These specs point to a more powerful "Switch 2" than I imagined, and people seem to be pretty convinced that they're legitimate. Channel art by @PaintraSeaPea
When you mentioned the controllers have supposedly got a mic in them I was jokingly talking to myself about "Hah, the controllers are gonna be phones. The nintendo phone-" and then I immediately changed posture and got all serious when I blurted out that the wii phone is about to be real
My guess is that, if the Switch 2 DOES end up being as powerful as this article claims, it's presumably because of third party titles. There are some HORENDOUSLY ugly Switch ports, so it could be that this was done to allow these games to not be so drastically compromised with the more powerful hardware.
A switch that can decently run Elden Ring for example, can you imagine? It's not that unrealistic now, though I try to manage my expectations. But if they go third party route with a PS4 pro like console, that's a dream console right there.
This is a fair assessment. That and the fact that Switch games already look like PS4 games cause it's already in the ballpark of that system, just slightly lower resolution or frame rates. Switch has the potential for a more noticeable leap in power this gen and kinda needs it cause of pressure of systems like the Steam Deck. Also, just to be able to keep playing PS5 ports, as you said.
I think the real reason they're making the Switch 2 more powerful then we expected is because it's not 2017 anymore. Now tere are other handheld gaming devices that massively outperform the Switch like the Steam Deck. They don't want their 3rd party ports to look and run significantly worse than on the competitors systems.
@@KingAgniKai You say they'll never change that and yet here they are changing that. Also the Wii U was underpowered yet it was one of they're biggest failures.
I think they may be making it stronger than a PS4 less at the consumer's request, but moreso the *developer's* request. I'm sure making it this powerful makes it much easier to port current-gen games
A ton of PS5 games also released on PS4 with only minor adjustments needed. If this has PS4 Pro level specs, it will really help it's third party support. The third party games will still run better on PS5, but the Switch 2 version won't be as bad as what a lot of Switch games have looked like in the past. With Square Enix committing to more multiplatform games, we could finally get Final Fantasy games releasing on Nintendo at the same time as on Playstation. Imagine if FF7 Remake and Rebirth get ported over, and then Part 3 releases on both PS5 and Switch 2 on the same day. After Final Fantasy 7 went to Playstation because the N64 wasn't powerful enough, I feel like this would be a poetic way to bring things back around.
@@darrenmacqueen9884you know I’d absolutely use the switch 2 more than my pc if that were the case, since nowadays I’m more into mobile gaming than sitting in a chair for 3 hours. Being able to play something like Sekiro on my “tablet” before bed would be a dream And yes, ik steam deck exists but it’s still pretty fucking expensive to me. At the end of the day it’ll come down to how much this thing costs and how strong it actually is
@@darrenmacqueen9884 and it's all because sony got too cocky and greedy with the ps5 lmao, barely any games for it on top of that, obviously pc is still the best platform for almost everything, but those nintendo first parties are the reason why most people buy the console anyways (although some do buy due to their unfamiliarity with the gaming space, and I do agree that starting off with a switch as your first gaming experience would be great.)
Translations for the more advanced tech stuff! At 1:22 on "Two 6GB LPDDR5X Memory Modules": This means the 12GB of memory is made of two 6GB memory modules that are good for battery (or "Low Power", hence "LP") and that are using the fastest, most recent standard for consumer memory (DDR5, the X is just branding for mobile modules). Should deliver some pretty good loading times and maybe even some graphics improvements. At 1:45 on "256GB UFS 3.1 Storage": This is pretty standard flash storage for portable devices (Universal Flash Storage, hence "UFS"). This is a faster and generally better standard than what the switch currently uses (eMMC), but interestingly is one version behind the cutting-edge 4.0 version of UFS, instead using 3.1, which has almost half the speeds, but likely a much lower price to match. Maybe its cost-saving, or perhaps it means we could see an even better version a few years down the line. Either way, this storage will definitely have better load times than current switch. Arlo's right - this really isn't anything to shake a stick at for a Switch 2!
To note, RAM bandwidth won't really help load times because it's not a bottleneck in that case. For the Switch, as an example, the bottlenecks were the CPU first and storage medium second. This is because game assets are compressed, and only the CPU could handle decompressing them. Even with microSD storage speeds of 90+MB/s, the decompression rate was pretty low (maybe no more than 50MB/s input?) as there were only 3 game cores to work with. It's why there was the introduction of "Boost Mode" which improved loading speeds. That's because the CPU was boosted from 1Ghz to 1.7Ghz, but at the expense of the GPU being downclocked to a mere 76.8Mhz (equivalent to about 39 GFlops). USeful for loading screens, not at all useful during gameplay. What Switch 2 will have, based on the Nvidia leaks, is a hardware file decompression engine block (FDE), very similar to what PS5 and Series have, which will handle what the CPU was originally tasked with. Not only relieving the CPU, but will do it MUCH faster. We don't know the rate of the input, nor the decompression ratio, but it's certainly a reason for having UFS 3.1 internal storage (2.1GB/s) and possible use of microSD Express cards (800MB/s). That number of 800MB/s may sound low, but 7zip benchmarking my gaming laptop with an i7 11800H, running at 4Ghz with 8c16t, was achieving an output rate of around 940MB/s, not input.
@@thepikminbrawler1746 Both use flash storage cells of multiple possible types. UFS is just a specification primarily used for soldered on storage on mobile devices. SSDs are just a type of flash media. It doesn't say anything about speed, flash type, physical size or interface.
I'm loving this channel with the quantity of uploads. Glad you found a way to upload this type of content without jeopardizing your main channel due to RU-vid goofiness.
A PS4 Pro with DLSS, ray-tracing, support for more modern features, and low-level access for developers would be a very capable machine. Imagine what Monolith Soft could do with something like that?
The rumored console specs of 'PS4 Pro/ Xbox Series S' are for docked mode, it's to be expected the clock speeds and voltages will be reduced in handheld mode, which if they're only targeting 1080p in handheld mode should be fine performance wise. Fortunately there are some other things in favour for battery life given current rumours. -Process node shrink: It's rumoured to be Samsung 7nm LPP which is way more efficient that the previous Switch, (you remember the massive battery life improvement with the 1st Switch refresh) the 'LPP' is a refinement of the node meaning 'Low Power + Performance'. -Ada features: Whilst the rumoured T239 processor is using NVidia's Ampere architecture instead of the impressively power efficient Ada architecture seen in 40 series cards, some of the newer features have actually been implemented. All we know of is Ada's use of 'clock gating', basically reducing power to silicon that's not being actively utilized, is coming to the Switch which will help with battery life, there's also the possibility of newer Tensor core hardware which delivers far better performance given the same power consumption. -Bigger size + New battery tech: An 8 inch screen suggests a slightly bigger construction, not sure if Nintendo wants to go the direction of increasing or decreasing thickness, but there'll certainly be little detriment in allocating a larger space for the battery.
fun fact, the switch was gonna have even less ram than it already does, but monster hunter looked at the dev kit and said. nah. we need this (points at sheet of minimum specs), or monster hunter can't happen on this(points at switch). and so nintendo added more ram to the switch. capcom probably saved the switch right there.
Heck the Switch cant even run Pokemon with the amount of RAM that it does (at least according to my tech savy friend Scarlet and Violet are mainly constrained by RAM)
@@EnigmaticGentleman Honestly it's more of a Pokémon problem than a Switch problem. There are better looking games running better than Scarlet and Violet on the same hardware...
I've been hearing this for years now and I'm goig to say it: PS4 Pro level is more than enough. Imagine that on your pocket? It's already a level capable of creating some very beautiful graphics
In terms of numbers it'll look similar to a ps4 pro but the new switch will be using newer technologies and assets and will deliver slightly better results.
@@FunnyParadoxDLSS helps a ton because if you render at 920p instead of 4k then upscale you can get all the better graphics of PS5 and better frame rate as it takes way less GPU power to process.
Impossible without extra power, probably with docked mode or with charging cable. There such big limitations for handheld with battery power draw that keeping even those most expensive handheld PC down too.
I wouldn't pay attention to that cortex chip with 8 GB RAM rumour, there's so much evidence pointing to the Tegra T239 that it's where the smart money is. And the whole rumoured release window was drawn from IGN's very particular interpretation of a question answered at the investor meeting, I wouldn't put much stock in it.
I’m not very caught up on the rumors. Why is the Tegra T239 Professor more likely than the cortex chip and what’s the advantages of having one over the other?
@@noahcaldwell5267 **Edit: the switch uses Tegra X1. Switch 2 is rumored (?) to use Tegra T239 which uses the same Tegra architecture as the X1 but I have no idea if that means it's backwards compatible. Also this new T239 chip may not be out??** maybe misinformation so don't quote me. But isn't that chip OP mentioned a backwards compatible chip for the Switch. So that'd make more sense to use instead of a new chip
@@noahcaldwell5267It's the chip elucidated from the Nvidia hack back in 2022. Basically, within the hacked materials, there is full documentation for NVN2. NVN is the Nintendo Switch's Graphics API (NVN=NVidia + Nintendo), NVN2 is the Switch-Next's graphics API. That's where we learned about T239's GPU. And information that's come out since has only corroborated T239 being the chip used in Switch-Next. It's a done deal at this point
@@artless3438 It's also slightly older, which means it'll be cheaper for Nintendo and for consumers. It's what Nintendo did with the Tegra chip inside the Switch so it makes sense they'd do it a second time.
@@artless3438 The original Switch used a Tegra X1 Maxwell based arm cpu developed by NVIDIA. The T239 would fit in that same line of arm CPUs, this time using Ampere based architecture which is a giant step up. It also makes sense from the cost saving Nintendo loves to employ, as back with the original Switch, they could have gone for Pascal architecture that would have resulted in better efficiency and performance but decided against it because it cost far too much for what audience they were aiming for at the time. They could have gone of Lovelace this time around for greater performance, but Ampere is much cheaper to manufacture and sell, plus offers numerous upscaling enhancements to compared to years past.
I think a PS4 Pro/Xbox 1 S power level would be the only way they can come close to the success of the original switch. Since the concept is no longer revolutionary, a massive power spike is the only way you're going to recapture a lot of that same excitement. Imagine playing Elden Ring on the switch 2.
Yeah, but the Switch is so far behind that it's going to be a big jump in power either way. I mean Elden Ring runs on a base PS4 fine enough so I don't think 3rd party support is going to be too much of an issue. Hopefully these rumors are true and it is closer to a PS4 Pro, but even if they're not I think just having a Switch that runs most current 3rd party games (Most of which still run fine on base PS4s and Xbox Ones) and next gen 1st party games will do fine enough.
At this point "New Nintendo console" is excitement enough. They've genuinely built such an insane reputation of quality this generation (unlike the Wii before anyone brings that up) that that as long as they have a good game lineup tens of millions will buy no matter what.
We're potentially a year off. Hopefully the "Super Switch" has some fire launch games, and hopefully remasters of Switch games are inexpensive, if not free, DLC on top of backwards compatibility.
Specifically for docked mode, but yes. It really depends on what is being utilized. In terms of raw power, Series S likely has the high ground. But toss in FSR and/or RT, and Switch 2 may push ahead simply because those two features on it are ran on dedicated hardware, not digging into existing resources.
The main I reason I hear this at the moment is that Nvidia will implement DLSS 3 into the Switch 2 and the possible amount of ram that the OS will take up. To give an example, the PS5 has about 16GB of ram but needs about 2.5GB for the OS, so devs can only really play with about 13.5GB of ram if the Switch 2 OS is similar to the Switch 1 OS in terms of RAM usage then Devs would have around 11.5GB of ram but some are speculating that the Switch 2 OS would be about 1 GB of RAM so Devs get 11GB to play with which would also still be more then the Series S which has only 10GB to start with and that's before we take into account how much the OS is using.
@Tython82 This is going to sound really weird but blame Nvidia and their naming schemes. Switch 2 will most likely not be capable of dlss3. But will be capable of dlss 3.5 and on. The ga10f in the switch 2 has 1536 fp32 shaders to the series s 1280, but likely won't be clocked high enough to exceed or match the series s in raster compute (shades pixels for traditional graphics rendering.) Probably be somewhere between 0.5 to 1 tflop short of the series s here. (Comparing docked, as series s doesn't have a portable mode. All comparisons are docked switch 2). It will have around 3 GB more capacity for games as you described because of the extremely lightweight horizon os. But it will only have around a bit more than half the memory bandwidth, and around half the hardware texture throughput, as it has just over half the texture mappers. The extra memory will likely be in service of feeding the vast amount of raw compute the switch 2 will have over the series s, for things like it's tensor and rt cores. For RTX Ampere (not turing, not lovelace, not the a100 or orin, just rtx ampere) Tensor cores provide the exact same number of shaders as the main gpu, in this case, 1536 vector lanes, but they are for different data types than fp32, like fp16 or int8. You can think of it like having one gpu for raster graphics shaders and another gpu of the same size for compute shaders. The tensor cores are designed to accelerate large matrix operations by 8x over how long it would take the raster shaders to perform the same mma instructions. AMD's solution to needing fp16 compute is called rapid packing, they use fp32 shaders to perform 2 fp16 operations. This doubles compute but you have to spend fp32 performance to do it. So a series s at 4 tflops fp32, can reach 8 tflops fp16, but will have 0 tflops fp32 if it does. A switch 2 at 3 tflops fp32, will have 24 tflops fp16 compute, AND the full 3 tflops fp32, they run in parallel. This is where the power to run dlss fast enough to boost performance comes from. So if a hypothetical game needed 2 tflops fp16 for compute, the series s would be at 3 tflops fp32, 2 tflops fp16. While switch 2 would be at 3 tflops fp32, 24 tflops fp16.
@@Nobody-sp7ug While Series S does have more RAM bandwidth than Switch 2 will have, there is the importance of just how effective the architectures can utilize it. I don't know what RDNA2's effective bandwidth per TFlop is, but Ampere is roughly 25GB/s per TFlop. With the RAM being LPDDR5X and is capable of 120GB/s, we can estimate that the Switch 2's GPU can be allowed to push into 1.3Ghz territory to produce roughly 4TFlops even with the CPU allocating 20GB/s from the RAM. They don't have to worry about battery life in this case because it's in docked mode. Pushing the GPU that high isn't just a benefit to the shaders, but also to the tensor/RT cores as they are locked to the same frequency. We also have to understand that Series S's RDNA2 is not on full parity with RDNA2-based desktop GPUs, as it is missing key elements, like Infinity Cache. This has a direct effect on the performance of the ROPs. Every RDNA2/3 APU is affected by this. What about Switch 2 using Ampere? It is on full-parity with Ampere, and then some because of the design of the T239 SoC. Just like Tegra X1 was Maxwell-based, it did incorporate certain features found in Pascal, and the T239 SoC will include some features from Lovelace (unfortunately, not the same OFA used for DLSS 3's frame generation).
When I hear that there's a microphone in the controller, my first thought wasn't communication options, but them bringing the DS games to the Switch 2 Online.
None of those people are the source. They are just (mostly) people who saw and discussed the information from the source. The actual sources are as follows: GPU Render config: NVN2 Graphics api documentation stolen from nvidia and released by Lapsu$ in Ransom attack. CPU: Commits made by Nvidia employees in the public L4T github I guess because they didn't think anyone paid attention. RAM: Publically Available shipping manifests.
I also think that because they sold so many Switches they've probably been able to get better deals with parts for Switch 2 therefore it can be more powerful parts for their aimed budget
Personally I think Nintendo may be leaning towards more 3rd party title support like Fortnite or Overwatch 2 and making it more powerful to handle those titles better. This would also mean 1st party devs could go wild with the games considering they have a whole lot more power to work with.
It's funny that people are thinking that the Switch 2 sounds "more powerful than they thought" because if you know anything whatsoever about computer hardware you'd realize that aside from the RAM which is completely current everything else in the system is 2-4 year old technology which makes it almost exactly the same as the Nintendo Switch when it launched. Of course, the beauty of this is that one of the biggest weaknesses of the Nintendo Switch is it's memory bandwidth and this RAM config would essentially triple the amount of memory while also quadrupling the bandwidth. Let's just hope that whatever new game carts they use can also run at UFS 3.1 speeds so that games don't need to be installed to the internal memory AND that the onboard storage can be expanded with more of the same and I'll personally be good to go.
Just to note, but the T239 SoC with its 12 SMs (1536 CUDA cores) would be too big, run too hot, and eat batteries for breakfast if it were on the same process node as Ampere desktop GPUs were made on (Samsung 8N/10nm). The likely process node it could use that Nvidia is seemingly going to have an opening on is the TSMC 4N (Nvidia optimized 5nm), which by comparison offers at least double the performance per watt. The thing to know is that if you were to take Ampere SMs, replace the tensor/RT/OFA with their next-gen versions, and make them on TSMC 4N, you've basically got Lovelace. That's how close they are in design.
I agree to an extent. I don't care about these insane graphically intensive games like cyberpunk and stuff. But it would be nice to be able to play rocket league, zelda totk/botw, apex, etc at 60fps instead of 30 and constantly lagging below
it would make sense for the iteration that's supposed to be "like the last one" to focus on beefing up specs (you see this in all areas of tech to be fair.)
It could also be that Nintendo is so afraid of another Wii U situation that they're overcompensating compared to what they'd usually think they need to guarantee that people see it as a necessary upgrade
The Switch was developed while Nintendo was under water. Now they are doing so well, they can afford to put more cleverness into the Switch 2 development. So they might end up making something that is surprisingly powerful for a surprisingly small price. Mobile chips got so good and plentiful, that weaker hardware might be more expensive. Also Playstation announced that the PS5 is already at the end and it would suck to fall even more behind. The Switch was like one gen behind before the PS5, then it would be 2 right away after release because of the PS6.
Now that Nintendo obviously isn’t trying to be as secretive now, it’s certaintly MORE plausible. It makes sense that they would start all there orders now in such as being able to do that without being questioned is probably one reason they made the announcement at all.
would love this channel to also be a podcast feed of audio only since the visuals seem not totally necessary. would absolutely turn notifications on for it in my podcast app.
I think Nintendo realize their weak hardware is the only thing preventing them from completely dominating the market. If they improve that, there’s literally no problem with the Switch. Make games run well on it, including ports, that’s them potentially set forever. It’s also the only thing worth changing. If you keep the system functionally identical, the only way to justify its creation is improving the one flaw with the previous console. Cheap out on that, there’s no reason to buy it.
Dude, have you been living under rock the last decade, specially the last couple of years? And people still wonder how the AAA industry is in shambles...
@@XanderVJ I’m not saying Nintendo is in a fierce competition. I’m saying they’re right now able to make a killshot. XBOX is dead, Play Station’s userbase is lower than Sony wants, to the point developers like Square Enix are no longer letting their games be Play Station exclusive because the revenue isn’t adding up, and the only real competitor Nintendo has is PC gaming, where most of PlayStation’s market has shifted to, and thus has shifted-for physical consoles-toward the Steam Deck, a branch Nintendo can still compete with with unique, exclusive titles and maybe better battery life and optimization..
i do see the ps4 pro levels of power being likely. i think with the popularity of handheld gaming pcs like the steam deck, the pricing for mobile SOCs has gotten a lot more competitive for Nintendo to jump in and pick something more powerful than they'd usually go with.
They probably want it to be better for third party. Also PS4 pro is one generation behind, not the regular ps4 since the pro came out around the same time as the first switch.
I'm watching your Mario marathon with Simpleflips on his channel! When the new Mario comes out on Switch 2, you'll do the whole marathon again with the new game at the end, right? It seems reasonable with how much you guys love Lost Levels!
If it’s more expensive at first when I’d get it and they drop the price, I want to show that I was a Nintendo Ambassador for the 3DS and be like a Super Ambassador and get like 40 retro games free haha
But Nintendo is not just one generation behind, and by the time Switch 2 comes out, we will be at the halfway point of the ps5/series X so they are 1.5 generations behind now. They need to future proof their console to at least be able to adopt third party games from other developers
the switch successor would need two things to be VR-capable: a very high resolution screen and the processing power to make it work. I don't think we've heard about the former. But it seems like a natural choice.
Yes, can't wait for TTYD! I'll definitely be watching your stream Arlo so I can share the joy with you. Currently playing the original Paper Mario for the first time and really enjoying it!
If this is true, then combined with Nvidias upscaling (and potentially even frame generation) the PS5 like visuals people have been talking about aren't just plausible, but straight up likely.
@@2intheampm512 It is if Nvidia wants to keep up its "Ampere isnt capable of frame gen" myth. Fact is they only need to upgrade a VERY small part of the GPU to get it working well.
@@EnigmaticGentleman It's not a myth whatsoever. Ampere doesn't have a fast enough nor feature capable enough OFA (Optical Flow Accelerator) to utilize DLSS 3 FG. T239 has an OFA somewhere in between the power of desktop Ampere and Lovelace (it's the same OFA as T234/Orin), however from what I've seen from NVN2 the OFA does not support the additional features from Lovelace that make FG possible. This isn't a defense of Nvidia for going about their DLSS FG implementation this way, it's really not something that required the fixed function hardware, shown by FSR 3 FG being nearly as good (unlike FSR upscaling vs. DLSS upscaling). But what I am saying is that it's unlikely for Switch 2 to get DLSS FG because of the OFA version used and how Nvidia does FG. FSR 3 FG is also unlikely to be utilized due to the relatively lower shader throughput of T239 vs. PC/laptop dGPUs
Having it be similar in power to a PS4 Pro or Xbox One X really shouldn't because surprise, I would describe the current Switch as being '7.5th gen' in terms of power so I fully expected them to take at least a whole generation or leap up from that point.
Maybe they could also want to make it more powerful than they normally would because they want it to last as much or even a little bit longer than the Switch and make sure developers have more space to work with for those games on the Switch 2's final years? Because as much as TOTK is an absolute technical marvel and a miracle that it runs as well as it does, it still is held back by the switch's specs.
In marketing you learn that to compete with other companies you need to make your product: unique, low priced, high quality. If we look at what nintendo is good at is making unique games that are only on switch so probably they are making the switch powerful to handle the newer generation of the games. Maybe a zelda game with great visuals or mario with a huge map like lots of teleportation and planets.
A PS4 Pro-level console would pretty much be the perfect console, because lets be honest, there isn't a whole lot that truly NEEDS PS5 level hardware to this day.
Yeah, the only noticeable difference to me between my PS4 Pro and PS5 are the load times. And the faster load times ARE nice, but not necessary. And if that's the only difference between my PS5 and Switch 2 then I'm going to be very happy.
The source mentioning 8x A78AE is wrong. From Linux 4 Tegra commits, we know that T239 has 1 cluster of 8 cores. The Arm Cortex A78AE can come in a max cluster size of 4 cores, so it would be two clusters. The A78C can come in a single cluster with 8 cores, hence that is the Arm core IP T239 is using
On paper, it might be around ps4 pro level, but we also have to take into account the power draw. We have handhelds like the ROG Ally that are around that level, but the battery gets drained like crazy. In docked mode it would be nice, but not possible in handheld mode unless you want less than 2 hours of battery
What excites me is what this means for their online! If Nintendo is signaling that they’re getting back in the dome with Microsoft and Sony AND competing with the Steam Deck? I think they have to improve their online offerings just because it’s such an easy win for Nintendo.
Arlo thinking the Switch 2 would only be on par with a base PS4 is so confusing. The Switch was not a portable 360, it was a portable Super 360 Pro. It wasn't 1 generation behind at release, it was more like 50%-25% of a generation behind. Imagine Doom Eternal or The Witcher 3 running on a base 360. Hint: it would not. What a baffling thought process, of course this thing would be as powerful as a PS4 Pro, if not more. Sure, Nintendo doesn't care about power as much as the others, but c'mon. Takes like this are so annoying.
I will add on to this and say Tales of Vesperia remastered ran perfectly on switch and its technically a remaster of a 360 and ps3 game. Its easy to buy into online dooming but the switch hardware wasnt that far behind
@@carbvan No it ran fine. Switch version is a remaster though. Its literally a better version of the game that runs at least just as good. I dont understand whats confusing
@@-lord1754 I get it now, just most people would point towards a newer game as an example of why a console is more powerful than last-gen hardware, rather than a game that already ran on last-gen hardware.
With a power level around the Series S range, they ensure current gen third party support and not just ports from the PS4/XBone gen. Elden Ring and FF7 Remake on a Nintendo system, on the go, is a pretty attractive feature
There is not a big leap from PS4 Pro to XBox Series S. But as soon as the next Nintendo console is as poweful as the XBox Series S they will get full third party support which makes a huge difference and is totally worth spending a tiny bit more on hardware power.
its so crazy to see how unrealistic people have been about this handheld lol. like it's not a home console, how could people be disappointed that it wasn't gonna be like ps5 level performance? as if nintendo's whole thing was huge competition based on how good their games can be on limited hardware and not like the boring fidelity arms race that other companies are heading for.
The ds itself was already amazing to me back then for having 3d graphics at the palm of my hands. The Switch itself is already something I couldn't have ever dreamed to exist, having ps4 level would be perfection.
technically the original switch could end up being the handheld console of this generation. We've always had a home console & a handheld from Nintendo, so if they really focus on the Switch Lite going forward it would be a return to form
The switch was not under powered. It was the strongest chipset in it's class for quite some time. Hell digital foundry just compared it to the three times the price and nine years younger iPhone 15. It was very competitive. It's very difficult to exceed the power envelope given price, temperature and size. Steam deck is more powerful but the battery life is low, it's huge and it's expensive.
I'm impressed with your price analysis in this video, it's a very realistic strategy that we've actually seen before with the quest 2/3 where the quest 2 became the budget version of the more expensive 3, both still recieve advertising.
I’ve said it before and I’ll say it again: Nintendo HAS to keep the next console affordable. If Nintendo thinks that they will see similar sales of “the Switch 2” charging $500 a pop, they will regret it. With how bad inflation has gotten, it might be impossible to charge $300 again… but I think $400 is gonna be the top end they should aim for if they want to see continued success. And I KNOW Nintendo hates doing this but it might behove them to give away the razor so they can sell us the blades.
this performance boost, along with some other hardware upgrades like magnetic joysticks, analog triggers, etc. is all the switch needs to be succesful in its next gen (also nintendo please add online parties this time)
This is all very exciting news! I'm very excited for when they will announce all this. Personally, I just want DS/3DS/WiiU compatibility digitally somehow. I WANT IT SO BAD. So many great games on those systems... If they come to NSO or get rereleased for the Switch 2 somehow, I will be very happy.
These tech specs have me concerned over the price point, I’m really hoping it doesn’t cost over 450 CAD, 350 USD. Let alone being as expensive as the ps5/series X.
7:31 this is exact topic i thought in recent years. there were so many youtubers benefitted by switch hype, and what we see now is them being either talk completely different consoles(wulff den), or keep making unheathy amount of switch 2 rumor contents(switch force). but i can't blame them, since nintendo didn't release any big, massy contents several years. it is sure a hard time for nintendo youtubers. and also this is why i adore this guy, his genuine, honest talk style make me watch his videos even the topic itself isn't that much interesting. but i must say i'm eargerly waiting for super-hyped arlo again 😂
I'm thinking they want it powerful enough so that they can port ps5 and Xbox games over without a giant compromise in quality. Sure games like Hogworts Legacy run on the switch but they know the people who buy games like that will always go for the ps5 or Xbox version if they can. That eats into profits quite a bit.
The switch is almost a decade old now. The PS5 has been out for almost 5 years and I assume in it’s later half of its life. The next switch isn’t even coming out this year. If it’s not at least as strong as a PS4 pro I don’t see the point of it tbh
I find it more plausible that Nintendo realized that some of the Switch's success was it's ability to court 3rd party developers with an architecture that was easy to port to. The Wii-U had two displays - that alone makes ports harder. Batman needed to be fundamentally changed for its port even though the system could handle it. But the switch was not only able to handle modern engines like UE4 - it didn't have a feature or lack of feature requiring existing titles to be re-engineered to the same degree. The next engines, however, would not be easily supported on the present Switch. If your lighting system depends on ray tracing, you need to redo the entire lighting system to run on Switch. UE5 would not be supported even with lower resolutions or less particles because of it - things that made impossible ports like Doom 2016 possible this generation. So if Nintendo either went to developers and asked for bottlenecks, or looked seriously at the engines others were using to develop cross-platform titles and realized there were really only a handful of features that were actually preventing future ports (Ray Tracing being one of them, which requires a more modern GPU that can handle different lighting calculations but not necessarily a dramatically more expensive one, and RAM speed being another), then that might explain the move. The Xbox One and PS4 had older GPUs and not as much RAM, but RAM is unusually cheap at the moment (when it has been relatively expensive for most of the past 6 years) and GPUs with extra processing power are being overproduced for AI use, lowering costs. The market of the Switch also gives Nintendo more bargaining power with NVIDIA or AMD when it comes to GPUs - this is a system that could be on order for years, with proven potential for a hundred million units. It may be to the GPU-maker's best interests to let Nintendo get a a GPU at near cost now in exchange for really good profits a year to six years down the line as production ramps up and costs for aging parts that wouldn't otherwise have much value get less expensive to produce. Nintendo didn't have that negotiatiating power last time when the Wii-U flopped, and looked to existing chips instead. Now, they can ask for a custom chipset designed specifically for low-spec UE5 support - ensuring easier ports for others.
Nintendo won back 3rd parties partly because the Switch was just powerful enough to play some PS4/XB1 games. They probably thought the can't afford to loose them once more
If you talk about Nintendo aiming for performance 1 generation behind, bear in mind that PS5 has been out almost 3 and a half years now. PS4 is one and a half generations back. If Sony does decide to make a PS6, then for half of Switch 2's lifespan it's going to be 2 generations behind. That said, I do personally think we're approaching a point of diminishing returns for game system performance. The difference between a game for ten year old hardware and one for new hardware isn't as big as it would have been between say 1990 and 2000. So maybe Nintendo being a bit further behind hardware wise isn't such an issue.
If I remember correctly a leak like this happened a year before the switch. Back when it was “nx” it ended up being pretty accurate but it wasn’t final at all, there were changes from that point but at the time the leak was accurate
Switch 2 reveal date is entirly dependant on what they show on June's direct, if it is "stacked" don't expect a reveal this year, January at earliest, but if if it is somehwt light on content, we could be seeing a late fall reveal.
Why would anyone struggle to believe Nintendo could at least match the power of 8-10 year consoles😂 If you go by their regular cadence of being a generation behind Sony and MS that’s exactly where they’d be set to land by now anyway
One thing and this is more recent. Nintendo did Acquire a studio that mostly did switch ports. If they are making it more powerful. They could be setting up to be able to bring more other system titles, (ones that had a lot of difficulty on switch) ported over. That would Sell a LOT more units. The Tech has gotten cheaper. A LOT cheaper than when the switch came out. (The Crypto Run is not nearly as in swing as it was in 2017.)
