• 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!

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

Reader mode
Man I'm a bit of a Nintendo fanboy and I own that but $500 for new hardware is just too much. I don't know that I'd jump in on that at full price.

I say discontinue the OG switch, cut the OLED to $300 and make whatever is next $400. And that's already pushing it.
 
indospot said:
Man I'm a bit of a Nintendo fanboy and I own that but $500 for new hardware is just too much. I don't know that I'd jump in on that at full price.
Click to expand...
That's the idea. Keep demand down to prevent scalping and make them easier to obtain

Everybody who wants one should be able to get one on launch day
 
indospot said:
Man I'm a bit of a Nintendo fanboy and I own that but $500 for new hardware is just too much. I don't know that I'd jump in on that at full price.

I say discontinue the OG switch, cut the OLED to $300 and make whatever is next $400. And that's already pushing it.
Click to expand...
I'd only jump in on it only if this new hardware is meant to kick off a new generation, otherwise there is absolutely no way I'm paying for that much on a mere revision that's just going to play the same games, my current Switch can already do that
 
Z0m3le said:
I'll say this, Drake should be on shelves before this time next year, from you and everyone else talking about it, games are already being readied for the device and there is some reason to believe that the reveal will be in 2 or 3 weeks, I'd even suggest July 12-14th for such a reveal, mainly because they didn't show off any first party games in this last direct, but there is many more reasons to believe it is happening soon, both public and private. I can hang on for a few more weeks with hype I guess.
Click to expand...
Thanks for your contributions to this discussion over the years ☺️. Let's see what next week brings!
 
0
This post is 1000% speculation.

Scenario 1 - Nvidia ends TSMC 16 nm production forcing a refresh of all T214 devices

With the addition of 4 nm capacity for the RTX 4000 series and a big drop in RTX 3000 production Nvidia could rationalise some of their older processes.
This means that all Switch and Shield models get refreshed with the new T239 (Drake). The Lite is handheld only so it doesn't need the fancy cooling for docked DLSS.

Nintendo can select new components that will remain in production until the end of the Switch lifespan. This is similar to the 2019 refresh as the TSMC 20 nm process and the LPDDR4 memory used in the original Switch model were end-of-life.
Like the 3DS Nintendo can flexibly allocate SOC supply between the three models as they wind down production of the Switch.

Currently there are regular discounts on all Switch models so Nintendo could use this refresh to revert to standard pricing.
For this scenario the process will need to be cheap, so Samsung 8 nm is the top contender.

Scenario 2 - T239 on TSMC 4 nm or 6 nm

Also known as the enthusiast option. The higher cost means that the new T239 is only used for a new Switch 4K and the Shield Pro.
The components used in the current Switch models will need to remain in production for 3+ years to make this is a viable option.
Perhaps this could replace the OLED?

Scenario 3 - Some combination of the above

This seems pretty farfetched but perhaps the regular Switch, the Lite and the Shield get a refreshed T214 (T219?) on 8 nm with slightly better battery life. This means no DLSS or RT for these models.
Then the OLED and the Shield Pro then go up in price and get a more expensive T239 that includes all the new features.
 
slsk said:
This seems pretty farfetched but perhaps the regular Switch, the Lite and the Shield get a refreshed T214 (T219?) on 8 nm with slightly better battery life. This means no DLSS or RT for these models.
Click to expand...
That requires Nintendo and Nvidia to completely redesign the Tegra X1+ with Samsung's IPs in mind, which I don't think is inexpensive, since the Tegra X1+'s using TSMC's IPs when fabricated using TSMC's 16 nm** process node.

** → simply a marketing nomenclature used by all foundry companies
 
ReddDreadtheLead said:
How about, instead of discontinuing the OLED or the V2, they just temporarily discontinue the lite and drop the V2 to 250?

