>Tom Henderson: the next console from Nintendo is so powerful that developers will be releasing their new multiplatform games on Japanese handhelds at once
Nintendo is making the same mistake the last time with GameCube. Chasing the performance edge will cause Nintendo's DOOM!
 UFOs Are A Psyop Shirt $21.68 |
 |
UFOs Are A Psyop Shirt $21.68 |
It's still a handheld, it won't be as performant as the bone series or the ps5
>performant as the bone series or the ps5
it automatically performs better just by showing up since no-one owns or cares to own either of them.
>it automatically performs better just by showing up since no-one owns or cares to own either of them.
Why are you so delusional?
Sony's revenue numbers are inflated. They record 100% of all sales on their online store as revenue, even for third-party games. The lion's share of this money is paid to the respective publishers, but Sony still records 100% of it as revenue on their balance sheets. Nintendo, in contrast, only records their cut as revenue. Money that's owed to third-party publishers from eShop sales is not counted as revenue on Nintendo's balance sheets.
Source
It is revenue, notice that Nintendo is behind both Sony and Xbox but beats out both of them, that's revenue, but Nintendo are around half to more than half of all software sales by unit value, and overwhelmingly most of that by dollar value, thus Nintendo ends up with a significantly higher share of that revenue as end profits.
Tencent is not a game company though it is a Chinese communist party dystopian bag of shit
Earlier leaks confirmed PS4/XBone tier strength. That's to be expected considering it's a handheld. I have no idea why people think it'll be PS5/XsX tier
It's literally impossible for a handheld to be as strong as the ps5. If it was possible, Sony engineers would be hacks since they had to make it that big to work
The PS5 came out 3 years ago. Obviously I don't think the Switch 2 will be that powerful, but with nvidia tricks, it could compete with Series S
The PS5 has a 350W power draw. The switch 2 would need a fricking tesla battery to work for more than 5 minutes. have you seen the fan on the and cooler on the ps5? it's bigger than the steam deck
The PS5 came out 3 years ago. Obviously I don't think the Switch 2 will be that powerful, but with nvidia tricks, it could compete with Series S
It's not going to compete with the steam deck, let alone the S.
The deck is already a couple years old and the deck 2 is probably not far away. The switch 2 should definitely be more powerful than the first deck
There are already updated SoCs in the ROG and unless you're at 20-30 watts there's not much performance difference if any. The switch 2 isn't going to draw anywhere near that wattage, it won't have the thermals to handle it even if there weren't battery realities to consider.
>bringing up the goydeck at all
It's a handheld in the same price range - why wouldn't I in the context of pie in the sky performance expectations?
steam is selling it at a loss because they know they can get away with it from all the free money they get from other devs
add about 100 bucks to the price to get the real price range
>steam is selling it at a los
Not anymore, lol.
the series s is basically a ps4
Nah that shit runs next gen games great for a poorgay like me, wouldn't be able to enjoy SF6 and COD without it, still plan on getting a PS5 tho series s is lame
>The PS5 has a 350W power draw
Its about 200w, sometimes less under load. Your general point is solid though. The Switch 2 will be a 5-10w handheld. There isn't any way that the Switch 2 in that tiny power envelope is going to perform better than current gen Nvidia mobile GPUs used in laptops which need 25-50w and still provide meh performance.
>The PS5 came out 3 years ago
It's only one GPU generation old. And we already know Switch 2 is going to use Nvidia's Ampere, which also came out three years ago.
So, there's no way Switch 2 is going to perform anywhere near a PS5 or even a Series S. It's going to be comparable to a Steam Deck at best, which is also using a 3-year old GPU.
That said, the gap between PS5 and Switch 2 will be a lot smaller than PS4 vs. Switch 1. So if Switch 1 was somehow getting (some) PS4 ports, porting games from PS5 to Switch 2 will be way easier.
The fact Series S exists also helps. The baseline for next-gen games isn't PS5, but Series S (so like, half the GPU performance).
Another thing to consider is diminishing returns in graphics, PS5 games don't look THAT much better than PS4 games. In other words Switch 2 ports won't look significantly worse than PS5, unless you zoom-in and autistically obsess over minor details.
It is possible but it would cost over 1k bucks and have a 30 minute battery unless you make it as thick and heavy as a brick to house more batteries
Also it would need even stronger fans than the Deckv0x2v
Well in 6 years, it will be possible. Technology keeps advancing every day dude.
>I have no idea why people think it'll be PS5/XsX tier
Raw numbers its less powerful but its going to have Nvidia tech like DLSS which will make it look closer to PS5 level
Kek, the nvidia shills going in damage control mode already.
DLSS works well when you're upscaling from 1440p to 4k, not from 720p mobileshit. The same goes for framegen. You need a constant 60fps for it to work with no artefacts.
t. 4090 owner
Docked you should expect PS4 Pro GPU with a much better GPU/Ram.
Handheld should be somewhat better than base PS4. All this with DLSS.
AI upscaling and framegen magic bullshit probably.
AMD has been on overdrive developing it and trying to shill that shit.
It's because of that rumor that the FF7 Remake was running on a dev kit and it looked and ran like a PS5 game when it was probably just DLSS doing its thing if true.
>FF7 Remake is PS4 game including FF7 RB.
That was confirmed bulllshit and FF7R isn’t coming to the switch or Xbox
because of its architecture and dlss it will probably outperform series s in docked
It doesn't need to be as powerful to keep up.
Bear in mind the PS5 and Xbox run games at 4k, while this one will probably be running at 720p, 1080p at most.
