Doubt.
Compared to does not mean equal to… lol
And even if some prototype device is, that doesn’t mean the production device will be, once things like heat and power usage have to really be accounted for.
It doesn’t even matter a lot if it does have really good graphics capability. Nvidia is good at that (though whether they’d price that where Nintendo wants is questionable). The question is what Nvidia can give in a CPU, because the only ARM CPU out there that’s actually interesting in terms of efficient per core performance is Apple.
That is not a gaming capable chip. It is a server chip where the entire value proposition is the core count and connectivity.
Nvidia doesn’t make anything and hasn’t shown any capability to make anything that isn’t a massive liability for gaming.
There’s no such thing as a “gaming chip” when it comes to CPUs. Are you trying to tell me that you can’t plug a GPU into the PCIe slot of an Ampere Altra? Do you honestly believe that a game compiled for ARM magically won’t run on a server chip due to some kind of hardware block that detects games and says “nope, not gonna run that?”
Also, Nvidia makes the processor in the Nintendo Switch, and I linked chips from two other manufacturers in my comment.
There are performance traits you have to have to be even in the vicinity of functional for gaming, and they’re the opposite of what you need for a server. Yes, I’m saying that if you put a gaming GPU into any of those chips, the performance would be fucking terrible. You need fast clocks and IPC with low latency, not lots of cores and high bandwidth. High “Performance per core” in terms of server parts does not mean that it can do anywhere close to the same work per core a consumer, gaming focused chip can do. The design parameters are completely different.
The processor in the Switch chip is the reason the Switch has such a limited AAA library. It’s not mediocre. It’s not serviceable. It’s fucking terrible.
True, but it does suggest they are in the same league. Not saying it is, but able to be compared suggests that it may be as good in some aspects.
I compared my wealth to Bill Gates and turns out he makes more money just existing for 1 minute than I will make in my entire life. But we are comparable.
You are comparable, and what they said was not anywhere near over the top or outrageous.
Your disbelief in a product existing and making a joke out of what otherwise would be a proper conversation is honestly very sad.
Exactly. Oranges are comparable to apples, doesn’t mean they share much in common
Honestly the swtcih is so far off in performance that if the new switch performs like the ps4 it’s already a win.
Terrible title. “Switch 2 supports ray tracing and will use upscaling” is the summary. Which is obvious, it won’t be anywhere near consoles, it’s like 1/7th resolution.
Yeah damn click bait titles
That’s not what the article says, the values in the patent are an example. It’s not out of realm of possibility to have something that can match at least the Series S when docked while still supporting a portable mode.
deleted by creator
Uh huh.
I mean sure, two outlets reporting it, but I’ll believe it when I see it. With the Switch Pro/2/U/360/Series N in particular, the leaks were always so outlandish and in the end turned out false, while we can clearly assume the overall news about a Switch successor being in development to be real, any specific piece of news I’d immediately discard and put into the “made up stuff”-folder for the time being.
This report would make the switch more powerful than a steamdeck. I’ll believe it when I see it
Remember when Switch was comparable to PS4?
I find this hard to believe. At this point Switch 2 “rumors” have just been used for clickbait now.
I think they’re working on it but it won’t be for awhile.
deleted by creator
As per for Nintendo
Nintendo is of course famous for never releasing obsolete hardware
I don’t doubt it… Nintendo is always years behind.
The PS5 came out in 2020 and this Switch2 is probably a year away. So that would make their hardware be roughly 4 years old in terms of power. Plus if this is roughly the size of the current Switch, it won’t be pushing more than HD-resolutions (current Switch is only a 720 display), so getting PS5-level graphics on a 1080 screen these days is not particularly complicated or expensive.
God of war 2016 PS 4 original setting at 720p on steam deck is about 30 fps. On ROG Ally afew frames less if you run it at 15 watts, at 45 watts Ally can probably do 720p at 50ish fps but less than an hour of battery. Ally is the top of line 2023 AMD tech apu and cost $700. Mobile technology is amazing right now, but it’s just not at a level where it can do 3 years old desktop graphics at a reasonable cost/power consumption.
Current switch does 1080 docked already , so while I hope it’ll have at least 4k menus and 4k light games, I’d settled for 1080 again with some sorta more advanced AA for first party games
it’s screen is 720. I would not expect Nintendo to go above 1080 on the screen and maybe output a scaled-up 4K when docked.
To use the PS5 as an example, it’s based on Zen 2 and RDNA 2, both of which are now deprecated. It would not be surprising for Nintendo to match them at this point in the cycle.
The Steam Deck uses the same architectures by the way, with different core counts and a few more differences in capabilities
Yes it is surprising, it’s a high TDP desktop x86 SoC vs a low TDP mobile ARM SoC. Not close.
Did Nintendo announce that Switch 2 is ARM?
I don’t know. It’s obviously arm. They partner with Nvidia, they want backward compat, and it’s a mobile device.
lol, 3 years into the current gen and switch 2 only competes. Seriously
If it’s portable, that’s a game changer.
Batteries haven’t advance far enough to make this headline possible
True, it’s probably microfusion reactors.
True. I don’t think that would be possible though, considering the power of the current handhelds like steam deck and its competitors. I don’t think it’ll be even as powerful as a steam deck tbh
Steam deck and similar devices are 500 dollars and up, unless Nintendo is ready to sell devices that expensive, there’s no way Switch 2 is going to be on the same range of processing power.
Nintendo has a stranglehold on their game distribution and keep their software prices high. They would 100% be in a position for Switch 2 to be a loss leader.
How much loss though, $500+ devices can’t even do PS4 pro graphics and at a terrible (90min ish) battery life, and they are big/heavy. Plus Nintendo historically never sold their devices at a loss, even when they had total market dominance.
Right - if it’s portable and has the graphics of a ps5, it’ll cost thousands, not hundreds lol. There’s just no way, unless the “visuals comparable” is to be taken literally and just means they are capable of being compared
Aside from possibly the N64 and GameCube, Nintendo has never tried to push technology in that way.
And it’s been true since the very first console. The Master System was more powerful than the NES, and the Genesis/Mega Drive was more powerful than the Super NES (arguably; the Sega CPU was far more powerful than Nintendo’s). Same is true for its portables.
They’ve always prioritized per-unit margins. It’s a conservative approach, but it means profit on every console sold.
So there’s a 0% chance this console is actually as powerful as a PS5. However, there’s a good chance there are hardware and software techniques being used to upscale a lower resolution image.
Nintendo never makes high power consoles that’s not really their area. So I’d be surprised if this is true.
And what does PS5 equivalent graphics even mean? We just talking screen resolution or are we saying it can push the same poly count. I’d be prepared to accept it might get 1080p maybe 4k on a good day, but that’ll only be on low poly assets.
Both the N64 and the GameCube were built and marketed with performance in mind (especially the N64). Maybe you’re just too young to remember the ads.
Today’s consoles are pretty different than the n64 or GameCube tho
yeah, Project Reality
Apparently the ps5 comparison is because they ran the same tech demo that the ps5 did 2 years ago. But that doesn’t really mean anything. At this point Nintendo may still be working with a wide range of specs on prototypes before finalizing a decision about what the console will be.
I’ve got a steam deck and a host of other steam deck competitors that do that and more now.
The appeal of Nintendo console is first party exclusives and whatever the new gimmick may be (I don’t mean that word as a bad thing, I have loved most of their gimmicks). Powerful hardware just means that it can potentially have a good third party support, so that you’re not left playing just the first party games.
I’ve got steam deck and ROG ally, both barely do 720p 45fps PS4 pro level games, and forget about battery life.
I’ll believe they made something on the same level as the competitors when the console actually comes out. An unreleased demo console is not something you should be using as a benchmark for how good the visuals are since the product will most likely go through a significant amount of changes in-between the demo and release.
Even then, there’s the chance that if the console is coming out a few days later, there is no guarantees they didn’t use an old demo console that is outdated compared to what will be released or wasn’t made specifically with the goal in mind of overselling the console by pouring resources into making the demo console actually better than the release one.
👌👍🤣
deleted by creator
meh doesn’t seem too likely
My expectations for the switch successor are reasonable I think
Backwards compatible with the Switch
performance boost when docked (I’d be perfectly happy with solid 1080p 60fps)
Mobile performance of 720p 60fps (lower detail settings than docked)
And I dunno just get a modern fucking friend/online system or at the very least let me integrate discord lol
