- Pronouns
- He/Him
Do you mind giving a time stamp for this discussion?
-
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.
-
Do you have audio editing experience and want to help out with the Famiboards Discussion Club Podcast? If so, we're looking for help and would love to have you on the team! Just let us know in the Podcast Thread if you are interested!
-
General system instability
🚧 We apologise for the recent server issues. The site may be unavaliable while we investigate the problem. 🚧
StarTopic Future Nintendo Hardware & Technology Speculation & Discussion |ST| (Read the staff posts before commenting!)
- Thread starter Dakhil
- Start date
ShaunSwitch
Moblin
Great insight as always Thraktor.
With Drake being a 12 sm part and with your estimates of chip size at different manufacturing nodes I'd put money on a TSMC 5nm family process at this point.
I know that 8nm is feasible, but with the chip edging close to 200mm^2, even if they reserve higher clocks for a docked profile I feel the device would need a larger cooling solution, which in turn requires a larger shell, Dock, possibly battery if the power draw increases in handheld, which doesn't feel like something Nintendo would shoot for. Not if the shrunk chip isn't much more expensive and they can reuse all the current manufacturing lines for the OLED shell etc.
There's a lot to be saved by not having to create brand new tooling and manufacturing lines for shells, docks, etc. All of this would be part of the decision making process for Nvidia and Nintendo.
I guess there are three scenarios for me.
Drake on TSMC 5nm, reuses existing OLED manufacturing processes for large parts of the device. Clocks similar to current switch. Due to chip size, yield and reusing existing manufacturing lines this very well could be the most economical option for Drake.
Drake on Samsung 8nm, reuses OLED manufacturing processes, clocks are low and some SM disabled in handheld to maintain similar power profile. This doesn't make sense as making a smaller chip than 12sm would be more economical.
Drake on Samsung 8nm. Uses new manufacturing lines for a much bigger device. It's as big as the WiiU Gamepad but has high clocks. Has new feature in that it uses the cooling solution to blow a strong wind on the users face. Implemented in Mario sunshine so you can feel the warm sea breeze blowing on your face as you play.
D
Deleted member 887
Guest
I don’t believe there is either - but it’s not inconceivable that a non-Drake revision exists and hasn’t leaked.
Consider this (hypothetical) situation:
1) Nintendo is working on a revision that adds DLSS to the Switch. It’s a custom chip that adds tensor cores to the X1, plus a clock bump. This is the Switch Pro
2) At the same time Nintendo is working on a Switch 2, DLSS, a huge upgrade in power, but not fully backwards compatible.
3) Game devs get Switch Pro dev kits and leak “4K switch with DLSS” to some folks in the press
4) Outside game-world, Nvidia folks start leaking Switch 2 development.
5) The community expects a DLSS revision, Lapsu$ hack shows DLSS hardware, thus conflating the Switch Pro with the Switch 2
To be clear, I don’t think that’s happened. But not only is it not impossible it already happened when the 4K device started leaking from devs at about the same time the OLED model leaked from hardware manufacturers, and smart folks assumed they were the same machine.
Zedark
The guy with the ToV avatar
Just anxiety, nothing actually happened.
- Pronouns
- He/Him
Would it even be theoretically possible to add tensor cores to a (presumably die shrunk) TX1 chip?
Alovon11
Like Like
- Pronouns
- He/Them
No, not it would not
Look over there
Bob-omb
Along those lines, on the software side of things, are the DLSS related calls done in CUDA? Such that regardless of the existence of tensor cores, Maxwell level CUDA compatibility would have no idea what to do? Or is that not relevant?
Simba1
Bob-omb
I dont dispute Nvidia leak.
I meant Nate.
Nop, has to be Turing or newer.
Simba1
Bob-omb
Well things that he said in last podcast are quite strange, but maybe is simple bad wording and comparison from his side..
Simba1
Bob-omb
It starts around 1:14.
Hosermess
Koopa
1:14:30 is the question where he mentions all that stuff in his reply. He says a few interesting things in his reply. But was just stating his opinions. Like he says Sony could have marketed the PS4 Pro as a next gen console. Marketing, branding & position are the important things etc.