>Bear in mind the PS5 and Xbox run games at 4k
very few select titles run at native 4k most are upscaled
Most games have native 4K at 30fps modes on PS5. A few spaghetti code stinkers don't though.
when you make bait its not supposed to be THIS moronic
Nintendo, DOOMED since the 1996
How will they ever recover from being this DOOMED
I'm 100% convinced that all this "it's as stronk as the ps5" posting comes from actual snoys just so they can go OH NO NO NO when it's obviously revealed it's at ps4 level, which is completely fine for a handheld.
Preemptive Cope.
pretty much, I'm expecting it to be PS4 pro levels of power at max, but with better and modern tech.
Yeah that would make sense
Given how pathetic they are, you're probably right.
It's clearly that, and the normal people think "it'll be PS4, maybe PS4 Pro level, and carried to near PS5 clarity using DLSS"
no it's just (you) being too moronic to read properly and understand that switch 2 getting day 1 ports of ps5 games doesn't mean it'll be as powerful as a ps5
to be fair that doesn't mean the switch2 has good hardware, it just means the ps5 has overpriced garbage hardware
>it just means the ps5 has overpriced garbage hardware
No it doesn't mean that
I hope so, but it could also be from people who really just don't understand how to interpret specs into end power, or aren't aware at all of the cust being made to demos they've seen.
i mean, you cant tell already from the shitty style of writing?
Bingo. Most concerngayging for Nintendo, Xbox and PC comes from the local sony roaches. They do this so they can take screenshots and then later post about how delusional tenders are supposedly.
It's so...FRICKING...over...
There's nothing but an empty lot where Nintendo HQ once was..............
eric thread
Nintendo ips are not enough to keep them afloat. They need to jump from gimmick to gimmick every single generation and if they fail the gimmick roll it will hurt them for an entire generation and it may put them out of business. Nintendo sweats bricks every single time the have to start a new generation. The Switch2 proves this.
Nintendo IP's outsell every other game combined. FF is one of the most famous IP's in vidya and they shit and clap over 3 million sales, which Nintendo clears in 24 hours of every game release.
Are you moronic normies dont know FF but literally every moron knows mario or has probably played a mario game before
>Nintendo ips are not enough to keep them afloat
A stupid childish lie in the first sentence.
What a fricking moronic take. Mainline Pokemon moves millions of consoles on its own. People act like Monster Hunter was what moved their handhelds when it was always their own games.
They don't need to sweat anymore because they already merged all their games into one platform.
It's a handheld bro, calm down. It's not gonna be an actual PS5 handheld. Nowadays mobile can run a lot of stuff, even if its not you know the best settings.
All Nintendo needs is for it to run Mario and Zelda, because that's what people buy it for. The handheld factor appeals to a whole other group of people.
Having even PS4 level graphics is just a sweet bonus - compare DQ XI on PS4 and Switch.
If people really cared about graphics they'd play on PC.
> all Nintendo needs is for it to run Mario and Zelda, because that's what people buy it for.
Pokemon
No way they pull that off outside of $700 handheld or something the size of a cinderblock. Give me portable gen 8 home console specs
Gamecube failed because of the tiny disc sizes.
No it failed because it had nothing that could stand up to GTA and Halo, and the world wasn't interested in a clean image and family friendly because that was kiddy shit in that era. They wanted sex, violence, drugs, blood, swearing, and Nintendo offered little in that category.
Disc space defiantly played into that, otherwise I don't see any reasons why Rockstar wouldn't have brought over GTA to the Gamecube, especially considering even the GBC and GBA had GTA games on them.
The fact it launched almost two years after the PS2 was a huge disadvantage as well. By the time the GameCube came out, there were 20+ million PS2s on the market already.
Just like you failed because of tiny pee-pee sizes.
there is plenty of switch/ps5 games already so saying there will be switch 2/ps5 games is meaningless
I think that the implication of the tweet is they will be close too if not up to par with the big boys
It's just Nvidia leftovers being pitched with DLSS as a magic solution, it's not performant at all and all the games will suffer from severe artifacting.
What makes you so sure?
normalgays don't give a shit, they can barely tell the difference between 10 and 144 fps or 720p and 4k, do you think they can see the difference between native and upscaled shit?
DLSS is basically what will make or break the console I'm thinking
>company will doom themselves by doing the one thing everyone has been asking them to do for years
the only reason the gamecube and n64 failed is cause Nintendo just had to have their own storage formats instead of adopting CDs/DVDs if the n64 had used CDs it would have dominated
It's going to be stronger than ps5
Why anyone thinks it's going to be stronger than the deck, let alone be anywhere near ps5, with how big the deck is, how relatively expensive it is while nintendo doesn't sell hardware at a loss, how fast it can run out of battery despite being very power efficient for a handheld, how loud the fans get, etc. is beyond me. All these leaks reek of marketing bullshit and doublespeak to drum up hype where nobody is actually saying it's that powerful only that it maybe looks around that powerful on a tiny handheld screen from the glimpses they claimed to see of tech demos.
We basically know the strength already
Based on the Nvidia hack it's somewhere around 3tflops, so a range of like 2.5 tflops to 3.5 tflops, probably somewhere near the middle.
DLSS can effectively double performance on average, so more comparable to 6tflops in real world performance.
Compare below
Series S: 4tflops
Switch 2: 3tflops - effectively 6 tflops
PS5: 10tflops
XSX: 12tflops
So about 50% stronger than the series S, 60% of a PS5 and 50% of a series X.
How are they getting so much power into a handheld?
It's probably gonna be bigger (because no one uses this shit portably anyway) and it will have a bigger gap in handheld and docked due to higher docked resolution. DLSS obviously helping.
T239 is 4flops(docked)
>T239 is 4flops(docked)
The AGX Orin that it's based on is 5tflops, but it will have to be underclocked to cut back on power usage. I honestly think they *could* get it up to 4tflops but will opt for closer to 3 to lower heat. They just don't really need 4tflops when they've got DLSS in their pocket anyway.
An effective 6tflop console is absolutely strong enough. First party Nintendo games will be absolutely beautiful and third party games will still run great. With diminishing returns people probably wont even notice the difference between the PS5 and switch version most of the time.
4tflops docked is easy as frick with a cheapo fan and piece of copper. Remember these chips are made with passive cooling in mind, even a tiny fan makes a massive difference.
Also the extra tflop will matter because you'll want a native 1440p to reconstruct for best image quality. DLSS from 1080p is much worse than from 1080p.
First party Nintendo games are already beautiful, I hate being in the minority here but I don't want to have to wait 12 years for the next Zelda, or 8 years for the next Mario, or have a console with a 15 minute battery life, Switch 2 really is looking like shit here.
>I hate being in the minority here but I don't want to have to wait 12 years for the next Zelda, or 8 years for the next Mario,
I don't mind the longer gaps between the big games because of two reasons.
Firstly, they're much longer.
Yeah the gamecube got two Zelda games in 6 years, but those games were both 30 hours long. Even if the switch 2 only gets one new Zelda in 8 years, if it's 200 hours long, I'm not gonna complain.
Second, they've stepped up a lot of their smaller franchises. Stuff like Kirby, Luigi's Mansion and Pikmin are way better than they used to be, so I'm not so desperate for the mainline Mario or Zelda anymore.
But then you just ignored that every IP is going to fly through the roof in terms of development time and lower tier IP will just be left by the wayside, everyone thought it was a miracle when a new Mario Strikers was announced, but now Luigi's Mansion is going to take 6 years to make, thus you will get 1 NLG game per gen instead of the 2 you got on Switch, 1 new Kirby, 1 Xenoblade, Nintendo was the only company that pushed for lower fidelity visuals so that they could keep development time down but at the power people are expecting they will meet next gen standards in terms of asset quality, they didn't even need to hit PS4 levels of fidelity on the Switch 2, Mario doesn't need to be as detailed as a TLoU character.
The main point is game length though. Even if all these series move to one per gen, if that game is 2-3x longer, does it really matter? If anything that just saves me money because I get the same amount of content but buy half the games.
So you'd rather 1 game where the content barely changes past say the 50 hour mark than 2 100 hour games where the content is vastly different, why is Jim Ryan in a Nintendo thread shilling for Nintendo to be more like Sony.
>So you'd rather 1 game where the content barely changes past say the 50 hour mark than 2 100 hour games where the content is vastly different, why is Jim Ryan in a Nintendo thread shilling for Nintendo to be more like Sony.
I have always been very critical of the sort of Skyrim design where the game is huge but full of literal copy pasted content. But that's not what Nintendo has done so far.
For example, the recent Pikmin 4 is about 4x longer than the other Pikmin games, but it very rarely reuses content, certainly not any more than the older Pikmin games. It's just a longer better game. If Nintendo starts copy pasting content to pad out games I will 100% call them out on it but so far they haven't.
Pikmin 4's long development wasn't due to it being a major multi generation leap in fidelity over previous titles.
The point is that you're basically advocating for a Sony position of fewer bigger games, which really is frick off tier, Nintendo are at the point where they could choose more games and keep the same length they are at right now, the next Zelda won't be double the length of Tears of the Kingdom and Breath of the Wild, just double the development time, and like I said before you're going to see IP dissolve again after the strange period where IP was being revived out of nowhere, we will eventually get to the point where it's either Mario or either Zelda for the current generation of hardware, I don't understand why you are championing this.
The reason why I'm fine with fewer bigger games it that Nintendo is set to publish around 100 games on the switch. Even if that number drops to 70, particularly if game length goes up, I'm not going to cry about it.
You bring up sony but they were producing so few games to begin with that they're at the point where they make like one game every 2 years, it's not comparable to Nintendo who currently publishes around 12-14 games a year.
This is a double gen leap, the new amount will be 25 games per gen, so less than 5 per year, same length to maybe longer, but they look closer to CGI.
Games have already reached the limit of how long they can possibly be. Do you really want a Zelda game that takes 200-400 hours, double from TotK's 100-200 hours?
I'd rather they release multiple smaller games which have distinct mechanics from each other. There's only so much gameplay variety a single game can have, even if it has a lot of content.
Exactly 10 times stronger than Switch(docked).
Xenoblade 4 will saved from 360p-540p 20fps
>Exactly 10 times stronger than Switch(docked).
Way stronger than that because of DLSS and raytracing support. DLSS is huge and the leaked chip has surprisingly good raytracing (for a console).
majority of users uses the switch as a portable
source: nintendo's own data
I just want Switch 2 to have a basic boost mode.
Just let it play Switch1 games with disabled dynamic resolution at locked 30fps
>will be powered by the Apple M3
x86 homosexuals btfo
why would nintendo submit to the biggest israelite company of them all?
jewvidia is already bad enough let alone apple
what hardware is the switch 1 running? amd or nvidia?
i'm not saying nvidia hardware is bad
i'm saying they're extremely israeli
apple manages to be even worse
it was a genuine question gayet i actually don't know and i'm not computer savvy to google that
oh my bad. its nvidia, more specifically a custom tegra x1
Why the frick is nintendo not going with AMD hardware anyway? These days they are far more TDP efficient than nvidia while providing upcaling magic just as good for the average consoomer, while being far cheaper.
good question, it's probably backwards compatibility
Keep in mind DLSS beats the frick out of FSR at low resolutions. For high end PCs FSR is getting pretty close, but for a lower end console, DLSS is the way better option right now.
Switch 2 will completely flip that notion on it's head, Nintendo aren't going with Nvidia because they are more expensive and less powerful.
Because Nvidia was desperate to have some kind of stake in the console market and gave Nintendo a good deal on the Tegra X1.
Xbox already went AMD with the 360, Sony got burned so hard on the RSX that they stopped answering Nvidia's calls, and Jensen was determined to get a win in consoles. AFAIK AMD doesn't have ARM SoCs ready to go while Nvidia had already been dabbling with their tablet thing.
Also FSR2 sucks ass.
nintendo are behind Sony and MS in terms of rendering tech., and it has to buy a whole package from NV. Sony and MS has their own rendering, they customize their chip based on their needs.
NVIDIA has more experience with ARM.
AMD's attempt was basically vaporware when Nintendo was looking to make a hybrid system.
>literally who: Nintendo is suddenly being competent about hardware for no reason!
>for no reason
The Wii/DS/Wii U/3DS sold mainly to kids and casuals. The switch sold mostly to core adults aged 20-40. It's a different audience. Whereas before Nintendo had a unique customer base, the people buying their consoles now are the same people buying PS5 and Xbox. It's worth it to them to cut the profit margin by 50 bucks to get much better third party support, to convince some people to skip a playstation this gen.
If snoy didn't kick out all the japanese devs out of the console thanks to their xenophobic westoid practices the switch would still be losing to the other two consoles.
What a world.
>If snoy didn't kick out all the japanese devs out of the console
moron
we literally know what the chip is bevause the nvidia breach, its powerful stuff
well what chip is it
t239, which is like 3/4ths of a rtx 3050 mobile
Not how that works.
There are a few variants of the Orin family, and the ones comparable in power to the Switch are super low performance. The Orin Nano SKUs in the range of 5 to 15w have 512 or 1024 ALUs and are 1.2 or 2.5 TFLOPS.
The mobile 3050 is literally double that higher tier part and still sucks dog shit.
I am so sick of you fricking morons bringing up the nano. It's not the fricking nano. Nvidia was hacked, the GPU they're using is the AGX Orin drive. We aren't speculating on that, it's a fact, get over it. The nano would not make sense in a game console anyway because all it is, is the shitty chips that didn't come out properly, so they dump it off for a lower price. It's not a legitimate line of chips and they cant supply 150 million of them.
Stop trying to use words you don't understand. Stop mindlessly regurgitating terms you cannot fully grasp.
The *SoC* not GPU Nintendo would use literally is not the gull AGX Orin, that is a $3000+ test bed chip. Outside of the auto industry its only used for scalable AI/ML programming for companies willing to foot the enormous cost. No leaked data indicated that the Switch 2 was using this, the reference only indicated, at a driver level, that this hardware family was being utilized at some point, likely only for development.
Nvidia is selling a 60w several thousand dollar SoC to Nintendo for use in a 5w handheld
We know what it's based on, we don't know what the end clocks are or what parts of the chip will be outright switched off, rumours are constantly pushing that this will use up the full chip, which is bad, but people are really thirsty for PS5 quality hardware while also complaining that diminishing returns make the kind of power of 9th gen hardware completely pointless.
The only thing we don't know are the clock speeds. And since the base chip is 5tflops, there's no fricking way they underclock it below 3tflops.
We only got the base chip configuration, not the finalized clock speeds, or the customized configuration, and base chip is like 10 minutes for battery life, I know it's a very unpopular opinion but I like my handhelds to be able to play games for longer than 10 minutes.
>We only got the base chip configuration, not the finalized clock speeds, or the customized configuration,
We know almost everything about how it's configured actually. It really is just the clock speeds we don't know.
Yes, which is why rumours are so wildly different on it's config and there are multiple sources.
if MS/Sony has different ISA for GPU, how do you know there isn't a difference?
>if MS/Sony has different ISA for GPU, how do you know there isn't a difference?
Because Nvidia was hacked and most data about Drake, the switch 2's GPU was posted online. We know the SM configuration and the number of CUDA cores. With those two things it means the only thing we don't have to calculate performance is the clock speed, but we can guess it's probably similar to the switch, pointing to around 3tflops.
SM configuration and CUDA cores does not determine the perf. For example, GPU can lower precision for certain Ops to increase bandwidth for ALU. There may be a accelerator to increase memory usage.
Additionally, 3tflops means nothing otherwise no one need benchmarks.
>SM configuration and CUDA cores does not determine the perf
Those two elements along with clock speed are easily at least 90% of the performance.
>Additionally, 3tflops means nothing otherwise no one need benchmarks.
People always make the argument that you cant compare tflops, but in most cases it actually is a pretty good comparison. Not perfect but close enough. It's very rare you get two chips where there's a big performance gap relative to the tflops. It happens, but rarely.
But as far as benchmarks, we know it ran BotW at 4k, which means it has to be at least 6x stronger than the switch, that's the absolute floor.
if the perf is perfectly scaling with core numbers, Sony wouldn't increase GPU freq. Even for graphic workloads suitable for parallel execution, it is hard to maintain high utilization in all cores.
>we know it ran BotW at 4k, which means it has to be at least 6x stronger than the switch, that's the absolute floor.
I doubt it can achieve native 4K res. but we will see.
>I doubt it can achieve native 4K res. but we will see.
Literally no one but you gives a frick if it's native res or DLSS. I'm sure that's gonna be your moronic argument when this thing comes out "Well, it's not REALLY 4k" and exactly 0 people outside of this board will ever notice.
>I doubt it can achieve native 4K res. but we will see.
I bet 2d games and last gen titles (optimized switch 1 games) could probably do native 4k on switch 2
but yeah the actual current gen bigger budget releases will probably be 720p~1080p native then upscaled, maybe as low as 540p for ps5 tier games
Is it really Nintendo's fault when ARM was pushed to the ceiling from smartphones and tablets as a market?
Right now Nintendo is the place to get first party Nintendo games, and this is an extremely lucrative market for them. They made insane profit margins on each first party title and sell a ton of them. But right now Nintendo has a very small chunk of the third party market, as well as the online subscription market. There's huge room for Nintendo to expand in these areas, which is why a more powerful console makes sense.
If they make 50 dollars less on each console, over the course of the generation that costs them around 6-7 billion dollars. On the surface this looks horrible, but that's really like 800 million per year and 800 million per year can easily be made up with increased third party and online subscription sales. Selling an extra 10 million online subscriptions each year would immediately make them about 600 million of that 800 million back.
This is why I expect Nintendo to cut the profit margin to get better hardware.
Why would Nintendo need that kind of power to get third party support? third parties have been pushing harder and harder to maintain cross gen titles, even then third party sales won't take off on Nintendo hardware because none of them are interested in putting in anything resembling effort.
I don't know. With how culturally dead Playstation and Xbox are as brands, they might be able to carry it.
Who's still getting excited to buy a Playstation now, really? We're a world away from the early 00's where the Playstation just had hit after hit, with a good portion of them being exclusive.
Now people wait five years for a Final Fantasy game, and then they hate it.
>the wii u is gonna be the same power as a PS3
>the switch is gonna be the same power as base Xbone
>the next nintendo console is gonna be the same power as XSS
Do you guys really not see a pattern, or are you all just too young to have been around back then?
The wii u being stronger than ps360 was true, it's just that it released only a year before the ps4 and xbone without being particularly cheap.
>it's just that it released only a year before the ps4 and xbone without being particularly cheap.
Yeah and the PS4 pro and XboneX released right around when the Switch did.
And guess what's most likely gonna be releasing right around when the Switch does.
It being around series s in raw power falls in like with the nintendo pattern of being in the middle of past and current gen specs
and from what we heard, switch 2 runs the matrix awakens demo better than the series s
literally read the thread moron, we already have an idea of how strong it's going to be because of leaks from nvidia themselves
>the wii u is gonna be the same power as a PS3, it's current gen!
>PS4 and Xbone come out 1 year later
>the switch is gonna be the same power as base Xbone, it's current gen!
>PS4 pro came out 6 months before and XboneX 6 months later
>the next nintendo console is gonna be the same power as XSS, it's current gen!
See the pattern now?
When people claimed the Switch would be as strong as the Xbone they were purely speculating. They just grabbed the strongest Nvidia chip on the market and assumed Nintendo was going to use that, which they didn't. In this case we are going off real data from a hack of Nvidia, not speculation or guesswork. We know the GPU it's using, there's no chance we're wrong.
So that'd be a no, you can't see a very simple pattern...
Even if it's as powerful as low end current gen the pro models are going to be out damn soon after release, making it look like an underpowered toy that AAA devs aren't going to bother porting multiplats to.
>When people claimed the Switch would be as strong as the Xbone they were purely speculating.
And btw that's wrong. We knew the Switch's SoC very early on, it is just heavily underclocked in the Switch. Which very well could be the same case for Switch 2.
>And btw that's wrong. We knew the Switch's SoC very early on, it is just heavily underclocked in the Switch
Do you enjoy making shit up?
The X1 is 512 flops and the switch is 390gflops
That's not a "massive" underclock. In fact, if they apply the same underclock to the switch 2, it would be 3.8tflops. But I'm being more on the pessimistic side there and assuming they underclock it harder toward 3tflops.
>Do you enjoy making shit up?
So you're saying the Switch doesn't have an underclocked Tegra X1 T210, and that every resource on the internet is wrong?
>So you're saying the Switch doesn't have an underclocked Tegra X1 T210, and that every resource on the internet is wrong?
It's underclocked by 24%, which in computing is fricking nothing. You would notice almost no difference in switch games if it hadn't been underclocked at all. Instead of a few areas in BotW having frame drops they'd run solid 30 across the board, whoopie big fricking deal.
But it is an X1? Then explain how this
isn't wrong.
I wouldn't be surprised if we don't get pro models at all this gen tbh
we're already almost halfway through the gen and there still aren't any games that use the full potential of the consoles yet
better ai upscaling will be the "pro" performance boost
There's nothing for a pro to do anyway.
Games are already 4k. No normal human being wants a higher resolution than that. And the framerates are usually solid so little room to improve there. They're not gonna make a big difference in raytracing because that would be a massive headache to developers, having to develop one version of the game around raytracing and the other without. I agree, we get no pro consoles this gen. Instead, sony and microsoft will focus on getting the cost of the base unit down.
This gen will be longer than usual cause of covid
There's already tons of rumors about devkits already being in dev's hands, and that the big push will be improved raytracing.
It's gonna be very interesting to see the ramifications of the switch 2.
One thing I can say for sure is the Series S will immediately die.
$300 for the series S with no disk drive vs $400 for the switch 2 with physical game support, Nintendo's first party library, portability, less power usage, cheaper online play and most likely more power.
Even if Microsoft drops that turd to $200 no one's buying that over the Switch 2.
Series S was a pittance and Microsoft trying to have a serviceable price to a not so serviceable version of their hardware. It's a reason why no one should ever make two SKUs of the same console ecosystem but with a disparity in specs between the hardware outside storage.
because yield of Series X chip is too low, so MS can use defect chips of Series X to make XSS to reduce production cost.
No it won't. It exists exactly for this market segment. Switch would have the <$300 price all to itself without series s. Now it has good competition because series s will undoubtedly be more powerful than switch 2 even with all the new tech. You can only do so much with a portable machine because of power limitations. You're looking at probably PS4 levels of power at best from the switch 2. Series s will never stop being an attractive option because of gamepass especially with zenimax/ABK games.
>because series s will undoubtedly be more powerful than switch 2 even with all the new tech
It absolutely will not. The leaked chip is 5flops, underclock the shit out of it down to 3tflops and then use DLSS and you've got a console 50% stronger than the S.
Are you high? Even a steamdeck is only 1.6 tflop (weaker than a ps4). Nothing nvidia makes in lower power mobile is 5tflop FP32.
The steam deck is a mobile device, the switch 2 is a hybrid, you cant compare them. The max power the steam deck can draw is 15 watts, the switch 2 will almost certainly be higher than that.
>ids hibrid xdddd
You are fricking brain damaged
Its a handheld. The Switch is a handheld. Plugging something into the wall isn't new technology. Literally every laptop in existence performs better on line power vs battery.
Yes and a hybrid is still a mobile device. All hybrid means is docked connectivity but that doesn't change the fundamental hardware limitations of it having to run in portable mode, with an acceptable battery life, acceptable heat profile, based on an acceptable cooling solution at an acceptable cost etc etc. Switch 2 isn't some fricking super handheld which will break conventional logic. Not to mention it's likely a <$350 machine again. You really, genuinely believe they're going to make a portable machine with 3tflop fp32 and all the hardware (battery, cooling) that goes to running that chip efficiently on top of next gen joycons and a dock in the box for a cheap affordable price for little timmy? Put the crack pipe down
the hardware is probably at PS4 level but will 3rd parties commit to it since the baseline specs for AAA is PS5 now
>the hardware is probably at PS4 level
Are you even reading this thread?
The GPU it's based on is 5tflops. The Switch was underclocked by 24%. In what fricking world are you getting that 5tflop chip down to the 1.8tflops of the ps4.
Also keep in mind the ps4 architecture was ridiculously shitty, so it's more like 1.3tflops to hit PS4 level. That's around a 75% underclock compared to the 24% of the switch. You're delusional.
> The GPU it's based on is 5tflops
it doesn't have power budget to maintain this perf. it doesn't matter.
>it doesn't have power budget to maintain this perf. it doesn't matter.
What power budget?
When people talk about the performance, they're talking about docked. Docked has no "power budget." It's effectively a home console when it's docked. As long as they can fit the chip in the console, they can power it in docked mode.
No one is denying that handheld performance will be significantly weaker. But no one cares because people who play in handheld don't care about specs. They're more casual users.
power budget : how much heat(power) the system can dissipate over long time. it is called as TDP in desktop chip. Even switch can be used in docked mode, I doubt it can have giant heat sink like PS5/xbox. As a result, TDP as well as perf of switch 2 limited
There are many ways to deal with heat, particularly
1)Make the switch 2 physical larger, which seems very likely for multiple reasons. No one actually sticks the switch in their pockets so no one is gonna care if it's larger.
2)Add a fan to the dock. Seems pretty straight forward, probably adds like 3 dollars to the price.
3)Improve the fan in the console.
They might even do all 3. But heat is much easier to solve than you're suggesting.
Giant heat sink is always needed unless it has liquid cooling. Chip power is not constant. its peak power is well above TDP. Because giant heat sink can absorb the heat with little temp rising (heat capacity), the chip can still work. And the heat sink have to directly./closely contact with chip otherwise chip will be burned quickly. I don't see how they solve this problem.
ARM uses far less power and produces far less heat than x64.
A small cheap fan and some copper is all yoy really need to hit the 5tflops on arm. Remember ARM Chios are designed to be passively cooled, introducing even shitty active cooling makes a massive difference.
ARM is irrelevant here because GPU consumes more power than CPU does.
It's a SoC, the GPU is part of the CPU. It'll run far cooler than GPUs built for PCs.
>GPU is part of the CPU
OK. we can stop here.
Brainless moronic redditor. A tiny handheld does not have a thermal solution comparable to a home console or even a budget laptop. You shit eating children have been utterly brain rotten by marketing spin. "Docking" a system isn't magic, its just connecting it to a wall outlet so you don't get hampered by a small capacity battery. You cannot instantly change everything else about the system just because its tethered to a wall.
It's not a fricking handheld you absolute mongoloid. Stick a fan in the dock. There ya go, heat solution. I'm sure that one was way too complex for your tiny brain to possibly comprehend.
Its a handheld. A dock isn't the magic device you moronic wonders think it is.
An external fan increasing air flow isn't going to allow a system to pull 4x more power. The cooler inside of the system will be no different from anything else on the market with similar power envelope like the Switch or any modern smart phone. It'll be one copper heat pipe. Just barely good enough to dissipate 5-10w peak.
>An external fan increasing air flow isn't going to allow a system to pull 4x more power.
Who the frick said anything about 4x more power?
I didn't say that.
The switch uses about 12 watts of power in docked, so you're suggesting 48 watts of power docked.
The only thing that will be significantly increasing in power draw is the GPU. The GPU the switch 2 will be using uses 40 watts of power, compared to about 5-6 watts for the switch. So about 35 watts more.
So just jamming the AGX Orin in unchanged and not underclocked would get you to that level. But several features have been trimmed out, it will obviously be on a newer process and they will underclock it. All in all, I'd expect it to use at most half the power it currently does. This would push the switch 2 up by about 15 watts over the switch 1, so about 25-30 watts, let's say 27 watts for the sake of example.
I think it's totally doable for them to cool a 27 watt console with a fan in the dock.
what is a teraflop?
even if it is base ps4 strength, that is a huge fricking deal
especially if they also ship lite versions that will no longer be handicapped by drift joycons since the switch 2 is apparently going to use hall effect like sensors
Will the discussion around the next Nintendo console get better or worse when it's actually revealed?
>Will the discussion around the next Nintendo console get better or worse when it's actually revealed?
It's going to get much worse (here). The deranged schizophrenic Sony fanboy(s?) (it might just be one autistic guy). will claim that DLSS isn't real 4k and cherrypick screenshots from youtube. When it releases to huge success they will claim that it's just the Nintendo fanboys buying it and that it's going to flop in a month...and then two months...and then 3. They'll claim the next 3D Mario is terrible because it's forced soul.
DLSS is not real 4K though, what are you on about?
>DLSS is not real 4K though, what are you on about?
DLSS is literally outputting in 4k, try again.
Boring, power is not exciting. When consoles mimic phones or GPU purchases I'm no longer interested in anything but the cheapest and most efficient solution which is some form of pc.
>Boring, power is not exciting
More power the better and if you don't mind digital pc is best. You get mods and eroges too. The only thing keeping me on consoles is physical.
Powered means 60fps. Power means games that aren't so low resolution they look like broken glass smeared in Vaseline.
Power isn't all about MUH PHOTOREALISM
If all I want is power then I buy a pc, if all I want is a powerful handheld I will buy a handheld pc like the deck (which I also already own) or the deck 2 that will launch in 3 years which will be more powerful than switch 2 and will have a larger library. I'm not interested in generic power in a locked down environment.
If power didn't matter than you could sell the Odin 2 even if it was running on a 32-bit ARM CPU.
What a stupid, irrelevant post. The point is that Nintendo handhelds lose their appeal when all they are is another pointless tax you pay to gain access to games that play like every other game but with tendie nostalgia sprinkled ontop. You can never win the power war with pc which improves on a yearly refresh cycle.
That's just it.
Nintendo isn't making handhelds anymore. They're going with a hybrid console because tending to only one console environment without abandoning the userbase of console or handheld just keeps things simple and there's less of a problem with lost sales.
Technology just advanced that far for the idea of the Switch to be supported the way it does. It's been almost 7 years now and the hardware is showing its age for developer support. It stands to reason to do this refresh and matching the performance of mid to high end devices on the market is just incidental really.
giving more processing power to devs is clearly a mistake regardless
the homosexuals are giving less and less of a shit about optimizing and at this point thanks to upscaling they think they can get away with needing a 4090 ti to run garbage that looks like it came from the late ps2 era
Switch games load like crap though, so you can pretend the lack of performance is a virtue that pushes developers to be creative and optimize smartly or whatever but at the end of the day, some tasks may as well be like trying to fit an elephant into a van.
It's irrelevant wether Nintendo makes a handheld or a console or a hybrid, these are no longer unique classifications and pc does all the same shit. If Nintendo is no longer pioneering interesting tech they are just a tech illiterate boomer company releasing shitty pcs
> If Nintendo is no longer pioneering interesting tech
Gonna stop you there.
All Nintendo hardware was just repurposed off the shelf parts. That isn't to say they didn't choose their parts wisely but people often make the mistake of assuming they made their hardware from scratch rather than repurpose off the shelf parts. Hell, even the SGI hardware in the N64, customized as it was was still based on existing architecture.
The switch 2 GPU was probably partially created by Nintendo. It's extremely likely that after the switch's success, Nintendo helped fund the development of Orin, because it just happens to be exactly what they need in a chip. They probably helped foot the bill to get a chip that was better made for their console, specifically with the DLSS and raytracing support.
Nintendo may have commissioned NVIDIA to design the T239 based on existing Orin line but Orin was already in NVIDIA's roadmap.
Obviously they were always going to make more tegra chips, but I think it's very likely that Nintendo helped fund the development. Looking at the Orin, if this was just something that happened to release, then Nintendo is the luckiest fricking company on earth, because it's exactly what they want in a chip in every way.
They've been making Tegra hardware that doesn't end up in Nintendo consoles but automobiles and kits. I don't think you can credit Nintendo for something they've been doing before even partnering up with them.
Its crazy how delusional console babs are.
In the span of time that the Switch existed Nvidia sold 5x more chips for self driving systems and infotainment systems in cars vs the entire lifetime sales of the Switch.
I never said that, every response you give is some irrelevant tidbit of obvious information. Nobody cares whether Nintendo made their tech from scratch all they care about is if it's shifting gaming hardware in new directions.
What did Switch add that wasn't already done by Nintendo themselves in previous Nintendo consoles?
Rumble? That was N64
Tilt Gyro? They played with that during the Game Boy.
Touch screen? DS
Dual Analog? GameCube
Motion Sensor? The Wii.
Joy-Cons did make multiplayer more accessible, sure, but at the end of the day they just repeated was the NES offered out of the box.
Switch is a successful system, but it was really just Nintendo building a better mousetrap of a console using past knowledge. The "new experiences" angle either goes out the door or it's reduced in scale in terms of what it truly means and I don't think a hardware refresh is going to compromise that.
The switch is their least innovative console in a while but the gimmick was still useful and appealing. Seamless switching between handheld and console was genuinely new for a mass market. It is no longer a USP.
and even then that was based on existing technology in other devices and laptops. For the development environment all they did was merge the road.
Like I said, whether it was existing technology or not is completely irrelevant. It is their entire MO to use outdated tech in novel ways, if they stop doing that they are just using outdated tech.
>Like I said, whether it was existing technology or not is completely irrelevant.
The whole point is not to put Nintendo on a pedestal in terms of the hardware or features existing. It's nice they utilized it but that doesn't make them the pioneer of that technology. If anything they like Apple are just doing the tech version of stealing someone's art, meme or video and getting more views out of their name rather than the inventor of said tech.
They need power because most games on switch run like shit regardless.
in the future gpus will only generate 1 fps and AI will hallucinate the remaining 143 frames
Yeah, why not. It's just much more efficient for the GPU to take an image and make another image out of it than to make an entirely new image every time.
The huge issue we have with discussion of the switch 2, is that people act like with generic technological advancements it would have gained about 3x more power in nearly 8 years. It makes reasonable discussion nearly impossible, because it's such a fundamental misunderstanding. Just from advancements in mobile tech, you'd expect it to be around 6-7x stronger than the switch. That's the base level before bringing in things like DLSS or using more power in docked.
If you genuinely believe mobile tech only got 3x stronger in nearly 8 years you're brain damaged and don't belong in this thread.
Tendies don't know how anything works.
I know that mobile tech is advancing fast as frick.
For example, between the Iphone 13 and 15 2 years passed and the 15 is 2.5x stronger. That's 2.5x in 2 years.
For a longer comparison, the Iphone 7 released 7 years ago and was around 8x weaker.
most people get their tech info from shitposts
i can't even say from tech ecelebs because even those are talking about DLSS framegen bullshit and all those tech advancements that affect both pc and mobile but primarily mobile tech portability by giving far more power for less Ws
at this point you can buy budget phones that can run genshit at a reasonable fps and that's an hilariously poorly optimized game
Where did you get 3x performance claims from? The switch is not 1 terraflop, it's like 0.3-0.4 so the steamdeck which is 1.6TF is already 4x the power. If someone is saying the switch 2 is 3tf that's the same as claiming it's 7-8x the power
>terraflop
terraflops do not, and have never correlated with video game performance
It's Teraflop, you dumbass. And they do matter, just know the difference between FP32 and FP16.
I'm not the one who made the arbitrary claim of switch threads discussing 3x performance increases based on 3tf claims.
The NG Switch will be more powerful than the PS4 in handheld mode alone. That alone is more than a leap over the current Switch. And in turn will receive far more 3rd party ports than the OG Switch could possibly dream of receiving.
what if theres no switch 2
and its just switch pro
Wouldn't surprise me in the least honestly. They just dropped a new Zelda and have a new Mario coming out, they could feasibly wait another 2 years if they wanted.
>they could feasibly wait another 2 years if they wanted.
No, they can't. The switch is dropping to around 14m sales this year, down from about 18m last year and the drop is accelerating. Next year will be like 8m if they don't have a new console. They're also obviously holding all their games back at this point so even if they delay the thing they wont have games to sell until then.
Didn't we get the original Super Mario RPG and Yoshi's Island when N64 was just about out the door?
Literally every rumor prior to a Nintendo console's reveal is said to be as strong as Sony or Microsoft's console and they never are. Why do people keep humoring the idea. I'm not saying it's impossible but it really has no weight at this point when this happens every generation.
These aren't rumors. We're going off the Nvidia hack. It's factual data. Why is this so hard for you to understand?
>Nintendo console
>Being powerful
Can't wait to emulate that "powerful console" 3 months after release
>Can't wait to emulate that "powerful console" 3 months after release
You need a console that is about 7-8x stronger than the switch to emulate it in good quality.
So you're gonna need at least a 21tflop GPU to emulate the switch 2, although I'm curious how emulating DLSS is gonna work, that might be a mess.
So unless you got a 4070 give up on that
Calling it now it's going to be the EXACT same tegra x1 processor as current switch but with a clock speed bump on a smaller 7nm process or similar. Nintendo literally went 3 gens from gamecube to wii to wii u with the same hardware and internals to preserve backwards compatibility from gen to gen. The only reason you can't play gamecube disks on a wii u is because it doesn't read the mini disks but the hardware is perfectly capable since it's the same shit.
>Calling it now it's going to be the EXACT same tegra x1 processor as current switch but with a clock speed bump
They already released that moron...in 2019. They clocked the speed up when they increased the battery life and released the lite.
No they didn't the switch to this day is still an underclocked tegra x1 even in docked mode. An nvidia shield tv has the fully clocked tegra x1 processor.
It would actually be cheaper for them to get a new chipset than re-fab an old one at a smaller die.
Unless they don't care about backwards compatibility then sure. But assuming they're trying to preserve backwards compatibility it's the most feasible option for Nintendo who historically use hardware emulation with identical hardware rather than software emulation.
I'm so sick of morons comparing it to the steam deck. The steam deck will be almost 3 years old when this thing comes out. If they released a new steamdeck at that time it would be 4-5tflops, not 1.6tflops like it is now. That's why this comparison is moronic.
I feel like people are expecting Nintendo to change laws of physics with this handheld.
>I feel like people are expecting Nintendo to change laws of physics with this handheld.
You're just not understanding where mobile tech is at.
The Switch was about 40% stronger than the newest iphone when it released.
The newest iphone right now is about 1.8tflops.
If you apply the same increase, that would be about 2.5tflops. But the switch 2 is holiday next year, not early like the switch was and will probably use more power than the switch did.