It’s not like the Lite sells amazingly…

Price bracket would be: 250, 350 and 450 in this case
Click to expand...
Yes, some of the regulars discussed this potential Switch lineup on Discord:

Drake ModelOLED ModelV2 ModelLite
$450​
$350​
$250-$200 (dockless?)​
Suspended or discontinued​
(There are enough discussions in this thread about the potential Drake pricing. I'll skip it here.)
  • Nintendo claimed that the OLED Model's profit margin is lower. They may not be willing to drop the price.
  • It essentially becomes the standard model in this new product lineup.
  • Presently it may be the most profitable model, and has room for a price reduction.
  • In certain markets Nintendo could unbundle the dock to lower the entry point.
  • iPhone SE, the cheapest model, goes in and out of production based on Apple's needs. Nintendo can do the same.
  • They might bring it back later with further cost reduction (e.g., digital only), or Drake upgrade.
Advantages of keeping V2 over Lite:
  • There's more commonality between V2, OLED, and presumably Drake models. By removing Lite from production, it'd simplify the supply chain, enhance the economies of scale, and improve production line flexibility.
  • If V2 indeed goes dockless, Nintendo could discontinue the old dock and sell only the OLED dock, further simplifying the logistics.
  • V2's compatibility with Joy-Con required games, such as Switch Sports and Ring Fit, is better than Lite.
  • If they can manage to reduce the V2 price to $250 or lower, it may seem a better value than Lite to consumers.
Stinky Horse said:
Just after Nintendo was talking about having to consider people are struggling and having less disposable income, this place turns into an auction house
Click to expand...
[OT alert] I understand that sentiment. The reality is that during every economic upheaval, the rich always gets richer. We all just witnessed this during the height of COVID. For the same reason, when the economy's bad, luxury stocks such as LVMH and staple stocks such Walmarts often perform better than everything in the middle (the middle got hollowed out). The PS5, XSX, SD, and likely Drake will continue to be priced for those with disposable incomes. Nintendo simply stated that they'd "closely monitor the situation", but didn't indicate any intention of price reduction. I'd vote for a more just taxation system, but hardly expect a business to voluntarily seek lowered profits.[/OT]
 
I think they will keep the Lite as the low cost option. With COVID induced supply chain issues, it's hard to judge their BOMs and we don't know what its costing them to keep the 16nm line open with TSMC. Maybe nothing, or maybe something.

I agree price cuts on existing Switch may be thin, but pricing expectations are tricky. I still remember a certain group of individuals insisting $250 lock on Switch based on shield pricing and that not working out very well.
 
0
These nomenclatures are funny. 7nm, 5nm, 3nm, I even read 1nm... If a transistor had any characteristic length below 7-8nm, or even 10nm, expecially in the etched silicon part, your computers wouldn't work. Once you get below De Broglie's wavelength, quantum tunneling will start fucking up whatever gain you may have. I can't wait for Drake II being based on the 1 Angstrom process of TSMC.
 
lexony said:
Is the OLED Model really still $350 in the US? Here in Switzerland you can get it already for ~$330 and the regular Switch for ~$270
Click to expand...
Yes, still $350 and sometimes out of stock even. I recall that the price cut in Europe was due to the exchange rate?
 
fwd-bwd said:
Yes, some of the regulars discussed this potential Switch lineup on Discord:

Drake ModelOLED ModelV2 ModelLite
$450​
$350​
$250-$200 (dockless?)​
Suspended or discontinued​
(There are enough discussions in this thread about the potential Drake pricing. I'll skip it here.)
  • Nintendo claimed that the OLED Model's profit margin is lower. They may not be willing to drop the price.
  • It essentially becomes the standard model in this new product lineup.
  • Presently it may be the most profitable model, and has room for a price reduction.
  • In certain markets Nintendo could unbundle the dock to lower the entry point.
  • iPhone SE, the cheapest model, goes in and out of production based on Apple's needs. Nintendo can do the same.
  • They might bring it back later with further cost reduction (e.g., digital only), or Drake upgrade.
Advantages of keeping V2 over Lite:
  • There's more commonality between V2, OLED, and presumably Drake models. By removing Lite from production, it'd simplify the supply chain, enhance the economies of scale, and improve production line flexibility.
  • If V2 indeed goes dockless, Nintendo could discontinue the old dock and sell only the OLED dock, further simplifying the logistics.
  • V2's compatibility with Joy-Con required games, such as Switch Sports and Ring Fit, is better than Lite.
  • If they can manage to reduce the V2 price to $250 or lower, it may seem a better value than Lite to consumers.
Click to expand...
I'd disagree, I think the Lite will be the last of the T214-based models to be discontinued. Nintendo have historically kept the cheapest to manufacture model around for the longest (eg Wii Mini, 2DS), as it allows them to maintain comfortable profits on hardware while selling to a typically price-conscious late adopters. I'd also argue that the Switch Lite has a specific market that the V2 hybrid model doesn't address as well: young kids. Parents not only want a cheaper option, particularly when they're buying one for each child, but the Lite is more durable than any of the hybrid Switch models, as there aren't any detachable parts which can be lost of broken.

My guess is that they'll keep the Lite at $200 for the time being, have a version of the OLED model at $300 (possibly a 32GB version), and then the Drake model at $400 or so. They don't need to keep all three hybrid models around and I would assume they'll keep the OLED model around as it will share more components with the Drake model (including the dock).
 
Thraktor said:
My guess is that they'll keep the Lite at $200 for the time being, have a version of the OLED model at $300 (possibly a 32GB version), and then the Drake model at $400 or so. They don't need to keep all three hybrid models around and I would assume they'll keep the OLED model around as it will share more components with the Drake model (including the dock).
Click to expand...
Indeed the $200 price point is great for mindshare and second unit sales to existing Switch owners.

If anything Nintendo would prefer to lower the price of the Lite to $150 if component prices allowed them to do so.

I’m curious if future risk of loss of TSMC for T214 would be reason to go with another TSMC node for Drake.
 
0
Nintendo preferring to lower a Switch price? Doubtful. Plus there's a risk in pricing a discount model too low relative to the regular one.

Also, a digital only Lite doesn't make much sense to me since it's viewed as a second system and not being able to swap cartridges with it would be a drawback.
 
Hosermess said:
Nintendo preferring to lower a Switch price? Doubtful. Plus there's a risk in pricing a discount model too low relative to the regular one.
Click to expand...
Yeah I get the idea of getting hardware in as many hands as possible to generate revenue from software sales...but Switch is still selling faster than they can produce it. No incentive to drop the Lite price yet.
 
0
Thraktor said:
I'd disagree, I think the Lite will be the last of the T214-based models to be discontinued. Nintendo have historically kept the cheapest to manufacture model around for the longest (eg Wii Mini, 2DS), as it allows them to maintain comfortable profits on hardware while selling to a typically price-conscious late adopters. I'd also argue that the Switch Lite has a specific market that the V2 hybrid model doesn't address as well: young kids. Parents not only want a cheaper option, particularly when they're buying one for each child, but the Lite is more durable than any of the hybrid Switch models, as there aren't any detachable parts which can be lost of broken.
Click to expand...
That's certainly a very likely scenario, and seemingly the expectation of the majority. I simply wanted to provide an alternative that may not be as farfetched as it appears. In the first 6 months alone after the OLED introduction, about 2.3 million existing Switch units were replaced by the new model (40% of OLED sales). I'd guess that the trend will only accelerate when the Drake model is released, creating a glut of used units entering the secondhand market or becoming hand-me-downs. The low-end/children's segment would be well fed, even if the Lite is temporarily withdrawn from the market. (Granted, the same can be said about the V2.)

