StarTopic Future Nintendo Hardware & Technology Speculation & Discussion |ST| (Read the staff posts before commenting!)

[oldpuck]

Please be a “hybrid” - docking should be part of the pitch for these handheld devices.

It'll be interesting to see how they pull this off. Microsoft has had some smart ideas with their hardware, and have managed to just pull defeat from the jaws of victory every time.

My thinking would be that a "Series S in the hand" would be a pretty compelling experience, and technically pretty doable. If they manage to keep the CPU and RAM identical, but cut the GPU in half, they could sell it to devs as "Yes, it's technically a third profile to support, but all you gotta do is halve the resolution, and you're good to go. Testing and support will be minimal."

Supporting a "true" docked mode might create a "neither fish nor foul" situation. It's not powerful enough to deliver a true Series S experience, but it's different enough from the handheld profile that it's yet another round of testing to get it supported.

Or they go a totally different route and it's not "Series" hardware at all, but a sideline, with its own specs, and its own store. MS gets all their exclusives on their, but third party support is totally optional, and it's a totally bespoke device with no attachment to the base Series architecture.

I know what route I'd choose - the cut in half Series S, where I think, with some very careful engineering (getting GDDR6 into a handheld, woof) you could deliver a device that outperforms Steam Deck, has access to the full Xbox library, and MS could afford to sell at cost, undercutting the Z1 based handhelds, but still priced high enough that one game sell nets profit.

We'll see what they try, but I'm for the first time in a long time interested in MS hardware

 

[Future Boy Nemo]

Whoooooa okay, I heard about Microsoft eventually caving to complaints from devs and allowing them to tap into the RAM that was held aside for the OS, but I had no idea the "extra RAM" devs were given access to was a quarter of the speed.

Technically the smaller pool isn't slower, it just has less bandwidth. The latency between putting in a request for and receiving a single piece of data should be the same as with the larger pool of memory. The difference in performance would come from the larger pool pulling four pieces of data in the same time as the smaller pool can pull one, something that makes parallel processors like GPUs very happy .

Series S has five identical memory chips. Each is 2GB, has 32 pins to transfer data to and from the processor, and runs at the same clock-speed giving 56GB/s bandwidth per chip. Because the main pool has four memory chips it's total bandwidth is 224GB/s, but the speed of the memory itself remains the same. The only thing that makes the bonus RAM (which is around 300-400 megabytes I think, the other 1.X gigabytes still being reserved by the OS) 'worse' is that it introduces the balancing act of what to put in each pool of memory, like @oldpuck said.

 

[karmitt]

I mean they've already copied Nintendo branding with their Directs and even Partner Directs, so...

I think Nintendo deserves credit for being the first to market with the idea, but I wholeheartedly think it’s where the industry will converge anyway, and I’m not gonna dog companies for making similar plays. So yes, please everybody copy.

 

[robertman2]

I mean it'll have all the 3rd party games + MS' (now) massive 1st/2nd party catalog pretty much day 1.

The problem with devices like PSP and Vita was always that they couldn't actually run the "real" console games and had to run bespoke, watered down spin-offs of main franchises which required time for a lesser experience and the library had to start from 0.

But a Steam Deck style device from MS wouldn't have those issues, it would probably have games like GTAVI, Marvel 1943, etc. ready to go on top of all the existing PC games which number in the the thousands.

Steam Deck 2 in itself was always probably going to be a whopper of a device, especially since it looks like it'll basically have Sony and MS games.

You have to account for the fact that modern Xbox is modern Xbox, There'll be some catch that fucks it over, or just the fact Xbox hardware isn't selling any more. It's another desperate attempt by them to convince Nadella to not kill the hardware division.

Or they go a totally different route and it's not "Series" hardware at all, but a sideline, with its own specs, and its own store. MS gets all their exclusives on their, but third party support is totally optional, and it's a totally bespoke device with no attachment to the base Series architecture.

Yeah, sounds like something I'd expect Microsoft to do.

 

[Machrider]

You have to account for the fact that modern Xbox is modern Xbox, There'll be some catch that fucks it over, or just the fact Xbox hardware isn't selling any more. It's another desperate attempt by them to convince Nadella to not kill the hardware division.

Yeah, sounds like something I'd expect Microsoft to do.

If MS can get away with Sony not coming into the space, it's honestly not a bad play for them. The problem with the XBox is it's always compared to the Playstation, but if you remove that "well you have to choose one or the other" dilemma, then all of the sudden its strengths would become more apparent.

That said, knowing their luck, Playstation's hardware division is probably also working on a similar device, lol.

 

[palemire]

I think Nintendo deserves credit for being the first to market with the idea, but I wholeheartedly think it’s where the industry will converge anyway, and I’m not gonna dog companies for making similar plays. So yes, please everybody copy.

It's just funny to use the exact same name

Totally expecting a portable Xbox now to be called Xbox Series SP
(the p is for portable)

 

[robertman2]

If MS can get away with Sony not coming into the space, it's honestly not a bad play for them. The problem with the XBox is it's always compared to the Playstation, but if you remove that "well you have to choose one or the other" dilemma, then all of the sudden its strengths would become more apparent.

That said, knowing their luck, Playstation's hardware division is probably also working on a similar device, lol.

I think there's rumors of Sony working on something, but honestly, it's not them they should be worried about, it's Nintendo. Especially with MS putting Xbox games on Switch and Switch 2

 

[bmfrosty]

Or not? The Series consoles aren’t themselves a disaster in any way. Series X is probably the best home console I’ve ever owned. There are countless factors that have led to the platform doing poorly this generation, but it’s in poor spirits to condemn their next efforts before they’ve even happened.

I’m hopeful they stick the landing and put pressure on Nintendo and Sony.

It's kind of interesting to note where things have gone generation by generation.

Like 5th and 6th generation Sony stuck the landing so well that it was the detriment of everyone else. Especially Nintendo who fucked it up in the 5th and MS just starting.

7th generation Sony fell on it's face and Nintendo stuck the landing. Microsoft picked up with 360.

8th generation Don Mattrick fucked it up for Xbox and Nintendo fell on it's face.

Now this funny 9thish generation Nintendo stuck the landing early, but MS and Sony are stumbling along with an extension on what they did last generation. We'll see if Nintendo keeps their momentum going next year with Switch 2.

I feel like we're coming to the end of things and someone is going to drop out if they don't improve their standing by the end of the decade. I'd say it's Microsoft but they've been putting good money into it from their fumble with Don Mattrick in 2013. I think both Sony and Microsoft are going to keep shoveling money at their problems for the foreseeable future. I truly don't know if either are profiting or not at this point. They both have enough other businesses that they can obfuscate pretty well.

 

[Kise Ryota]

getting GDDR6 into a handheld

I was thinking LPDDR5 @256 bit. Would it be worse in power consumption and/or price than GDDR?

 

[Lugia667]

I feel like releasing even more new hardware isn't exactly going to solve the Xbox issues tbh...it feels almost like falling into the Sega trap

 

[Machrider]

It'll be interesting to see how they pull this off. Microsoft has had some smart ideas with their hardware, and have managed to just pull defeat from the jaws of victory every time.

My thinking would be that a "Series S in the hand" would be a pretty compelling experience, and technically pretty doable. If they manage to keep the CPU and RAM identical, but cut the GPU in half, they could sell it to devs as "Yes, it's technically a third profile to support, but all you gotta do is halve the resolution, and you're good to go. Testing and support will be minimal."

Supporting a "true" docked mode might create a "neither fish nor foul" situation. It's not powerful enough to deliver a true Series S experience, but it's different enough from the handheld profile that it's yet another round of testing to get it supported.

Or they go a totally different route and it's not "Series" hardware at all, but a sideline, with its own specs, and its own store. MS gets all their exclusives on their, but third party support is totally optional, and it's a totally bespoke device with no attachment to the base Series architecture.

I know what route I'd choose - the cut in half Series S, where I think, with some very careful engineering (getting GDDR6 into a handheld, woof) you could deliver a device that outperforms Steam Deck, has access to the full Xbox library, and MS could afford to sell at cost, undercutting the Z1 based handhelds, but still priced high enough that one game sell nets profit.

We'll see what they try, but I'm for the first time in a long time interested in MS hardware

I don't think it'll be based on their console hardware. Most likely will be similar to the APU AMD is giving Valve for Steam Deck 2, but because it's MS they'll pay a bit extra $$$ for maybe a little bit better performance.

But their games will run on it anyway, I don't think there is really going to be a process of "oh shit, we have to now port our XBox Series S/X games", those games will be there, it'll just be the PC versions.

 

[KarlRemarx]

It'll be interesting to see how they pull this off. Microsoft has had some smart ideas with their hardware, and have managed to just pull defeat from the jaws of victory every time.

My thinking would be that a "Series S in the hand" would be a pretty compelling experience, and technically pretty doable. If they manage to keep the CPU and RAM identical, but cut the GPU in half, they could sell it to devs as "Yes, it's technically a third profile to support, but all you gotta do is halve the resolution, and you're good to go. Testing and support will be minimal."

Supporting a "true" docked mode might create a "neither fish nor foul" situation. It's not powerful enough to deliver a true Series S experience, but it's different enough from the handheld profile that it's yet another round of testing to get it supported.

Or they go a totally different route and it's not "Series" hardware at all, but a sideline, with its own specs, and its own store. MS gets all their exclusives on their, but third party support is totally optional, and it's a totally bespoke device with no attachment to the base Series architecture.

I know what route I'd choose - the cut in half Series S, where I think, with some very careful engineering (getting GDDR6 into a handheld, woof) you could deliver a device that outperforms Steam Deck, has access to the full Xbox library, and MS could afford to sell at cost, undercutting the Z1 based handhelds, but still priced high enough that one game sell nets profit.

We'll see what they try, but I'm for the first time in a long time interested in MS hardware

I think developers would revolt if they were told to support yet another weaker hardware profile on Xbox, especially when the alternative non-Nintendo option for handheld sales (Steam Deck) operates on the premise of "uhh yeah, ship what you like, we've literally created an entire translation layer that will Just Work for 99% of cases, and if you implement these trivial measures which mostly amount to including controller support in a sane way, we'll even promote you as a Steam Deck title. Or you can just do nothing and react if there is a vocal number of users who want it"

Like at that point, Microsoft will have made it as hard or harder to deploy a console release than Valve have ever made it for devs to support Windows software on a Linux device. Which is unsurprising given how Microsoft have utterly fumbled their entire videogame business post-360, but still damning.

 

[pelusilla6]

I like this video from Phawx about the possible Xbox Handheld

 

[bmfrosty]

Like at that point, Microsoft will have made it as hard or harder to deploy a console release than Valve have ever made it for devs to support Windows software on a Linux device. Which is unsurprising given how Microsoft have utterly fumbled their entire videogame business post-360, but still damning.

I think xbox has probably been fine since they stopped force bundling kinect in 2014. I put it all at Don Mattrick - even if it wasn't his idea. He was the guy who should have put a stop to it. I didn't pick up an system after the Wii U until Switch, but eventually picked up a xbox to play borderlands 3 on. I probably would have picked up an xbox much earlier if it hadn't been for that debacle. I was pretty enthused about the experience that I had with the 360 starting in about 2008.

The problem was that after the marketing in early 2013, the damage was done and they handed the ball to Sony and the PC space for the enthusiast crowd.

 

[Dakhil]

They're probably going with series S ram amounts and less GPU.

I don't think 5 GB (40 Gb) LPDDR5/5X modules exist, going by Micron's LPDDR5/5X catalogue. Nor do I think there's enough room on the motherboard to install five 2 GB (16 Gb) LPDDR5/5X modules.

 

[bmfrosty]

I don't think 5 GB (40 Gb) LPDDR5/5X modules exist, going by Micron's LPDDR5/5X catalogue. Nor do I think there's enough room on the motherboard to install five 2 GB (16 Gb) LPDDR5/5X modules.

Good point. Could go 3 modules & 4 GB, or 2 @ 4 & 1 @ 2 if they exist. Haven't dug into it.

 

[Cuzizkool]

The fact that there’s more hefty rumors swirling right now for a XBox handheld and PS5 Pro than there is Switch 2… I just want a crumb, Nintendo. please.

 

[Scrawnton]

GDC started and no big leaks? Only one explanation: this system just doesn't exist.

 

[seyfeselassie]

I know Nash Weedle is an unreliable source(and I'm not sure if they are banned nor do I know how to check banned content/sources), but they claim that they heard direct confirmation from a developer that the Switch 2 dev kit has tools that will take development "one step further". Obviously their word alone isn't enough but Necrolipe did retweet it. Does their tweet have any credibility @necrolipe ?

 

[KarlRemarx]

I think xbox has probably been fine since they stopped force bundling kinect in 2014. I put it all at Don Mattrick - even if it wasn't his idea. He was the guy who should have put a stop to it. I didn't pick up an system after the Wii U until Switch, but eventually picked up a xbox to play borderlands 3 on. I probably would have picked up an xbox much earlier if it hadn't been for that debacle. I was pretty enthused about the experience that I had with the 360 starting in about 2008.

The problem was that after the marketing in early 2013, the damage was done and they handed the ball to Sony and the PC space for the enthusiast crowd.

Oh yeah - not particularly blaming Phil Spencer or those currently in the Xbox division but Microsoft's overall strategy post-360, which was largely imposed upon Xbox by Microsoft (via Mattrick and others). Too many people high up in Microsoft seemingly thought they had finally achieved the "Windows in the living room" dream and immediately started behaving like they had a completely captive group of customers that they could use as a stick to beat Apple TV with, rather than paying attention to their actual competitors at Steam/PS.

I think if there had been more continuity of leadership from Xbox->360->Xbox One, those running the business would hopefully have seen that they had finally achieved almost-equivalent marketshare with the PS3 and simply needed to iterate on that while expanding their market presence internationally. Instead, they doubled down on the Anglosphere via entertainment deals for NFL etc that had no major presence anywhere but the US. In the intervening years Sony have made Playstation a brand synonymous with videogames in the rest of the world simply by having a proper supply chain and marketing presence in those countries.

 

[redmutineer75]

I wonder if MS will be clever and allow other PC stores to be on the marketplace ... that would effectively mean the Playstation PC games also run on the device, lol.

That would be a horrible decision. The whole reason that consoles exist is the principle of "give the razor, sell the blades". The hardware operates at a loss (and a quite steep one at that) in order to sucker buyers into the console ecosystem, in which the console manufacturer gets a cut from every transaction. By allowing Steam, EGS, or whatever else to be on an Xbox device, you're allowing consumers to completely bypass the part that actually makes Microsoft money. Unless such a device is $600-700 and sold at a profit like the other handheld PCs on the market, they'll never allow other storefronts to leech off of their ecosystem.

 

[SoldierDelta]

That would be a horrible decision. The whole reason that consoles exist is the principle of "give the razor, sell the blades". The hardware operates at a loss (and a quite steep one at that) in order to sucker buyers into the console ecosystem, in which the console manufacturer gets a cut from every transaction. By allowing Steam, EGS, or whatever else to be on an Xbox device, you're allowing consumers to completely bypass the part that actually makes Microsoft money. Unless such a device is $600-700 and sold at a profit like the other handheld PCs on the market, they'll never allow other storefronts to leech off of their ecosystem.

Worth mentioning that, if I'm right in it being a Handheld PC, Microsoft would be actively anti-consumer in not allowing Steam/EGS/GoG etc. onto the device. Having it be sold at a profit would probably be the best move, but it could literally just be a Handheld Xbox Series S and do fine as well. Idk, pick your poison. It's not beating the Switch and unlikely to beat the price of the Steam Deck, so either way it isn't going to dominate the market. Having it as an option with a limited initial batch would be a good way to test the waters.

 

[bmfrosty]

Oh yeah - not particularly blaming Phil Spencer or those currently in the Xbox division but Microsoft's overall strategy post-360, which was largely imposed upon Xbox by Microsoft (via Mattrick and others). Too many people high up in Microsoft seemingly thought they had finally achieved the "Windows in the living room" dream and immediately started behaving like they had a completely captive group of customers that they could use as a stick to beat Apple TV with, rather than paying attention to their actual competitors at Steam/PS.

I think if there had been more continuity of leadership from Xbox->360->Xbox One, those running the business would hopefully have seen that they had finally achieved almost-equivalent marketshare with the PS3 and simply needed to iterate on that while expanding their market presence internationally. Instead, they doubled down on the Anglosphere via entertainment deals for NFL etc that had no major presence anywhere but the US. In the intervening years Sony have made Playstation a brand synonymous with videogames in the rest of the world simply by having a proper supply chain and marketing presence in those countries.

I think all 3 are doing fine this generation as far as marketing and system design goes. The HD++ twins though - it will be interesting to see if one tries something new this next generation and either breaks out or fumbles hard. Kind of the same thing watching Nintendo, but without an equivalent other console waiting in the wings to pick up the ball if the other fumbles. Maybe we'll see a portable Xbox that's waiting for Nintendo to fumble.

 

[kasparov77]

I know Nash Weedle is an unreliable source(and I'm not sure if they are banned nor do I know how to check banned content/sources), but they claim that they heard direct confirmation from a developer that the Switch 2 dev kit has tools that will take development "one step further". Obviously their word alone isn't enough but Necrolipe did retweet it. Does their tweet have any credibility @necrolipe ?

bruh.. thats the easiest kind of thing to say
it's like me saying "the switch 2 will have a gpu of a newer generation"

 

[oldpuck]

I think developers would revolt if they were told to support yet another weaker hardware profile on Xbox,

MS won't require support - they can't. Every game on the store already has the contract negotiated, MS can't go back those publishers and require they develop a new port of the game. They're four years into the console's life cycle already.

What they can do is treat it like a mid-gen refresh, and make support optional. What they can do is like they did for backwards compat, and provide a team that can heavily support the ports, or even do it for developers. What they can do is make a chip which makes ports very easy.

A handheld can't have a 4k screen, or even a 1440p screen. A handheld doesn't need the Series S's level of GPU power, by definition. The Series S is a 20 CU GPU, the Z1 Extreme is 12. MS could offer the same CPU, RAM, decompression hardware as the Series S, with half the GPU, and make it cheaper and less power hungry than the ROG Ally.

Such a device would make ports very easy. Just drop your resolution in half and go on about your day. On a 7 inch 1080p screen, that half resolution will probably look better than the Series S versions. I'm not saying they will, but this is a very doable strategy.

If this hardware faceplants, it will outsell the Steam Deck by 2-3x just because of branding

I don't think it'll be based on their console hardware. Most likely will be similar to the APU AMD is giving Valve for Steam Deck 2, but because it's MS they'll pay a bit extra $$$ for maybe a little bit better performance.

But their games will run on it anyway, I don't think there is really going to be a process of "oh shit, we have to now port our XBox Series S/X games", those games will be there, it'll just be the PC versions.

I don't think this is an option. Microsoft has to make money on either the hardware or the software, they can't lose money on both.

MS can't go toe to toe with Valve on handheld PC cost because MS doesn't have a PC store that matters. If it's "just" a PC, then they don't make money from software sales. If they need to make profitable hardware, what could they possibly offer that other vendors don't? MS's internal documents have said they don't want to get into the handheld PC space, because other vendors are filling that niche, and they're right.

MS could spin up a new store - but they'd need to make sure all the games inside the store ran on well on their new hardware. That would involve a technical approval process, a default set of settings - Xbox is still a windows style kernel and DirectX! At the point at which MS is making you hit a performance target, you're doing all the technical work necessary to get a new Xbox port up and running. So a new store isn't viable.

If MS brands the thing Xbox, and it doesn't play Xbox games, then the damn thing won't sell anyway. So who cares if the hardware is profitable?

The better move would be to make it a mini Xbox, and have it have the Xbox backwards compat library - every Xbox One, 360, base model game - available on day 1, plus all the exclusives. Roll out the red carpet to devs to making ports easier, and you might actually a product that people want. Which you can sell cheaper than cost, because you make money off the software.

If it isn't an Xbox, I think this is a total no go.

 

[eye0h]

The fact that there’s more hefty rumors swirling right now for a XBox handheld and PS5 Pro than there is Switch 2… I just want a crumb, Nintendo. please.

Helps when the CEO is liking tweets about an xbox handheld publicly

I know Nash Weedle is an unreliable source(and I'm not sure if they are banned nor do I know how to check banned content/sources), but they claim that they heard direct confirmation from a developer that the Switch 2 dev kit has tools that will take development "one step further". Obviously their word alone isn't enough but Necrolipe did retweet it. Does their tweet have any credibility @necrolipe ?

This doesn't really mean much. We already know the dev kit has new features, unless we know what they are it's not useful info lol
nevermind lol, guess there will be an interesting reveal

 

[darthdiablo]

GDC started and no big leaks? Only one explanation: this system just doesn't exist.

I think GDC is actually almost over - didn’t it start last Monday?

 

[necrolipe]

I know Nash Weedle is an unreliable source(and I'm not sure if they are banned nor do I know how to check banned content/sources), but they claim that they heard direct confirmation from a developer that the Switch 2 dev kit has tools that will take development "one step further". Obviously their word alone isn't enough but Necrolipe did retweet it. Does their tweet have any credibility @necrolipe ?

This tweet have a credibility judging by the bit of info that I have, yes
I have more informed things around this, but will not share for now publicy

tbh I believe that this will be soon available for y'all by news sites, etc.

 

[ILikeFeet]

But it could be relevant for the GPU clock, no? If the RT and TC would use more power, then the GPU's clock could decrease.

Anyway, I don't even know if it would make sense to say RT/TC blocks would make a difference in this case, because I don't know if they all work at the same time (I thought that, in the pipeline, the RT and TC blocks would work after the CUDA cores were done, so it wouldn't be about power consumption but milliseconds budget for the frame)

Well, I don't even know what I'm talking about anymore LOL but I still don't understand from where the information of RT and TC disabled came from, I couldn't find it. If it doesn't matter at all for power consumption and the CUDA cores clock, then the MX570 actually makes it look like SEC 8nm could work in the end...

I don't think anyone has any measure of either of these cores' power usage (because they're so intrinsic to the SM design). they would use more power because electrons are flowing through them, yes, but they more than likely don't make up a large portion of power usage. for instance, we can get a good look with tensor cores as power usage goes down when upscaling is used and goes up (slightly) when dlaa is used.



RT cores are doing more work, but so is everything else. power usage would be lost by the fact everything is consuming more power

but most importantly, this is all assuming you're not power limited. in the video posted, the gpu isn't power limited but limited by just how fast it can complete its task. a mobile chip like the MX570 would be power limited and regardless of what part of the silicon is used, it's going to hit the limits.

but you are right, it doesn't matter. this chip isn't going to give us any new info that we haven't gotten from the 2050. it's a binned chip anyway and barely even exists for testing purposes

 

[Machrider]

MS won't require support - they can't. Every game on the store already has the contract negotiated, MS can't go back those publishers and require they develop a new port of the game. They're four years into the console's life cycle already.

What they can do is treat it like a mid-gen refresh, and make support optional. What they can do is like they did for backwards compat, and provide a team that can heavily support the ports, or even do it for developers. What they can do is make a chip which makes ports very easy.

A handheld can't have a 4k screen, or even a 1440p screen. A handheld doesn't need the Series S's level of GPU power, by definition. The Series S is a 20 CU GPU, the Z1 Extreme is 12. MS could offer the same CPU, RAM, decompression hardware as the Series S, with half the GPU, and make it cheaper and less power hungry than the ROG Ally.

Such a device would make ports very easy. Just drop your resolution in half and go on about your day. On a 7 inch 1080p screen, that half resolution will probably look better than the Series S versions. I'm not saying they will, but this is a very doable strategy.

If this hardware faceplants, it will outsell the Steam Deck by 2-3x just because of branding


I don't think this is an option. Microsoft has to make money on either the hardware or the software, they can't lose money on both.

MS can't go toe to toe with Valve on handheld PC cost because MS doesn't have a PC store that matters. If it's "just" a PC, then they don't make money from software sales. If they need to make profitable hardware, what could they possibly offer that other vendors don't? MS's internal documents have said they don't want to get into the handheld PC space, because other vendors are filling that niche, and they're right.

MS could spin up a new store - but they'd need to make sure all the games inside the store ran on well on their new hardware. That would involve a technical approval process, a default set of settings - Xbox is still a windows style kernel and DirectX! At the point at which MS is making you hit a performance target, you're doing all the technical work necessary to get a new Xbox port up and running. So a new store isn't viable.

If MS brands the thing Xbox, and it doesn't play Xbox games, then the damn thing won't sell anyway. So who cares if the hardware is profitable?

The better move would be to make it a mini Xbox, and have it have the Xbox backwards compat library - every Xbox One, 360, base model game - available on day 1, plus all the exclusives. Roll out the red carpet to devs to making ports easier, and you might actually a product that people want. Which you can sell cheaper than cost, because you make money off the software.

If it isn't an Xbox, I think this is a total no go.

They would just make a "new" store front that just sells (basically) the PC versions of all of those games I think and take their licensing fee cut.

 

[TomNookYankees]

zero chance in hell this thing is anything other yet another Xbox disaster.

Depends on how MS prices it.

If they price it cheap enough and make sure not to repeat the problems with the Series S, it'll easily make a dent in tne market.

 

[SoldierDelta]

Depends on how MS prices it.

If they price it cheap enough and make sure not to repeat the problems with the Series S, it'll easily make a dent in tne market.

Make a portable Series S, sell it at 300 bucks, badabing badaboom.

Not a huge device sales wise, but it'd be a good price-competitive device against the Switch and would be a good Game Pass device. If that's what they're going to do, I wouldn't complain.

 

[ItWasMeantToBe19]

Make a portable Series S, sell it at 300 bucks, badabing badaboom.

Not a huge device sales wise, but it'd be a good price-competitive device against the Switch and would be a good Game Pass device. If that's what they're going to do, I wouldn't complain.

This would cost like $600 to manufacture at a minimum and probably couldn’t release until late 2026.

 

[bmfrosty]

MS won't require support - they can't. Every game on the store already has the contract negotiated, MS can't go back those publishers and require they develop a new port of the game. They're four years into the console's life cycle already.

What they can do is treat it like a mid-gen refresh, and make support optional. What they can do is like they did for backwards compat, and provide a team that can heavily support the ports, or even do it for developers. What they can do is make a chip which makes ports very easy.

A handheld can't have a 4k screen, or even a 1440p screen. A handheld doesn't need the Series S's level of GPU power, by definition. The Series S is a 20 CU GPU, the Z1 Extreme is 12. MS could offer the same CPU, RAM, decompression hardware as the Series S, with half the GPU, and make it cheaper and less power hungry than the ROG Ally.

Such a device would make ports very easy. Just drop your resolution in half and go on about your day. On a 7 inch 1080p screen, that half resolution will probably look better than the Series S versions. I'm not saying they will, but this is a very doable strategy.

If this hardware faceplants, it will outsell the Steam Deck by 2-3x just because of branding


I don't think this is an option. Microsoft has to make money on either the hardware or the software, they can't lose money on both.

MS can't go toe to toe with Valve on handheld PC cost because MS doesn't have a PC store that matters. If it's "just" a PC, then they don't make money from software sales. If they need to make profitable hardware, what could they possibly offer that other vendors don't? MS's internal documents have said they don't want to get into the handheld PC space, because other vendors are filling that niche, and they're right.

MS could spin up a new store - but they'd need to make sure all the games inside the store ran on well on their new hardware. That would involve a technical approval process, a default set of settings - Xbox is still a windows style kernel and DirectX! At the point at which MS is making you hit a performance target, you're doing all the technical work necessary to get a new Xbox port up and running. So a new store isn't viable.

If MS brands the thing Xbox, and it doesn't play Xbox games, then the damn thing won't sell anyway. So who cares if the hardware is profitable?

The better move would be to make it a mini Xbox, and have it have the Xbox backwards compat library - every Xbox One, 360, base model game - available on day 1, plus all the exclusives. Roll out the red carpet to devs to making ports easier, and you might actually a product that people want. Which you can sell cheaper than cost, because you make money off the software.

If it isn't an Xbox, I think this is a total no go.

Could be whatever Series S level hardware looks like in 2027 or 2028 with Series X or S level RAM. Make it compatible with everything this generation. Offer higher resolutions for next generation in next generation hardware, but not the portable. Keep supporting Series X & S for a while longer. I don't know what hardware looks like in 2027/2028 well enough. 3nm or 2nm maybe? I suppose if we get that Series X refresh it will tell us a bit. Cooler running is a must for it to work.

Make a portable Series S, sell it at 300 bucks, badabing badaboom.

Not a huge device sales wise, but it'd be a good price-competitive device against the Switch and would be a good Game Pass device. If that's what they're going to do, I wouldn't complain.

I wonder how many years they could stretch a version of the Series S profile.... Is the Black Series S a proper hardware refresh (new manufacturing process for the APU?) or is it just a new case and more storage?

 

[Steve]

This tweet have a credibility judging by the bit of info that I have, yes
I have more informed things around this, but will not share for now publicy

tbh I believe that this will be soon available for y'all by news sites, etc.

So in the coming weeks we'll either be hearing big news positive/negative.
Also wondering if they would show how the console look in the GDC.

either way thanks for the confirmation as always.

 

[ShadowFox08]

* Hidden text: cannot be quoted. *

To view the content, you need to Sign In or Register.

If Nintendo really does release Switch 2 next year, what in the world would they have for Q4 2024. I can't think of any heavy hitters swan songs. Just more ports.

It's slow, as @ItWasMeantToBe19 points out. It also has a two-pool design, which isn't inherently bad, but in the Series S causes additional problems.

Series S has two pools of memory, an 8GB pool which runs at 224 GB/s and a second 2GB pool which runs at 56 GB/s. Ideally, developers never need to tap into that second pool, and you just let the OS live there, and you go about your life. But that 8GB pool is pretty constrained - it's less than the One X had, after all, and much less than the Series X/PS5 - so developers often need to tap that second pool.

Getting the best performance out such a setup requires really carefully managing your resource allocation, something no other platform needs. The failure mode is that memory performance falls off a cliff somewhat unpredictably - texture streaming lags, or the GPU and the CPU stall out waiting for data from RAM.

Would you say the lack of RAM is worse, or the speed? I think devs were saying the former.

Just found this low power Ampere mobile SKU with 2048 CUDA, 4.7 TFLOPS, 96 GB/s, and a 15 Watt TDP
Is this a closer PC match for GA20B than the 2050?
https://www.techpowerup.com/gpu-specs/geforce-mx570.c3919

Edit: RT/DLSS are disabled and it's even more memory starved than the 2050 in most configurations (4GB>2GB). Maybe not.
15 watts from a GA107 (which is 115w in the 3050) is interesting for scalability of SEC8N though.

This chip has been brought up in the past before on this thread actually. this would sort of be like the 2048 core GPU of the highest Orion AGX kit, though I think the Orion AGX model is clocked a tad bit higher. Interesting nonetheless.

 

[karmitt]

It'll be interesting to see how they pull this off. Microsoft has had some smart ideas with their hardware, and have managed to just pull defeat from the jaws of victory every time.

My thinking would be that a "Series S in the hand" would be a pretty compelling experience, and technically pretty doable. If they manage to keep the CPU and RAM identical, but cut the GPU in half, they could sell it to devs as "Yes, it's technically a third profile to support, but all you gotta do is halve the resolution, and you're good to go. Testing and support will be minimal."

Supporting a "true" docked mode might create a "neither fish nor foul" situation. It's not powerful enough to deliver a true Series S experience, but it's different enough from the handheld profile that it's yet another round of testing to get it supported.

Or they go a totally different route and it's not "Series" hardware at all, but a sideline, with its own specs, and its own store. MS gets all their exclusives on their, but third party support is totally optional, and it's a totally bespoke device with no attachment to the base Series architecture.

I know what route I'd choose - the cut in half Series S, where I think, with some very careful engineering (getting GDDR6 into a handheld, woof) you could deliver a device that outperforms Steam Deck, has access to the full Xbox library, and MS could afford to sell at cost, undercutting the Z1 based handhelds, but still priced high enough that one game sell nets profit.

We'll see what they try, but I'm for the first time in a long time interested in MS hardware

I was assuming that whatever this handheld is, it’s lined up with Microsoft’s next generation, which we’d heard could be as early as 2026. Is it possible for them to have crunched down some Series S+ equivalent in handheld by then?

My personal hope is that they are pivoting “Xbox” into the Windows space - improve the Windows gaming experience and UI so much that it’s indistinguishable from Xbox, and then carry on from there. The next Xbox can instead be like an exceptionally polished version of the Ally or Deck.

If there’s one thing I’m learning from recent pivots in multi platform releases, it’s that PC is being treated as an open platform - Sony doesn’t see it as supporting Xbox. Microsoft would do well to kind of market PC gaming as “playing Xbox”, since they aren’t really budging the console market otherwise.

This tweet have a credibility judging by the bit of info that I have, yes
I have more informed things around this, but will not share for now publicy

tbh I believe that this will be soon available for y'all by news sites, etc.

What does “one step further” mean? It feels totally ambiguous - vague enough to slot into any finding about the dev kit having some inevitable novel feature.

 

[Ghostsonplanets]

Edit: RT/DLSS are disabled and it's even more memory starved than the 2050 in most configurations (4GB>2GB). Maybe not.

Why are RT and DLSS disabled? All the spec sheets I've seen mention RT and Tensor Cores, on the NVidia website it doesn't say anything, but perhaps that's because it's not a GPU focused on games.
I also found this article from Videocardz that mentions that DLSS and RT are possible on the MX570.

Neither Tensor Cores or RT Cores are disabled. It's just that the memory available (2GB VRAM) for the MX570 make it hard to leverage either feature without going out of framebuffer.

The Geforce MX series are made for CUDA compatible laptops for office work. They're really not meant to be used for gaming applications. Hence why they have so little memory available (2GB for either MX550 or MX570).

 

[Z0m3le]

MS won't require support - they can't. Every game on the store already has the contract negotiated, MS can't go back those publishers and require they develop a new port of the game. They're four years into the console's life cycle already.

What they can do is treat it like a mid-gen refresh, and make support optional. What they can do is like they did for backwards compat, and provide a team that can heavily support the ports, or even do it for developers. What they can do is make a chip which makes ports very easy.

A handheld can't have a 4k screen, or even a 1440p screen. A handheld doesn't need the Series S's level of GPU power, by definition. The Series S is a 20 CU GPU, the Z1 Extreme is 12. MS could offer the same CPU, RAM, decompression hardware as the Series S, with half the GPU, and make it cheaper and less power hungry than the ROG Ally.

Such a device would make ports very easy. Just drop your resolution in half and go on about your day. On a 7 inch 1080p screen, that half resolution will probably look better than the Series S versions. I'm not saying they will, but this is a very doable strategy.

If this hardware faceplants, it will outsell the Steam Deck by 2-3x just because of branding


I don't think this is an option. Microsoft has to make money on either the hardware or the software, they can't lose money on both.

MS can't go toe to toe with Valve on handheld PC cost because MS doesn't have a PC store that matters. If it's "just" a PC, then they don't make money from software sales. If they need to make profitable hardware, what could they possibly offer that other vendors don't? MS's internal documents have said they don't want to get into the handheld PC space, because other vendors are filling that niche, and they're right.

MS could spin up a new store - but they'd need to make sure all the games inside the store ran on well on their new hardware. That would involve a technical approval process, a default set of settings - Xbox is still a windows style kernel and DirectX! At the point at which MS is making you hit a performance target, you're doing all the technical work necessary to get a new Xbox port up and running. So a new store isn't viable.

If MS brands the thing Xbox, and it doesn't play Xbox games, then the damn thing won't sell anyway. So who cares if the hardware is profitable?

The better move would be to make it a mini Xbox, and have it have the Xbox backwards compat library - every Xbox One, 360, base model game - available on day 1, plus all the exclusives. Roll out the red carpet to devs to making ports easier, and you might actually a product that people want. Which you can sell cheaper than cost, because you make money off the software.

If it isn't an Xbox, I think this is a total no go.

The real reason it will outsell steam deck in those numbers is because you can buy it in the store and the marketing budget will exist.

 

[Truno]

Interesting discussion from Kit & Krysta. They think that Nintendo's goal is to squeeze as much as possible from their golden goose (Switch) and it's possible that this strategy will bite them in the ass, because the longer they wait the less 'revolutionary' Switch 2 will look to consumers:

 

[SoldierDelta]

Interesting discussion from Kit & Krysta. They think that Nintendo's goal is to squeeze as much as possible from their golden goose (Switch) and it's possible that this strategy will bite them in the ass, because the longer they wait the less 'revolutionary' Switch 2 will look to consumers:

I mean... by technicality they aren't wrong. Golden Geese are dubbed as such for a reason, but there's a problem with the logic here. It's clear that Nintendo was planning an earlier release but was pushed back for [INSERT REASON HERE], so they're getting a lot of money from the OG Switch out of natural benefit and also slightly out of desperation.

It's worth pointing out that the Switch is different from the Wii in this debate, which is the easy console to compare this situation to. The Wii was a fad that had major growth at the start before being forgotten about in the years after, leading into the Wii U's major flops. The Switch has a far more natural growth and hasn't fallen drastically off a cliff in terms of sales. I think it's fairly critical to wait for the next Earnings release before passing judgement about the Switch's longevity. We're basically hanging off the final thread of the Switch's life cycle, but it doesn't mean that everything will immediately go to shit if Nintendo waits a bit longer before releasing their Next-Gen system. This isn't 2010 Nintendo anymore.

 

[kasparov77]

because the longer they wait the less 'revolutionary' Switch 2 will look to consumers

that's why switch 2 needs a cool new gimmick

people don't accept it because switch 1 was so successful even though its gimmick isn't too much of a focus as much as wiiu and wii were
but wii's and switch's gimmicks (both of which really well executed) were the core reasons people bought the consoles in the first place, second only to games.

 

[Concernt]

Interesting discussion from Kit & Krysta. They think that Nintendo's goal is to squeeze as much as possible from their golden goose (Switch) and it's possible that this strategy will bite them in the ass, because the longer they wait the less 'revolutionary' Switch 2 will look to consumers:

1. They're using AI art thumbnails, ew.

2. Nintendo has said. Explicitly. That console launches are big, expensive, and complex, and aren't easily moved around based on quarter to quarter sales.

They were once employed as Nintendo staff in the marketing department. They don't appear to be keeping up to date with Nintendo's announcements. I personally have just... No reason to pay them much heed.

I'd say "they don't exactly have to pay attention to every Nintendo investor call", but if they want to make predictions about Nintendo's business, maybe at least read a summary?

 

[Lugia667]

yeah no sorry I don't buy the whole "Doing to to squeeze more out of Switch" argument. Is that seriously why they think the main reason is?

I mean I guess the bright side is if their dumb theory IS somehow true, the Switch will have more games for the second half of the year

 

[oldpuck]

They would just make a "new" store front that just sells (basically) the PC versions of all of those games I think and take their licensing fee cut.

I see what you're saying, but let's walk that line of thinking to its logical end.

Will this handheld let you run any storefront you like? Obviously it can't, it would be like using Microsoft Edge to install Chrome. The first thing you'd do is install Steam, which already has an interface designed to look good on handhelds, and you'd have your whole library. Microsoft wouldn't make a penny, and no third party would pay the MS tax to get on the store, when users already have other ways to get games.

So you need to lock down the OS to use the Windows Handheld Store. You need to build a customized UI that works with controllers. You need to build a DRM solution to combat your developers who are worried about piracy, and your own desire to make sure you get paid.

But you can't just put any games into the store either. Not only will games need to be bundled with your DRM stack, you'll need to make sure they all run on your new hardware - you can't sell games that don't run on the handheld when the store only serves the handheld. You'll need to have a validation process. You'll need to make sure the default config works with a controller, and not a keyboard and mouse.

So, at minimum we need a customized version of Windows that has a controller based UI for launching games, that locks down external stores, that has baked in DRM, and a way for devs to submit DirectX based games that run on Zen and RDNA hardware that conform a Microsoft standardized quality scheme and are completely controller driven.

...you need to rebuild the whole Xbox infrastructure a second time, to save a small amount of work from developers. It would be easier and cheaper to simply build a 2 TFLOP Xbox Series handheld. Automatically you'd let users have their digital library, their backwards compat games, their cloud saves. The product automatically becomes more compelling.

Yes, you would need new ports. But if you design the hardware well (not a guarantee, but certainly doable), 85% of ports would be simply "lowering the output resolution because of the smaller screen." MS could make it easier by not mandating that ports be feature identical to the TV versions. And they could afford to offer a whole bunch of developer support because of all the money they'd save not building a new OS/Online Infrastructure/DRM tech from scratch.

 

[SoldierDelta]

yeah no sorry I don't buy the whole "Doing to to squeeze more out of Switch" argument. Is that seriously why they think the main reason is?

There's a point to be made that it is a reason, the Switch is still doing fairly well for itself and money can still be made especially if they don't reveal the Switch 2... but it absolutely isn't a primary nor major reason for it. Their main reason for the delay or at least Nintendo not revealing the Switch 2 was that it wasn't ready for reveal. Anyone saying otherwise is just... silly.

Besides, I have no idea how much they can squeeze out of the Switch at this point. I think everyone who wants to have one probably owns 2 by now. Maybe I can buy a third one...

 

[Truno]

yeah no sorry I don't buy the whole "Doing to to squeeze more out of Switch" argument. Is that seriously why they think the main reason is?

The whole episode was a bit more negative than expected. For example, they didn't think that Nintendo would use the panel for TotK during GDC to educate other devs about how they designed various aspects of the game like they did for BotW's panel. They assumed that their only purpose at GDC was to sell the game

 

[Leviraps]

yeah no sorry I don't buy the whole "Doing to to squeeze more out of Switch" argument. Is that seriously why they think the main reason is?

I mean I guess the bright side is if their dumb theory IS somehow true, the Switch will have more games for the second half of the year

Love kit & krysta but they’re the same folks that said they think Nintendo is disappointed in TOTK’s sales, their analysis just isn’t good ngl

 

[oldpuck]

The real reason it will outsell steam deck in those numbers is because you can buy it in the store and the marketing budget will exist.

That's basically what I'm saying. A 10 million install base becomes pretty compelling to devs if you make ports easy. And if you simply offer a real console like experience - which the Steam Deck by design cannot do - I think you can make customers pretty happy.

I will be first in line to buy one if it is truly an Xbox handheld. Take my money

 

[BabyDontHurtMe]

Not sure where else to share this but there's an interesting small YouTube channel called Nintendo Forecast that analyzes Nintendo's business strategies and he provides very thorough commentary about the company and their products. I recommend watching his stuff.