I am just curious if current ipad and nVidia shield / google pixel c is as powerful as Nintendo 3ds. Its seems tablets are far more powerful. The nvidia shield is 300 usd. about 100 usd more then the 3ds xl. I would think when buying such large volumes you would see better graphics in nintendo's devices. I realize nintendo has never focused on power but it seems like todays tablets are killing portable game consoles. granted many tablets are more money but not all of them. It just seems like the age of portable game consoles are over with tablets. Will we ever see a portable with as good as graphics and memory on tablets brought to a dedicated console. It seems as if even the newest ps vita is less powerful then tablets and vita isnt cheap.
Got a tip for us?
Let us know
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
Is New nintendo 3ds as powerful as NVidia Shield tablet
- Thread starter wetcanvas
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
The Vita is from 2012. Compare that to tablets of the time if you want. And no the 3DS isn't as powerful, though it does have a 3D display that I haven't seen on a tablet device yet (I imagine one does exist though).
Tablets haven't killed consoles. The sales don't back that up. The Vita flopped because of a range of reasons, and the 3DS has had a really healthy life despite coming out after the dawn of tablet computing. Have you used a tablet, btw? I've got an iPad and some Android one specifically for games. They're pretty awful for gaming! I haven't played a mobile game as fun as Mario Kart 7, Smash Bros 3DS, Fire Emblem Awakening, Mario 3D Land, Pokemon XY and Omega.
Tablets haven't killed consoles. The sales don't back that up. The Vita flopped because of a range of reasons, and the 3DS has had a really healthy life despite coming out after the dawn of tablet computing. Have you used a tablet, btw? I've got an iPad and some Android one specifically for games. They're pretty awful for gaming! I haven't played a mobile game as fun as Mario Kart 7, Smash Bros 3DS, Fire Emblem Awakening, Mario 3D Land, Pokemon XY and Omega.
I think the smartphones are killing the handhelds. You already have this device in your pocket that is already far more powerful than handhelds. So do you justify buying a separate device just for buttons? Lets not forget, smartphone games are far cheaper than handhelds.
Also, this device does a lot more than gaming.
If that was the case then why did the 3DS sell so well? How did Pokemon games sell so many games, considering how expensive those games are compared to mobile games?
I like my iPhone but they are pretty bad at almost everything they do. No iPhone game has had me hooked as the 3DS games I mentioned earlier, my Tom Tom is a better GPS, my Canon 60D is a better camera. It seems that with these "all in one devices" to group phones and tablets together, you're doing a lot of compromising. But if you're happy with that then it's fine! Just remember that literally millions of people want a better experience.
Actually the iPhone is pretty good for music and web browsing (if the tabs don't reload).
(but no you don't solely justify buying a console because of buttons. For me its;
- Buttons
- Long standing game series
- Permanent compatibility, as in, no FW update will break a game
- Replaceable batteries to futureproof them, remember these are machines that last for 5-10 years with no planned-obsolesce
- HW features not present in iPhones, like Streetpass, 3D displays, OLED displays)
((My ultimate problem with gaming where your fingers obscure the image, is that you wouldn't be happy with this
))
Last edited:
The 3DS was launched in 2011 when smartphones were not a standard yet. In early 2011 I still had a the old Sony Ericsson phone and didn't get an iphone until very late 2012.
I would like to see a new handheld launched today and see it succeed to believe it. People are looking for entertainment, and if they can get their games for $1 on the iphone, they just don't see why they should pay $200 per device and $20 per extra game.
Just like the dedicated music player... it pretty much dead.
I would like to see a new handheld launched today and see it succeed to believe it. People are looking for entertainment, and if they can get their games for $1 on the iphone, they just don't see why they should pay $200 per device and $20 per extra game.
Just like the dedicated music player... it pretty much dead.
Smartphones have been standard since 2009. Remember iPhones were out in 2008, and things really kicked off with the 3GS-era because thats when Android picked up too. Smartphone sales didn't impact the DS either. The biggest tell of all this is how Pokemon sales are the same as they were pre-smartphones. Each series still sells 10-15million just as they always have. The rest of us had smart phones
It might be difficult to fathom but people, millions, like Nintendo games. Just like despite computers existing which are "technically better" consoles are selling better than ever. You think these systems are dead, so if that's the case why has Nintendo sold 70 million copies of Pokemon since smartphones existed? 70 million*£30 is a lot of money. Sorry I keep using Pokemon as an example, they recently published their sales data so they're a good up-to-date source.
So I'm not entirely sure why you're so adamant they're dead without proof. (btw, music players and phones are no different to each other. The experience is the same)
There is a difference between a thing that existed, and being a standard. I assure you, iphone and Samsungs were not standard up until 2012-2013. Believe it or not there were HD movies in 2002, but how many people you know had HD TVs in 2004?
Nintendo fans are shrinking since the SNES days, each console after that sold less than the previous except for the Wii. Nintendo themselves already releasing apps for smartphone.
No one can tell the future, but I have to see it to believe. The 3DS just might be their swan song...
Nintendo fans are shrinking since the SNES days, each console after that sold less than the previous except for the Wii. Nintendo themselves already releasing apps for smartphone.
No one can tell the future, but I have to see it to believe. The 3DS just might be their swan song...
I bought a 3DS XL used over the holidays for $100 just to see (it was used so I could return it).
I absolutely love it.
For me, I would rather play on a game handheld than a smartphone - I don't like putting my fingers all over the game display.
Also, people seem so addicted to their smartphones nowadays to the point of where I work they're on those things continuously instead of working...
The comparison you are making is like Apples vs. Oranges - they're totally different...