I get the sense he is/was more involved in the marketing side of the industry. And while he is knowledgeable in some of the tech stuff, I don't think that's his expertise. Not sure how many tech guys would be talking about promotional cycles as often as he does.
D
Deleted member 2551
Guest
I lurked the future Switch talks from 2018 and it’s basically the usual “it’s coming in [CURRENT YEAR + 2]”. In 12 months it’s gonna be “it’s coming in 2025”.
D
Deleted member 887
Guest
Nah, I'm just handwaving a magical low power Switch Pro chip without spinning up speculation about a revision that I don't actually believe exists. TL;DR: I don't believe a mini-revision distinct from Drake is incoming, but you can conceive of a scenario where we're combining Drake with a separate modest revision, the same way Drake and the OLED were mixed up. "Surely we'd know about it by now," doesn't quite hold up when much of what we know now comes from a Major Cyberattack, and not ordinary leaks.
Developers interact with a dynamic library provided by Nvidia. That library is a black box that makes the necessary calls to the driver (though technically I think Lapsus probably leaked the source for it).
Since DLSS leverages hardware features that Maxwell doesn't have, it probably just wouldn't know what to do with a Maxwell GPU.
Technically Volta, but there's never been a gaming focused Volta chip.
Sol
Moblin
Sol
Moblin
Nate mentioned that Drake is a akin to a New 3DS or Xbox One S, and that Nintendo's actual next-generation platform could come "around 2025".
BlueManifest
Bob-omb
Sol
Moblin
It sounds like what he thinks. You can listen here.
But I don't know how Nintendo could release a system like Drake in early 2023, and then turn around 2-3 years later and introduce a completely new next-generation platform.
Everything we know about Drake is that it is a completely custom SoC built by Nvidia for Nintendo and is maximizing numerous new technologies such as DLSS and ray-tracing. Completely custom, being fine tuned with input from Nintendo. You don't just develop a brand new SoC like that only to turn around 2-3 years later and replace it with your true next-gen platform.
BlueManifest
Bob-omb
Sol
Moblin
manfromthedam
Semi Undercover Game Music Guy
One note that Nate has used the XBox One S metaphor in the past, and has usually clarified that was from a marketing perspective.
Zedark
The guy with the ToV avatar
Indeed. Nate said this just last Saturday:
At the risk of reading too much into it, this doesn't sound like the device would be a 10% upgrade like an XB1S when he seems to believe the NVIDIA leak chip is the thing he's heard about himself as well.
BlueManifest
Bob-omb
Yea it’s more of a PS4 pro or Xbox one X if that is what it is, than a xb1s. The oled has more in common with a xb1s than the drake system would
Time line lands with standard time for a Nintendo next gen system though, 2025 for a next gen system would be 8 years and longest time frame ever in history for next gen transition for any gaming company not just Nintendo
Last edited:
- Pronouns
- He/Him
Thanks:
“….listening to the video discussing Bloomberg article about devs stated you heard this new hardware could come late 2022/2023, has changed based on a number of new releases this year?
As of this moment and recording, that has not changed
and it had a follow up question, based on your knowledge of the new hardware for Nintendo would it be more akin to a PlayStation 4 pro or PlayStation 5, what makes a console a next generation console instead of just a enhanced version of the original? in this case I would say it would be more of a PlayStation 4 pro than a PlayStation 5. PlayStation 5 was a true next generational successor whereas the switch hardware I have been referring to is more of a revision, think new 3ds from the base 3DS or even an Xbox one S to the Xbox one
As for a new Generation console, I mean some people would debate this for hours, it really comes down to, usually architecture (MVG: Yup), a bit with software but typically architecture is the main thing, and that can become a little muddled in some cases because it's not the sole factor. If Sony wanted to, they could have positioned the PlayStation 4 pro as a next generation system to the PlayStation 4, or Microsoft Xbox one X to the Xbox one…..”
thegodsend
Tektite
- Pronouns
- he/him
Nate has been straight forward and consistent: t's a Switch revision with DLSS potentially coming late this / early next year.
DLSS itself implies an new SOC and the nVidia leak matches this.
What Nate does not do is talk specs in detail and when he compares this to PS4 Pro, I believe he implies that this is the Switch brand and form factor, while a next gen console might bring more differences - stronger hardware being only one of them.