P.S.: This could just be a coincidence. @necrolipe mentioned that Nintendo did not renew their ANATEL certification (FCC license equivalent in Brazil) for the Switch Lite.
 
the Drake can have a high launch price for the first 6-12 months, $449 or $499 it won't matter it'll sell out everywhere the entire period. Nintendo almost can't lose with the Switch as things are, call it the early adopter tax. yes people have less money but everyone still has enough money for their favourite gadget and it isn't exactly a regular purchase like a smartphone.
 
fwd-bwd said:
Yes, still $350 and sometimes out of stock even. I recall that the price cut in Europe was due to the exchange rate?
Click to expand...
Yeah it is propably that. But when I‘m looking up prices in europe, it seems like the Switch really is usually a bit cheaper than in the US. For example you can get the OLED model for 316€ on Amazon Germany which is 324$.

The euro lost a lot compared to the dollar and the Swiss Central Bank is buying crazy amounts of other currencies because of the strong Swiss franc and it is going up and down compared to the dollar because of that. So maybe the prices are just updated with a delay by a lot of shops.

But it is interessting to me because normally it is the other way around. A lot of products in switzerland are currently to expensive if you go by the exchange rates.
 
0
if supply is low, a high price just makes more sense. it's the better approach for Nintendo and in a roundabout way it's the better approach for enthusiasts
 
granted Nintendo has been burned pretty bad by more 'premium' or higher priced hardware in the past. i hope they realise the Switch situation is entirely different for a multitude of reasons. they don't need to reinvent the wheel or add new gimmicks all they need is a system to exploit their software firing on all cylinders in the 'HD' era. BOTW, Mario Odyssey, MK8 all hugely successful titles any system that takes these sort of titles a step further is a slam dunk. hell BOTW & MK8 are essentially Wii U titles imagine the sort of sales they'll garner with a proper refresh of these series.
 
0
Hosermess said:
Nintendo preferring to lower a Switch price? Doubtful. Plus there's a risk in pricing a discount model too low relative to the regular one.

Also, a digital only Lite doesn't make much sense to me since it's viewed as a second system and not being able to swap cartridges with it would be a drawback.
Click to expand...

I don't mean to overstate the obvious, but I'd like everyone to keep in mind Nintendo prefers whatever arrangement they think will result in the most profit. What that is currently, won't matter in the future if their analysts feel a different arrangement will lead to more profit. Ie if in the future they are able to produce more units as burdens to production are eased, they may feel the market is losing elasticity, or that lowering the price will bring in enough new customers to make an increased profit over the smaller number of consumers paying a higher price.

That means their stance may appear fluid as the environment changes, when it's not, the base is anchored and unmoving.
 
Thraktor said:
I'd disagree, I think the Lite will be the last of the T214-based models to be discontinued. Nintendo have historically kept the cheapest to manufacture model around for the longest (eg Wii Mini, 2DS), as it allows them to maintain comfortable profits on hardware while selling to a typically price-conscious late adopters. I'd also argue that the Switch Lite has a specific market that the V2 hybrid model doesn't address as well: young kids. Parents not only want a cheaper option, particularly when they're buying one for each child, but the Lite is more durable than any of the hybrid Switch models, as there aren't any detachable parts which can be lost of broken.

My guess is that they'll keep the Lite at $200 for the time being, have a version of the OLED model at $300 (possibly a 32GB version), and then the Drake model at $400 or so. They don't need to keep all three hybrid models around and I would assume they'll keep the OLED model around as it will share more components with the Drake model (including the dock).
Click to expand...
I’d argue the Lite really isn’t addressing that market better then the V2. Based on sales extrapolation & anecdotal evidence the trade off, between Lite’s durability & V2’s versatility, doesn’t really favor the Lite. The price isn’t really doing much for it either as we see from sales. At this point in time young kids are pretty well taken care with V2 & OLED entering into the market either to become hand me down or resold at cheaper prices. The Lite is kinda just there to provide a budget alternative to those who don’t care about the Switch’s versatility.
 
Crusters said:
I don't mean to overstate the obvious, but I'd like everyone to keep in mind Nintendo prefers whatever arrangement they think will result in the most profit. What that is currently, won't matter in the future if their analysts feel a different arrangement will lead to more profit. Ie if in the future they are able to produce more units as burdens to production are eased, they may feel the market is losing elasticity, or that lowering the price will bring in enough new customers to make an increased profit over the smaller number of consumers paying a higher price.

That means their stance may appear fluid as the environment changes, when it's not, the base is anchored and unmoving.
Click to expand...
Sure, I just don't think it'll happen because of Drake being introduced. But I'm just guessing so ¯\(ツ)/¯
 
manfromthedam said:
I often get the feeling that they - especially Rich - know more than they're letting on on this topic. He's said in the past that he doesn't want to partake in rumours - only if he knows something that'll truly benefit the audience (like the Switch clocks back in 2016). Normally I feel like he doesn't want to linger too much on Switch 2 questions, but this time they took a little more time. It's interesting how he treats a New Switch (tm) in this coming year as something self-evident. Definitely worth a watch!
Click to expand...
I noticed this too. If you go back he’s always in the know. The guys been in the industry for 30+ years all the way back to the UK games magazine scene.

The next year also indicated to me March 2023 but I still think it has a shot of hitting this year.
 
Hosermess said:
Sure, I just don't think it'll happen because of Drake being introduced. But I'm just guessing so ¯\(ツ)/¯
Click to expand...

Sorry if I seemed to imply otherwise, but my post was directionless, and not attached to a particular side of the discussion I leaped into lol.
 
manfromthedam said:
I often get the feeling that they - especially Rich - know more than they're letting on on this topic.
Click to expand...
Polygon said:
I noticed this too. If you go back he’s always in the know. The guys been in the industry for 30+ years all the way back to the UK games magazine scene.
Click to expand...
I tend to take them at their word when they say they don’t know anything - if for no other reason than their frustration at “DF said” articles is so palpable.
 
oldpuck said:
I tend to take them at their word when they say they don’t know anything - if for no other reason than their frustration at “DF said” articles is so palpable.
Click to expand...

Didn't they accidentally state and analyze the wrong processor as drake from the Nvidia hack information?
 
0
I really don't think the price matters, especially at launch. The hardcore will be there on day one regardless as long as backwards compatibility is there. With how much materials price has increased in the last three years and the specs Nintendo are aiming for this will not be a bargain console and it shouldn't be. I expect it to be in line with the PS5 digital but I wouldn't be surprised to see it push the Series X/PS5 disc version.
 
After reading and listening to breakdowns of the Nvidia leak, Drake specs in the body of a Switch OLED seems worth the potential $400 - $450 price tag to me. Right in between the first and second pricing tiers of a Steam Deck with potentially the same amount of storage as an OLED (64gb) or more, and with the dock included of course. I anticipate a price cut via a die shrink model later on, since I expect this to phase out the og over time, but I know that when it launches I'll have trouble finding one.
 
0
I remember Matt from NPD saying that they game market is pretty “recession-proof”. The 2008 recession didn’t really effect the games market, if I recall. $450 would be a steal for Drake. Maybe $500 wouldn’t, but it would still sell out for the first two years, like the PS5 and XSX.
 
Pretty interesting about the Switch product line moving forward!

Nintendo haven't been too shy about some comparisons to companies like Apple. So, just spewing some thoughts based on IF Nintendo were to copy what they do. Off the top of my head, and I'm SURE I'm oversimplifying it with the details, but Apple with their phones in particular tend to have each "strength level/differentiation" last essentially 2 years time. Granted, they're huge, and the gaming space is different. So, for kicks, let's extend that to 4 years of staggering model releases. Let's also assume they have their differentiated models of Switch set at this moment, aside from a "pro model" coming soon. That'd give them...the normal one with OG Switch (~regular iPhone), an entry/basic one with the Lite (~SE), a "max" one with the OLED just as a screen differentiation mainly (~Max), and an incoming Pro Switch (~iPhone Pro).

With the Pro not being out yet, and the length of time kind of creeping up on the "new" OG version...do they release BOTH a new OG replacement and the Pro at the same time? (Thinking back to Gamecube/Panasonic Q).

Definitely probably not, haha, but it's fun to think about! :ROFLMAO:
 
0
mariodk18 said:
I remember Matt from NPD saying that they game market is pretty “recession-proof”. The 2008 recession didn’t really effect the games market, if I recall. $450 would be a steal for Drake. Maybe $500 wouldn’t, but it would still sell out for the first two years, like the PS5 and XSX.
Click to expand...
I remember reading something about during recessions, goods go down while services go up. it probably helps that getting the console is the one time cost, while there are a great many games at low cost
 
I wanted to put this out there, but digital foundry did not actually observe or dive deep into the data breach to know what the specifications of the next system are, in fact a bunch of people didn’t actually dive into it that reported on it. They parroted off of a Twitter post that mentioned some details about it, but it is evident that no one has actually went in and tried to decipher what the specifications for the next system is.


It should have been more clear before but it seems like they are avoiding this data breach as best as possible, perhaps due to the nature of the information or because they have no interest in the subject really to dive in like that.


When they reported the data breach from AMD for the PlayStation 5 and the Xbox series X, they went off of the Resetera post and the discussion surrounding the leaks that happened in that thread. They also went off of their own independent sources that they have.

So while they are reporters and enthusiast and professionals of whatever they do on media, not everyone should be taking everything they say with literal position of authority, specifically if they aren’t giving signs that they actually bothered to properly check it and 100% verify what it is at their talking about.

If you look back to on the data breach happened they pretty much skirted over the information quickly to move onto the next subject as quick as possible. Again either they do know and choose not to talk about it because of the way that the information was gathered or they do know but choose not to talk about it because it’s not as interesting to them.

There’s probably a third realistic option here.


Also notice how they haven’t really talked about in-depth about the Nvidia hack pertaining to the next generation of GPUs, I’m going to assume that they just don’t wanna talk about it because of the nature of how the information was acquired. Because I know damn well they would love to talk about that in-depth.

In fact, when they do talk about it they pretty much say “that based on the rumors”, i.e., it is based on information that is public that is not acquired illegally, if you wanna call it that.
 
slsk said:
This post is 1000% speculation.

Scenario 1 - Nvidia ends TSMC 16 nm production forcing a refresh of all T214 devices

With the addition of 4 nm capacity for the RTX 4000 series and a big drop in RTX 3000 production Nvidia could rationalise some of their older processes.
This means that all Switch and Shield models get refreshed with the new T239 (Drake). The Lite is handheld only so it doesn't need the fancy cooling for docked DLSS.

Nintendo can select new components that will remain in production until the end of the Switch lifespan. This is similar to the 2019 refresh as the TSMC 20 nm process and the LPDDR4 memory used in the original Switch model were end-of-life.
Like the 3DS Nintendo can flexibly allocate SOC supply between the three models as they wind down production of the Switch.

Currently there are regular discounts on all Switch models so Nintendo could use this refresh to revert to standard pricing.
For this scenario the process will need to be cheap, so Samsung 8 nm is the top contender.

Scenario 2 - T239 on TSMC 4 nm or 6 nm

Also known as the enthusiast option. The higher cost means that the new T239 is only used for a new Switch 4K and the Shield Pro.
The components used in the current Switch models will need to remain in production for 3+ years to make this is a viable option.
Perhaps this could replace the OLED?

Scenario 3 - Some combination of the above

This seems pretty farfetched but perhaps the regular Switch, the Lite and the Shield get a refreshed T214 (T219?) on 8 nm with slightly better battery life. This means no DLSS or RT for these models.
Then the OLED and the Shield Pro then go up in price and get a more expensive T239 that includes all the new features.
Click to expand...
Your scenario 1 really wouldn't work. Drake is not a drop-in replacement for Mariko like Mariko was for Erista.
 
Bosintang said:
These nomenclatures are funny. 7nm, 5nm, 3nm, I even read 1nm... If a transistor had any characteristic length below 7-8nm, or even 10nm, expecially in the etched silicon part, your computers wouldn't work. Once you get below De Broglie's wavelength, quantum tunneling will start fucking up whatever gain you may have. I can't wait for Drake II being based on the 1 Angstrom process of TSMC.
Click to expand...
Deleted. Misread.
 
0
ArchedThunder said:
I’m talking about the emulation issues caused with increasing resolution, like things rendering incorrectly, if they did DLSS the base resolution could stay 720p, avoiding new issues.
Click to expand...
I don't understand what this new thing was doing, but I didn't think it should be possible with emulation. I asked about something similar a few years back (something like 'what could DLSS do for N64 games rendering at their original resolution'), but the consensus was such a thing wasn't possible because the old games weren't providing things DLSS needs like motion vectors. Anyway, just straight up increasing the rendering resolution seems simpler. I wouldn't THINK that doing 2160p should bring up many new issues they haven't already dealt with changing the rendering resolution to 2x or 3x normal.
Glio said:
I just find it strange that Nintendo is suddenly going back to the Game Cube philosophy of "an equal but more powerful console" for a successor. I need to see something else, new and different, to truly believe it.
It's hard to me to believe that they are going to change their philosophy after Wii, Wii U, DS, 3DS and Switch.
Click to expand...
From 3DS/WiiU to Switch was "Less but more powerful". No more second screen, no more camera, no more microphone, no stereoscopic 3D screen or asymmetrical multiplayer, in service of a very straightforward console experience that can also work on the go. If they don't take away even more for Switch 2, it's a step up.
 
JoshuaJSlone said:
I don't understand what this new thing was doing, but I didn't think it should be possible with emulation. I asked about something similar a few years back (something like 'what could DLSS do for N64 games rendering at their original resolution'), but the consensus was such a thing wasn't possible because the old games weren't providing things DLSS needs like motion vectors. Anyway, just straight up increasing the rendering resolution seems simpler. I wouldn't THINK that doing 2160p should bring up many new issues they haven't already dealt with changing the rendering resolution to 2x or 3x normal.

From 3DS/WiiU to Switch was "Less but more powerful". No more second screen, no more camera, no more microphone, no stereoscopic 3D screen or asymmetrical multiplayer, in service of a very straightforward console experience that can also work on the go. If they don't take away even more for Switch 2, it's a step up.
Click to expand...
The joy-con are revolutionary for local multiplayer and that's something that neither 3DS or Wii U had.
 
0
Bosintang said:
These nomenclatures are funny. 7nm, 5nm, 3nm, I even read 1nm... If a transistor had any characteristic length below 7-8nm, or even 10nm, expecially in the etched silicon part, your computers wouldn't work. Once you get below De Broglie's wavelength, quantum tunneling will start fucking up whatever gain you may have. I can't wait for Drake II being based on the 1 Angstrom process of TSMC.
Click to expand...

Pretty sure Jim Keller would disagree and I’m sure he knows more than you.
 
Vash_the_Stampede said:
Pretty sure Jim Keller would disagree and I’m sure he knows more than you.
Click to expand...

I'm a solid state physicist; actively researching on a related topic. While architectures aren't my thing, which I'm very much willing to admit, the limitations due to quantum physics definitely are. And you aren't going below De Broglie's wavelength, as whichever gains you'd get from miniaturization would be offset by the increased leakage current.
You see, trying to clash people online for sports is pretty dumb, because sometimes, you end up out of your own depth. Don't be dumb.
 
There’s one person that literally puts a disclaimer in this thread in every single one of their posts about nanometers to clarify it is a marketing term.

Why are we worrying about this now lol
 
Reader mode
You must log in or register to reply here.
Please read this staff post before posting.

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


Back
Top Bottom