They are different, but that does not mean one will eat into the market of the other. Many laptop market dropped after people started getting iphone, they are different but many see that as enough for them to access the internet
I love my 2DS but it is most likely my last modern handheld console, and the end of an era of those types of devices on a mass scale. The only thing that they lend is a physical button format for game contexts that were developed prior to modern day interactions and that can be easily replaced by a much cheaper adaptor option for those who want the feel, sans nostalgia of course. Either way, your carrying around an additional component and if they adopt a game to modern touch formats, then that's even more friendly to the consumer.
At one point, handheld gaming hardware was required because there was just no device that people carried around to play those games on, so they had to deliver that with only competition from other hardware gaming manufacturers. Now, people already carry a device and Nintendo is hoping the value of their games justifies the investment (cost, carrying, lifespan of use) of additional hardware, which ups the margins and means that Nintendo is in more control of their environment. A win for them as long as they make the sales and maintain a catalog to do it, but the fight against iPhone is an uphill battle compared to PSP.
And to answer you question, the 3DS and it's counterparts aren't near the speed and power of the shield or even close to the iPhone. Nintendo pulls recidivous margins out of their hardware by giving them just-passable specs to run the games in their catalog, nothing more. In nVidia's case, they are aiming towards a different market and one that is outside of their direct control. The *new* 3DS is much better than its predecessor, but as far as being a 2015-16 product - it's severely lacking.
At one point, handheld gaming hardware was required because there was just no device that people carried around to play those games on, so they had to deliver that with only competition from other hardware gaming manufacturers. Now, people already carry a device and Nintendo is hoping the value of their games justifies the investment (cost, carrying, lifespan of use) of additional hardware, which ups the margins and means that Nintendo is in more control of their environment. A win for them as long as they make the sales and maintain a catalog to do it, but the fight against iPhone is an uphill battle compared to PSP.
And to answer you question, the 3DS and it's counterparts aren't near the speed and power of the shield or even close to the iPhone. Nintendo pulls recidivous margins out of their hardware by giving them just-passable specs to run the games in their catalog, nothing more. In nVidia's case, they are aiming towards a different market and one that is outside of their direct control. The *new* 3DS is much better than its predecessor, but as far as being a 2015-16 product - it's severely lacking.
If they made a game console with NVidia Tegra X1 with maxwell gpu you would be able to run super mario 3d world for wii u on it. Thats whats so depressing. I thought super mario world was a killer game. the stupid super mario land for 3ds doesnt come close to compare. If they had wii u games on a portable device then id be sold.
I should hope so, it is 11 years old. But also it's not so easy to compare these things. Are they comparing it spec for spec, or based off the visual quality? I wonder how much they could squeeze out of these devices if they had a dedicated "game mode" that shut everything off and removed all OS overheads.
Even at 11 years old, the iPad will not be able to do it. 360/ps3 had all those dedicated hardware to run the game and fans. I doubt the fanless iPad can cram into on a single chip. Last I heard Macbook pro gaming performance is just on par with the ps3. So I doubt the iPad can do it.
My Nvidia Shield Android TV box is more powerful than the 360 or PS3, I've been playing Borderlands The Pre-Sequel natively happily on it, and Metal Gear Rising: Revengeance, I have also been playing the complete Half Life 2 series on it not that that's a taxing game, it was also showing running Crysis 3. So whilst not a tablet it does show that mobile chips, because that's what's in the Shield TV box, are more powerful than consoles several years old and their is no reason to not believe the iPad Pro chip is also more powerful.
But the tablet has to run off a battery, not electricity outlet, and the shield does not have to power a display like a tablet does. The TV has its own power source.
I am just guessing that if the PS3 could be as thin as the Shield TV they would have released a "thinner" model long ago like they did with PS2 slim.
The technology didn't exist for Sony to make a thinner console, the chip needed to be heated, Nvidia has made a more powerful chip than the Cell and the Nvidia GPU in the PS3 was. Plus Sony didn't want to waste anymore money on the PS3. But I would still argue the iPad Pro is more powerful, it's 11 years newer! That's a millennium in the tech world.
agreed, but from my readings I found out while iPad chip is fast,it is custom designed to run specific things fast (and hence might lack in the graphics department) just like the PS3 is custom designed to run games+graphics as best possible.
Any way, we need someone who tested this stuff so we can finally see who is more powerful. The problem is, tablet games are never triple A multi-million dollar games that will show the best graphics iPad can output.
I agree with your post, you would need to run 3D Mark on the new iPad Pro and PS3 to get a good idea but i have never known it to run on a PS3. It would be cool to run it on both platforms though, or as you said get a nice AAA game on both platforms which again will never happen.
And I also meant to say the PS3's chip needed to be ventilated, not heated hehe.
Just wondering Do you think Nintendo will ever release there games like Mario Kart on tablets like the iPad and Android tablets because I would definitely LOVE to play Mario Kart games on the iPad haha!
The closest we have now to a Mario Kart game for the iPad and Android tablets is the Beach Buggy Racing which in its own right is definitely a FANTASTIC BRILLIANT VERY FUN racing game on tablets.
Just wondering Do you think Nintendo will ever release there games like Mario Kart on tablets like the iPad and Android tablets because I would definitely LOVE to play Mario Kart games on the iPad haha!
The closest we have now to a Mario Kart game for the iPad and Android tablets is the Beach Buggy Racing which in its own right is definitely a FANTASTIC BRILLIANT VERY FUN racing game on tablets.
Not whilst they're doing great with their own hardware. Just get a 3DS or a Wii U, they're cheap now and each has loads of incredible games. (more so when you consider the 3DS also plays DS games, and the Wii U also plays Wii games).