At least that's my reading.
So nothing changes.
DLSS itself implies an new SOC and the nVidia leak matches this.
What Nate does not do is talk specs in detail and when he compares this to PS4 Pro, I believe he implies that this is the Switch brand and form factor, while a next gen console might bring more differences - stronger hardware being only one of them.
At least that's my reading.
So nothing changes.
Last edited:
Zedark
The guy with the ToV avatar
While I absolutely disagree with the notion that PS4 Pro or XB1X can pass for next gen consoles with the weak CPUs that they have, that's also not the point being made, and I feel it's clear from this that the comment was focused on the marketing aspect, not the power profile.
Sol
Moblin
I agree that was very puzzling. A new next-generation platform that succeeds the Switch coming out around 2025 does not make any sense at all to me.
The PS4 Pro and Xbox One X were just juiced up components of the old hardware - same Jaguar CPU cores, and larger, beefier GCN based GPUs. The actual new SoC and architectures were introduced with Series X|S and the PS5.
Drake would also be a new SoC with a completely new architecture. Drake releasing a year from now with a brand new Nintendo platform then releasing just a few years later seems incredibly unlikely.
- Pronouns
- He/Him
To give a better context of the matter, he also used the GameBoy Color which in the Iwata asks it is considered a successor, but people like MVG and Grubb debate that it is not and it is a revision.
This was however about how people debate on a succ vs a pro
BlueManifest
Bob-omb
The gameboy advance probably could have been considered to be in the gameboy family even though it was a next gen system
It wasn’t until the DS that the system had a major change
Imo this system will be like going from the DS to the 3ds or the gameboy to the gameboy advance, a next gen system in the same family of systems
It won’t be a system like going from gameboy advance to DS, this type of system will release in 2028-2029
Last edited:
- Pronouns
- he / him
Be like PS5 and Series, release them before a bunch of tentpole releases come out for the last system.
ShaunSwitch
Moblin
There is one way a next generation device in 2024/2025 could make sense.
If we are talking about the switch, there are no more SoCs from Nvidia really planned until Atlan, which won't be available until 2026/2027. This makes another next gen switch style device unlikely before this point.
However, it's not completely alien for Nintendo to completely change form between generations or release third pillar devices that eventually replace the prior generation, aka DS to GBA. A device that isn't relying on a small form factor and battery power could be released and be another huge leap above Drake.
Something akin to an RTX 4060 with a couple of 8*A78 clusters running at 3ghz+ specifically built for whatever new gimmick Nintendo pursues, whether that be VR, AR or something we can't even imagine.
Not saying its likely. But I think this scenario is more likely than another SoC for mobile appearing from nowhere less than two years after Drake releases.
If we are talking about the switch, there are no more SoCs from Nvidia really planned until Atlan, which won't be available until 2026/2027. This makes another next gen switch style device unlikely before this point.
However, it's not completely alien for Nintendo to completely change form between generations or release third pillar devices that eventually replace the prior generation, aka DS to GBA. A device that isn't relying on a small form factor and battery power could be released and be another huge leap above Drake.
Something akin to an RTX 4060 with a couple of 8*A78 clusters running at 3ghz+ specifically built for whatever new gimmick Nintendo pursues, whether that be VR, AR or something we can't even imagine.
Not saying its likely. But I think this scenario is more likely than another SoC for mobile appearing from nowhere less than two years after Drake releases.
You truly believe that people get anxious about videogames, or is that just a figure of speech?
Edit: sorry I'm on mobile and fucked up my quote
Look over there
Bob-omb
Basically, yea, my interpretation of Nate's take then is that if we look at that investor relations' sales units page years later in the future, we'd probably see Drake be included within 'Nintendo Switch' sales. Then a potential 2025-or-later device would be a different concept and separate entry.
BlueManifest
Bob-omb
What I didn’t say this lolYou truly believe that people get anxious about videogames, or is that just a figure of speech?
Edit: sorry I'm on mobile and fucked up my quote
Zedark
The guy with the ToV avatar
Figure of speech.You truly believe that people get anxious about videogames, or is that just a figure of speech?
Edit: sorry I'm on mobile and fucked up my quote
Having a new, more powerful machine releasing in 2023 for a premium price, and then releasing 2 years later another videogame system, powerful enough to be considered a new generation, and thus again at a premium price, seems extremely far fetched don't you think? I know Nintendo is sometimes weird but I doubt it is that weird.
As far as I'm concerned, the current switch is fine and won't stop being fine for the next 2 years. The best game on PS5 is a cross generation game after all, so it's not like the new console generation has been revolutionary so far.
I'm betting that this is also Nintendo's reasoning, and 2024-25 is a fine time to release their next generation console. And that leaked device seems to be just that. Series S level will be great for an hybrid by that time.
Serif
𝕽𝖊𝖓𝖊𝖌𝖆𝖉𝖊 𝕬𝖓𝖌𝖊𝖑
I agree, it's all branding. The Game Boy was a brand - Nintendo's portable gaming "Walkman". The Game Boy Advance continued that brand. The DS was a successor to the GBA but very explicitly not a Game Boy, Nintendo could fall back on that branding in case the DS failed.
Wii was its own brand. Nintendo tried to extend that brand with the Wii U - didn't work quite as well, imho.
The Switch is Nintendo's latest successful brand. We're rightfully assuming Drake is a new 'Switch' (aka a hybrid gaming console in a tablet form factor) and not called a Nintendo Somethingelse. They don't need to make a hard delineation between revision and succ, it's been explained before in this thread why scalability of games, backwards compatibility, game patches, etc. mean an extended cross-gen period, and Drake will become Nintendo's lead dev platform eventually.
Maybe Nintendo releases a dedicated AR/VR platform with Nvidia chips in 2025 called Nintendo XR or whatever. Maybe that can be an actual third pillar and not replace the Switch, since personally I believe mixed reality will not substitute flat gaming but be an additional way of playing games. Just spitballing.
Sol
Moblin
I agree, it's all branding. The Game Boy was a brand - Nintendo's portable gaming "Walkman". The Game Boy Advance continued that brand. The DS was a successor to the GBA but very explicitly not a Game Boy, Nintendo could fall back on that branding in case the DS failed.
Wii was its own brand. Nintendo tried to extend that brand with the Wii U - didn't work quite as well, imho.
The Switch is Nintendo's latest successful brand. We're rightfully assuming Drake is a new 'Switch' (aka a hybrid gaming console in a tablet form factor) and not called a Nintendo Somethingelse. They don't need to make a hard delineation between revision and succ, it's been explained before in this thread why scalability of games, backwards compatibility, game patches, etc. mean an extended cross-gen period, and Drake will become Nintendo's lead dev platform eventually.
Maybe Nintendo releases a dedicated AR/VR platform with Nvidia chips in 2025 called Nintendo XR or whatever. Maybe that can be an actual third pillar and not replace the Switch, since personally I believe mixed reality will not substitute flat gaming but be an additional way of playing games. Just spitballing.
Nintendo needs to take a page from Microsoft and Sony and stick with a given platform. Trying to build a new gaming platform from scratch every 5-6 years has killed them in the past.
People love the Switch. People know what it is and understand how it works. Nintendo has built up years worth of extremely positive equity in the gaming industry with the Switch brand. A "Nintendo Switch 2" is easy to understand and people would realize what that system is, just like PS2, PS3, PS4, and PS5.
Creating a brand new platform again with a new name and starting from scratch again is just beyond foolish, IMO. Sony doesn't do it. Microsoft doesn't do it. There's no reason for Nintendo to keep doing this.
I can just see Nintendo bringing back the two screen concept and calling it the "Nintendo QuickFlip" or something, and then having to build the "QuickFlip" brand from scratch. Sony rolls into each new generation with another new Playstation because the Playstation brand has become so beloved and ubiquitous. Nintendo creating new brands every 5-6 years for their consoles is a trend that needs to end.
- Pronouns
- He/Him
Thing is, if we try to extrapolate:
Nate mentioned the N3DS and XBox One S, what do these two systems even share? The only thing I can find is that they were just discontinued for a better model and that better model remained for the duration of the system’s life, games worked on both. Outside of that, neither are particularly relevant to each other. Like at all.
So I’ll work on that…
When was the 3DS/XB1 released?
2011 and 2013 respectively.
