resolution screens with more powerful backlights, which as a result can consume considerably more power. The positive for this backlight is good contrast ratio which is important for creating a good 3D effect. On top of this they went with a rather powerful set of processing elements, which actually contribute meaningfully towards the power draw. They attempted to compensate for this with as big of a battery as they could get away with, but were limited mainly by size profile limitations.
When they do their process update to 28nm they should be able to get the processing elements under 0.1W which with no screen refinements would make for an around 1.85W max and a 0.6W min with a 2.7 to 8.3 hour battery life if everything else if kept the same. If they can increase the screens efficiency due to continuing improvements in LEDs and screen technology enough to slice off 100mW the battery range should now be 2.9 hours to 10 hours. These numbers should of course be taken with a grain of salt as we don't know the actual specifications.
Incidentally with TSMC 40G a Cortex A9 quad core at 800MHz should be consuming a full Watt and would be consuming 3.8W if run up to 2GHz. Add onto that the processing assets the Vita is talking about otherwise and they clearly are going to need to have a much larger, and heavier, battery to get near a 3DS' current battery life.
Last edited by a moderator:
