• Hey everyone, staff have documented a list of banned content and subject matter that we feel are not consistent with site values, and don't make sense to host discussion of on Famiboards. This list (and the relevant reasoning per item) is viewable here.

StarTopic Future Nintendo Hardware & Technology Speculation & Discussion |ST| (New Staff Post, Please read)

Reader mode
Darknut85 said:
Much better CPU, higher RAM, faster storage (+FDE), bigger cache. GPU power might be a bit worse, might a bit better. And if Oldpuck‘s 25GB/s/teraflop math for Ampere is right, it also won’t be bandwidth starved at 4 teraflops.

Whatever, I‘m tired of that comparison. PS4 Pro is a 8th gen console, Switch 2 is a 9th gen handheld. Imo, Switch 2 will perform better in most cases, while PS4 Pro might be better in others. You probably won’t change your opinion anyway, so let’s just agree to disagree (until we have more data).
Click to expand...
If I may interject, I think what Redd is trying to get across is that people might be overhyping the machine GPU capabilities when doing comparison with PS4 Pro GPU.

His point is that PS4 Pro is a big GPU with tons of available resources and clocked decently high (For 2016 GPU standards). When people say that Switch 2 GA10F GPU will of course surpass the PS4 Pro GPU *before DLSS (What does that even mean?) if clocked high enough, that couldn't be further from the truth.

He doesn't mean that there won't be scenarios where the Switch 2 GPU won't outpace PS4 Pro GPU. Of course, in some scenarios, Switch 2 GPU will outpace or even do things that wouldn't be possible on the 4Pro due to it being a modern GPU with hardware support for modern features. But, when doing a iso comparison, the goals of each GPU are very different. GA10F is designed to be into a power limited form factor and output 4K content with aid of machine learning upsampling. PS4 Pro GPU was designed to draw 200W+ and to bring PS4 content to 4K with checkerboarding. The former has a leaner GPU while the latter has a fatter GPU. In normal circumstances, the wealthy of resources the Pro GPU has access to mean it should be outperforming the Switch 2 GPU even if TFLOPs are equal.

But, again, for software developed to take advantage of modern featureset, the Tegra will be doing things that are outright impossible on the past Playstation machine. The grievance of @ReddDread is just that people are thinking Switch 2 Docked will be a 1:1 PS4 Pro when things should be much more nuanced. Ultimately, I think someone else description is perfect: Switch 2 is a device that can do the same things Series S can do. Just at slower performance due to the form factor.
 
ItWasMeantToBe19 said:
TSMC 4N has no cache size or IO size advantages over TSMC 6nm so I could see this still using TSMC 6nm to minimize price.
Click to expand...
LOL, 6nm ain't gonna happen. Neither Ampere nor Lovelace use TSMC 6nm, and Nvidia isn't going to make a custom chip on a custom lithography just for Nintendo. Custom chip yes, special lithography, no. It will be using an existing process,
darthdiablo said:
* Hidden text: cannot be quoted. *
Click to expand...
LOL, that is a good point. Imagine if it's the NoA employee who leaked the Tears of the Kingdom name on Reddit...
 
gabeplays said:
TLDR: A smaller node means better battery life, better performance, better everything.


Everyone wants TSMC 4N (5nm), but a lot of people are stuck on thinking Nintendo will go for 8NM because it's cheaper. I don't buy it and increasingly don't.


Nintendo hasn't cheapened out on any of the components that we know so far. 12gigs of ram, 256g storage space, mixed in with everything we know about the performance makes for one heck of a handheld at an affordable price-tag. Arguably, the only component where they "cheaped out" was the screen and going for an LCD instead of an OLED. But I'm personally not bothered and would rather they cheap out on the screen than any of the actual guts of the system. Plus, chances are good they'll do a premium OLED model several years into the Switch2's lifespan.

You could make the argument that the entry-level Steam Deck has 16gigs of RAM and is sold for $400 and Nintendo cheaped out on that but, tbh, my gut is telling me that Valve is selling the Steam Deck at a loss. Everybody and their grandma has a Switch and Nintendo is paired with Nvidia. I'm confident they've gotten much better deals and decided 12gigs is a healthy number for the foreseeable future that still lets them sell at a profit. I'm not too bothered.
Click to expand...
Well, pretty much every big-name handheld PC is running 16GB LPDDR5, but Switch 2 is looking to be 12GB of LPDDR5X. 16GB would be nice, but likely not needed in the long run. Having that extra bandwidth, however, is more important, and a good trade off.

In any case, I honestly believe the T239 will be TSMC 4N, even if the Samsung 8N is cheaper, because Nintendo thinks about the long term. With Switch, they were already in the process of making a weaker chip before getting convinced by Nvidia to use the Tegra X1. When they made the "switch", they were more or less locked into the 20nm process for the time being. When the 16nm Tegra X1+ became available, they immediately "switched" over to it, dropping the older process node. Here with the T239, they have the option from the start because they are in charge of the specs for Nvidia to design. What point would they have to go with an older process node to end up needing to use a newer node down the road (which costs money?) when they could use the newer node now? We all thought Nintendo would use LPDDR5, but they didn't. They 1-uped on it. To utilize what LPDDR5X offers over LPDDR5 means having hardware that pushes more, generating more heat, consuming more power. Using Samsung 8N would be counterintuitive, and simple a slap in the face.
 
So after the whirlwind of news we had this week, it seems like the only thing we really need to know for sure is the Node size which digital foundry is deadset on it being either 7nm or 8nm
 
Ghostsonplanets said:
If I may interject, I think what Redd is trying to get across is that people might be overhyping the machine GPU capabilities when doing comparison with PS4 Pro GPU.

His point is that PS4 Pro is a big GPU with tons of available resources and clocked decently high (For 2016 GPU standards). When people say that Switch 2 GA10F GPU will of course surpass the PS4 Pro GPU *before DLSS (What does that even mean?) if clocked high enough, that couldn't be further from the truth.

He doesn't mean that there won't be scenarios where the Switch 2 GPU won't outpace PS4 Pro GPU. Of course, in some scenarios, Switch 2 GPU will outpace or even do things that wouldn't be possible on the 4Pro due to it being a modern GPU with hardware support for modern features. But, when doing a iso comparison, the goals of each GPU are very different. GA10F is designed to be into a power limited form factor and output 4K content with aid of machine learning upsampling. PS4 Pro GPU was designed to draw 200W+ and to bring PS4 content to 4K with checkerboarding. The former has a leaner GPU while the latter has a fatter GPU. In normal circumstances, the wealthy of resources the Pro GPU has access to mean it should be outperforming the Switch 2 GPU even if TFLOPs are equal.

But, again, for software developed to take advantage of modern featureset, the Tegra will be doing things that are outright impossible on the past Playstation machine. The grievance of @ReddDread is just that people are thinking Switch 2 Docked will be a 1:1 PS4 Pro when things should be much more nuanced. Ultimately, I think someone else description is perfect: Switch 2 is a device that can do the same things Series S can do. Just at slower performance due to the form factor.
Click to expand...

Sir, if it can do 1080p/60 as STANDARD then screw it, I'm happy. 1440p/4K DLSSing is just a bonus.

But I don't want no more damned 30fps in my Nintendo titles. Are you listening, Aonuma?
 
Hey, I just wanted to leave a message thanking you all for all the work and information. This is one of the best threads and forums I have come across in a long time!
 
NintenDuvo said:
So after the whirlwind of news we had this week, it seems like the only thing we really need to know for sure is the Node size which digital foundry is deadset on it being either 7nm or 8nm
Click to expand...
I’m curious as do why. Like after all these new evidence I truly think Nintendo will be using a 4 TSMC, mostly because Nintendo will be using 12GB ram with LPDDR5X.

Like in my eyes it truly seems Nintendo aren’t cheapening out. But we might see some cost saving with the screen and other junk, other than that we might have a fantastic handheld and maybe the best one in the market.

If digital foundry are still set on 8NM, then I would genuinely be surprised. And would be intrigued as do why?
 
Concernt said:
It's very possible they're dead set on being wrong
Click to expand...
Have they actually updated their predictions since the shipping data was dropped a few days ago? Their last podcast pre-dated this info
darthdiablo said:
Ya sure? You have "Researcher" in your uname.

sus
Click to expand...
My favorite part of my username is that I created it before Tears of the Kingdom had an official title, and it just so happens there are Zonai researchers in the final game
 
Digital Foundry have yet to comment on the LPDDR5X RAM since their last podcast video was made 4 days ago.
 
ns156 said:
Sir, if it can do 1080p/60 as STANDARD then screw it, I'm happy. 1440p/4K DLSSing is just a bonus.
Click to expand...
1080p/60 or 1440p/4K rendering resolutions won't be the standard across the board. Some software will be pushing the system and will need more breathing room. Others will be fine enough and give what you want. Ultimately, it's up to the developers choice.
ns156 said:
But I don't want no more damned 30fps in my Nintendo titles. Are you listening, Aonuma?
Click to expand...
That also won't happen. There will be 30 FPS titles from Nintendo. 60 x 30 FPS is a developer choice and each has their own trade-off. It's a matter of performance x design goals.

As for Zelda, each title since OoT tried to push the Nintendo systems and have stickied to 30 FPS (Exception being ALBW and TFH). So I think it's quite likely that Zelda Next will also be 30 FPS, as the team will want to push the system on their own ways and make usage of the system modern feature set. But, maybe a 60 FPS option will be available, who knows.

But, again, I don't want to sound a doomer and take out your excitement. Switch 2 will be a very nice machine and a generational leap over Switch. If developers want to go towards 60FPS at higher resolutions, they'll be more able to freely do so without impacting presentation too much when compared to Switch.
 
Ghostsonplanets said:
1080p/60 or 1440p/4K rendering resolutions won't be the standard across the board. Some software will be pushing the system and will need more breathing room. Others will be fine enough and give what you want. Ultimately, it's up to the developers choice.

That also won't happen. There will be 30 FPS titles from Nintendo. 60 x 30 FPS is a developer choice and each has their own trade-off. It's a matter of performance x design goals.

As for Zelda, each title since OoT tried to push the Nintendo systems and have stickied to 30 FPS (Exception being ALBW and TFH). So I think it's quite likely that Zelda Next will also be 30 FPS, as the team will want to push the system on their own ways and make usage of the system modern feature set. But, maybe a 60 FPS option will be available, who knows.

But, again, I don't want to sound a doomer and take out your excitement. Switch 2 will be a very nice machine and a generational leap over Switch. If developers want to go towards 60FPS at higher resolutions, they'll be more able to freely do so without impacting presentation too much when compared to Switch.
Click to expand...

30fps is hell on OLED without motion smoothing. It's just a terrible choice with modern TVs.
 
ns156 said:
30fps is hell on OLED without motion smoothing. It's just a terrible choice with modern TVs.
Click to expand...
True. But, at the same time, 30 FPS allow developers to have nearly 4x as much more time to compute prettier effects or systems for their games. Hence why it's not something that ever will go away*. Specially for system with fixed and immutable performance.

*At least until 120Hz is standard everywhere and 40 FPS is an acceptable step up from 30 FPS.
 
Ghostsonplanets said:
True. But, at the same time, 30 FPS allow developers to have nearly 4x as much more time to compute prettier effects or systems for their games. Hence why it's not something that ever will go away*. Specially for system with fixed and immutable performance.

*At least until 120Hz is standard everywhere and 40 FPS is an acceptable step up from 30 FPS.
Click to expand...

These developers must see the world in slow motion if they don't realise how choppy their games look on modern TVs. SONY had the right idea by allowing different performance option modes.
 
It would be great for smaller Japanese developers to be able to develop more comfortably.
I hope that almost all Japanese third-party titles will be released on Switch 2.
4fe.jpg
 
ns156 said:
These developers must see the world in slow motion if they don't realise how choppy their games look on modern TVs.
Click to expand...
Ultimately, you can see the pretty in marketing but can't feel the choppy until you already bought the product. So prettier > smooth from a marketing standpoint. Some people will be fine with it, others won't. Hence why it comes down to a developer decision.
ns156 said:
SONY had the right idea by allowing different performance option modes.
Click to expand...
It's possible we will see the same with Switch 2, specially as some games already do something like this on current Switch. Just don't expect it for all the games nor as enforced policy by Nintendo.
 
Ghostsonplanets said:
Ultimately, you can see the pretty in marketing but can't feel the choppy until you already bought the product. So prettier > smooth from a marketing standpoint. Some people will be fine with it, others won't. Hence why it comes down to a developer decision.

It's possible we will see the same with Switch 2, specially as some games already do something like this on current Switch. Just don't expect it for all the games nor as enforced policy by Nintendo.
Click to expand...

I mostly play Nintendo systems for first party titles. So long as they do it there then I'm fine.
 
SirArthur said:
Dont they record their DF Direct on Thursdays?
Click to expand...
yea, they wouldn't comment on the manifest stuff until monday when they put their video out. unless they get corroboration of it, then they'll quickly put up a video. but since that hasn't happened before the weekend, I don't think devs reached out to them yet
 
0
Ghostsonplanets said:
Ultimately, I think someone else description is perfect: Switch 2 is a device that can do the same things Series S can do. Just at slower performance due to the form factor.
Click to expand...
Addendum: can play the same games for 20 bucks a year for online service instead of 80.
Jersh said:
Wii U Speculation Thread. Infamous now for going very off the rails in spec expectations only for Nintendo to wildly underdeliver.
Click to expand...
Oh lol. I did remember that for other places. What was it? Someone said we would get a Power 7 architecture and we would have Watson in our system.
 
Reader mode
You must log in or register to reply here.
Please read this new, consolidated staff post before posting.

Furthermore, according to this follow-up post, all off-topic chat will be moderated.
Last edited by a moderator:


Back
Top Bottom