When were their replacements released?
October 2014-February 2015 (N3DS XL) and August 2016. Respectively.
Oddly enough, the
NEW 3DS was announced January 2015 and released February of that same year 
in North America. But the standard sized model was released later.
Anyway, when was the 3DS and XB1 VCR discontinued?
3DS, from what I can find, was discontinued in probably late 2014 with the early 2015 having reports of it and this was before the N3DS released in certain regions.
And from what I can find XB1 VCR was discontinued between 2016 and 2017, before the One X was released but after the One S was released. In between that it was no longer available for purchase.
I can’t find information on the 3DS XL however but I assume it was discontinued at around the same time as the base model.
So 2015.
But how does this piece at all with the Nintendo switch? It was released in 2017 right, a better model came out in 2019 that completely replaced the original model and offered a better battery life than the original. At the same time they released a second addition to the switch family in the Lite model which was only meant for portable play and nothing more.
2 years after that, the OLED model is released but it does not replace anything in the Switch ecosystem. In fact, it simply adds to the switch ecosystem and is even priced to differentiate it from the basic switch system.
It has everything that the V2 model has, but with more perks for only a 16% price increase. In a few markets like japan that give proper data, it seems like the OLED model has taken up the sales of the V2 yet said v2 isn’t discontinued. It could be the honeymoon phase of course, but OLED seems like it’s cannibalizing the Switch V2 sales. Lite on the other hand doesn’t seem that affected. At least, that’s my interpretation of the data. And the OLED is still very supply limited.
(OLED is selling much better and faster than the Lite though).
V2 is making up less of these sales. Perhaps Nintendo is intentionally making less V2s and phasing them out slowly over the course of several months, or they are making enough but the audience is going for the OLED model still leaving the V2 to sit on shelves. It’s either or imo.
(Or both)
So to conclude, if I was to actually extrapolate more into what Nate said (I did), it seems like he is implying it is supposed to be a “revision“ in the same way that the PS4 Pro is to the PS4. However unlike the PS4 pro to the PS4, it replaces the base model just like how Nintendo replaced the old Nintendo 3DS with the new Nintendo 3DS or how Microsoft replace the Xbox one VCR with the Xbox one S. PS4 Pro sold alongside the basic plan (which was actually replaced with the Slim) for the remainder of its life until it was discontinued in 2020 in lieu of the PS5 DE which is priced the same.
It’s a two birds one stone type of revision, or the “pro” that replaces the base model.
Sole mention of N3DS fills that fine though so idk why mention One S… it shares nothing other than being a revision that replaces the base model. But that happened more than once already.
Simply put, I don’t know where the “2024” thing even slots here. What is that supposed to even mean
Nate mentioned the N3DS and XBox One S, what do these two systems even share? The only thing I can find is that they were just discontinued for a better model and that better model remained for the duration of the system’s life, games worked on both. Outside of that, neither are particularly relevant to each other. Like at all.
So I’ll work on that…
When was the 3DS/XB1 released?
2011 and 2013 respectively.
When were their replacements released?
October 2014-February 2015 (N3DS XL) and August 2016. Respectively.
Oddly enough, the
NEW 3DS was announced January 2015 and released February of that same year in North America. But the standard sized model was released later.Anyway, when was the 3DS and XB1 VCR discontinued?
3DS, from what I can find, was discontinued in probably late 2014 with the early 2015 having reports of it and this was before the N3DS released in certain regions.
And from what I can find XB1 VCR was discontinued between 2016 and 2017, before the One X was released but after the One S was released. In between that it was no longer available for purchase.
I can’t find information on the 3DS XL however but I assume it was discontinued at around the same time as the base model.
So 2015.
But how does this piece at all with the Nintendo switch? It was released in 2017 right, a better model came out in 2019 that completely replaced the original model and offered a better battery life than the original. At the same time they released a second addition to the switch family in the Lite model which was only meant for portable play and nothing more.
2 years after that, the OLED model is released but it does not replace anything in the Switch ecosystem. In fact, it simply adds to the switch ecosystem and is even priced to differentiate it from the basic switch system.
It has everything that the V2 model has, but with more perks for only a 16% price increase. In a few markets like japan that give proper data, it seems like the OLED model has taken up the sales of the V2 yet said v2 isn’t discontinued. It could be the honeymoon phase of course, but OLED seems like it’s cannibalizing the Switch V2 sales. Lite on the other hand doesn’t seem that affected. At least, that’s my interpretation of the data. And the OLED is still very supply limited.
(OLED is selling much better and faster than the Lite though).
V2 is making up less of these sales. Perhaps Nintendo is intentionally making less V2s and phasing them out slowly over the course of several months, or they are making enough but the audience is going for the OLED model still leaving the V2 to sit on shelves. It’s either or imo.
(Or both)
So to conclude, if I was to actually extrapolate more into what Nate said (I did), it seems like he is implying it is supposed to be a “revision“ in the same way that the PS4 Pro is to the PS4. However unlike the PS4 pro to the PS4, it replaces the base model just like how Nintendo replaced the old Nintendo 3DS with the new Nintendo 3DS or how Microsoft replace the Xbox one VCR with the Xbox one S. PS4 Pro sold alongside the basic plan (which was actually replaced with the Slim) for the remainder of its life until it was discontinued in 2020 in lieu of the PS5 DE which is priced the same.
It’s a two birds one stone type of revision, or the “pro” that replaces the base model.
Sole mention of N3DS fills that fine though so idk why mention One S… it shares nothing other than being a revision that replaces the base model. But that happened more than once already.
Simply put, I don’t know where the “2024” thing even slots here. What is that supposed to even mean
Serif
𝕽𝖊𝖓𝖊𝖌𝖆𝖉𝖊 𝕬𝖓𝖌𝖊𝖑
I agree. With the Switch we've had motion controlled swordplay adventures, fitness games with wearable attachments, augmented reality toy kart racing, touch screen games, tate mode games, VR, cardboard pianos and robot backpacks, and the list goes on. All while sticking to the Switch brand and form factor.
They could design a separate dedicated VR platform with foveated rendering and goggles like the Quest, but still call it Switch VR and allow Switch games to be played on it. Maybe a mixed reality Switch device with a camera, or adding wireless streaming for asymmetrical multiplayer.
Regardless, none of these particular features take up the spotlight because someone can just ignore all of these entirely, and enjoy just the main function of switching between handheld and TV mode. To me, this feels like a timeless idea. At least for the next decade and a half.
Tentacle-tropes
Kremling
I think it way too early to say what Nintendo is going to do in 5-6yrs & any potential new device, whether this device is the same or new. This is not even getting into the current leadership or what plans they have. But looking at their current strategy & words Shows they are not keen on building up another platform. Trying to extrapolate that far out is only gonna make you think of the worst case scenarios.
Look over there
Bob-omb
Well, New 3DS to Switch was a gap of under 3 years, so it's not impossible. I don't think it's likely, but it's possible for a device with a new concept/brand to launch 2-3 years after Drake.
I will say this: a planned 2024-2025 release period for Drake is something I would find peculiar. It'd be a rather extraordinarily long period of time since we heard about... let's say, intentions to reach the tape out stage, but some snags appeared, about roughly a year ago. On top of what people have already mentioned about devkits being out for so and so long as well as NVN2 been worked on since at least 2019.
If it ends up launching in 2024-2025, it would mean that something happened with the hardware along the way. 'Oh the Switch is doing just fine right now and will for the near future' will have jack all to do with it.
- Pronouns
- He/Him
If you're just talking about naming/branding, then I do agree. The Switch device is modular, and the "Switch" name is so malleable that I don't see any reason for them to drop it, even with new functionality. Adding VR via a headset 'dock' in Switch 3? Sure, it's just another profile in the hybrid catalog on the back of the box.
If you're talking about the hardware itself I always had the impression that Microsoft and Sony have been building new platforms from scratch every generation. The PS2 to PS3 shift was notoriously bad for developers. This current generation is probably the first transition that, as a consumer, feels like a graceful handover - especially on the Xbox front. Focus on cross-generational support, building on the existing UI, etc.
I can't find the source, but Nintendo stated in some investor meeting or similar that they're dissatisfied with how they have to start from scratch each generation and were working to mitigate this. We've yet to see how this will transpire, but it could very well be something we see signs of with the revision.
Last edited:
