• 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
Mirev said:
Isn’t usually Jan-March for Early 2023 and Jan-June for H1 2023?
Click to expand...
“Early 20XX” is often code for “Q1,” but not always. Some companies – particularly companies that like to release their big holiday products in September – divide the year into thirds, “Early,” “Mid,” and “Late,” each being four months. The first Apple Watch, for example, was released on time in “Early 2015” in late April, since that’s how Apple refers to year parts.

“H1 20XX” is unambiguously January-June.
 
 
 
Dakhil said:
Samsung has confirmed once again that high volume manufacturing (HVM) of Samsung's 3GAP process node is starting in 2024, presumably EoY (End-of-Year) 2024, not EoY 2023 as originally said.
Click to expand...
Well, wasn't it only a day or two ago when I said something about TSMC's N3 failure buying a year for Samsung and Intel? There goes Samsung's extra year.
Next up: will Intel 3 remain on track for manufacturing in 2H next year, or will it derail like everybody else?
Notsowise said:
New iphone is 4nm.

Was it expected?
Click to expand...
I'd say so. There was talk earlier in the year about TSMC's N3 running into delays, which would've knocked Apple off schedule already. And much more recently, the way TSMC talked about things, it apparently comes across as 'uhh, ignore N3; we'd very much prefer to talk about N3E'. And N3E is scheduled for volume production in 2H next year.
 
Look over there said:
Well, wasn't it only a day or two ago when I said something about TSMC's N3 failure buying a year for Samsung and Intel? There goes Samsung's extra year.
Next up: will Intel 3 remain on track for manufacturing in 2H next year, or will it derail like everybody else?
Click to expand...
There's Samsung's 3GAE process node, which currently started mass production, and could be used for fabricating the Tensor G2's successor.

Samsung's 3GAP process node is a different story, of course.
 
Dakhil said:
Not necessarily, since Apple's still using the Apple A15 Bionic, which is fabricated using TSMC's N5P process node, for the iPhone 14 and iPhone 14 Plus.

Apple's only using the Apple A16 Bionic for the iPhone 14 Pro and the iPhone 14 Pro Max.
Click to expand...
Right, they’re still going to have the N5P A15 in a lot of products (and potentially some new straight N5 A14 products, although I wouldn’t be surprised if the products currently using A12s and A13s skip straight to the A15). The base iPad (which is the most popular) is still on a 7nm A13; that’s probably going to get bumped up to a 5nm process this year.
 
Anyway, although I don't expect Nintendo's new hardware equipped with Drake to use LPDDR5X, Micron's the first company to ship LPDDR5X.
 
Personally I don’t consider these special edition releases to have make any meaningful significance to when the Drake gets released/revealed.

I could make the reverse case that since they know demand for their higher profit margin Switch will be stifled by the new one, they planned these to counteract that.

Not to mention that the target market for the early adopters of the Drake (a console that will cost considerably more) is not likely to overlap much with someone buying a switch this late in its life.
 
Simba1 said:
Point is that there is no need for 16GB of RAM for Drake Switch hardware, Switch isnt PC, dont even need same amount of RAM like PS5/XSX because not only is weaker hardware but also totally different type of configuration.
12GB of RAM for something like Drake hardware would be more than enough, even 8GB would be enough (around 7GB for games),
but I would said that something like 10GB would be sweet spot (8.5-9GB of RAM for games, that would make around 3x more RAM for games compared to current Switch).

Yes more RAM is always better, but more RAM raises costs and Nintendo doesnt love to raise costs if they dont need it,
especially now when costs of parts and manufacture costs are constantly raising, and when again they will try to have affordable price point and in same time selling it with profit.

Realistically everything from 8GB to 12GB could be expected.
Click to expand...
Took me a bit to reply to this one, but I just want to point out that the bolded isn't possible with LPDDR in a straightforward manner, as far as I'm aware. That is, with either LPDDR4X, 5, or 5X, you cannot hit 10 GB using multiples of the same module and land on 64-bit or 128-bit.

If 10 GB comes to mind because of the Xbox Series systems, the difference there lies in that manufacturers offer different options for GDDR. GDDR6 is made in chips of 1 GB 32-bit or 2 GB 32-bit. This is something more directly observable with graphics cards, but also still checks out with the PS5/Series consoles.
 
mjayer said:
Personally I don’t consider these special edition releases to have make any meaningful significance to when the Drake gets released/revealed.

I could make the reverse case that since they know demand for their higher profit margin Switch will be stifled by the new one, they planned these to counteract that.

Not to mention that the target market for the early adopters of the Drake (a console that will cost considerably more) is not likely to overlap much with someone buying a switch this late in its life.
Click to expand...

I don’t either. They’ll likely produce only enough Splatoon 3 and Scarlet / Violet Switches to satisfy a limited crowd, and they’ll probably sell out perfectly fine against the proposal of a non-‘game branded’ console launching at $100+ higher.

That said, it’s getting pretty late into the year. The only reason I could see an announcement this year is because I’ve heard people say Nintendo tends to announce when production starts. perhaps to control the messaging / avoid leaks? If they wanted a March launch with great supply, wouldn’t they be forced to announce something this year? When did 2017 Switch enter production?
 
I mean, a new Switch was announced in September, after all...
 
0
That patent diagram isn't even of an OLED Switch, the bezels are like the original.
 
0
karmitt said:
I don’t either. They’ll likely produce only enough Splatoon 3 and Scarlet / Violet Switches to satisfy a limited crowd, and they’ll probably sell out perfectly fine against the proposal of a non-‘game branded’ console launching at $100+ higher.

That said, it’s getting pretty late into the year. The only reason I could see an announcement this year is because I’ve heard people say Nintendo tends to announce when production starts. perhaps to control the messaging / avoid leaks? If they wanted a March launch with great supply, wouldn’t they be forced to announce something this year? When did 2017 Switch enter production?
Click to expand...
I imagine they would announce it by October at the latest if it was planned for March as that’s when the original Switch was announced as well.

5-6 months reveal(at least of console design/name) to release seem to be go to.
 
Shiba said:
I imagine they would announce it by October at the latest if it was planned for March as that’s when the original Switch was announced as well.
Click to expand...

I don't want to cling too much to the idea of mimicking the Switch launch because circumstances were different, the Wii U having already fallen off a cliff.

My angle is strictly around the assumption that they'll be announcing it when they start production, and if they want to produce enough units for a good March launch, when will they need to speak up about it?
 
Nintendojitsu said:
12GB is the floor. I honestly don't know how that 8GB nonsense managed to gain so much traction. As if the mobile space had any influence on the Switch other than the obvious.
Click to expand...
it has traction because it is a theoretically viable amount. Drake, at worse, will be in the ballpark of the last gen PS/Xbox duo, whom had 8GB. the allocation might even be better than those systems were. and filling out a 128-bit bus isn't impossible. no company has publicly launched chips, but they can do it if someone orders it
 
0
Awesomegames23 said:
Maybe, but what he's showing isn't evidence for it. Here is the same Switch console image shown for the New Pokemon Snap:


and for Skyward Sword HD:


lots of other examples out there, and obviously these didn't get their own models.
Click to expand...
Is their a comparison for either OLED special edition? Because you're comparing it to a Switch Lite (Snap) and a pair of joy-cons (SSHD), no?
 
0
karmitt said:
I don't want to cling too much to the idea of mimicking the Switch launch because circumstances were different, the Wii U having already fallen off a cliff.

My angle is strictly around the assumption that they'll be announcing it when they start production, and if they want to produce enough units for a good March launch, when will they need to speak up about it?
Click to expand...
There are only two places they could if they want to release it in March:
  1. Either this month or next
  2. Late Jan or Feb
 
NintenDuvo said:
so is the Pokemon Scar/Vio Switch the one the funcle was talking about going in production with the Splatoon 3 OLED
Click to expand...

kvetcha said:
seems like the most sensible assumption.
Click to expand...

NintenDuvo said:
Darn what will it take to make the Drake Switch physically manifest smh and this also explain why it just had the Nintendo Switch branding on the back
Click to expand...

Are we all talking about the same thing here? I thought we had the potential rumor around a backplate with a cutout / different dimensions? This doesn’t fit that description
 
karmitt said:
Are we all talking about the same thing here? I thought we had the potential rumor around a backplate with a cutout / different dimensions? This doesn’t fit that description
Click to expand...
dooooooom!

Honestly, I had forgotten that Factory Uncle mentioned it had a conspicuously different shape. Good call.
 
karmitt said:
I don't want to cling too much to the idea of mimicking the Switch launch because circumstances were different, the Wii U having already fallen off a cliff.
Click to expand...
Right. They’re not going to announce it before the busy holiday selling if it’s not going to be available this year. And it won’t be, so I wouldn’t expect an announcement this year.

I think it’ll be a 2H 2023 product, to be honest. Like the OLED and Switch Lite were, and like the majority of Nintendo’s hardware has been since time immemorial.
 
Gay Bowser said:
Right. They’re not going to announce it before the busy holiday selling if it’s not going to be available this year. And it won’t be, so I wouldn’t expect an announcement this year.

I think it’ll be a 2H 2023 product, to be honest. Like the OLED and Switch Lite were, and like the majority of Nintendo’s hardware has been since time immemorial.
Click to expand...

I’m going to blindly follow the reporting we’ve had about late 2022 to H1 2023 until it’s no longer viable. Literally any other speculation around the date currently has no footing.
 
I'm hearing a lot of "the holiday season is coming, they won't announce hardware just before then" and it's like... 3DS feels bad that you forgot about it so badly that you don't recall that exact thing was done to it when Switch's launch date was pegged for March of 2017 in April of the prior year.
Or the Game Boy/GBC, when GBA got announced in autumn of 1999, allegedly undercutting TWO holiday seasons.
Or the DS being allegedly undercut in March 2010 by the impending 3DS launched in February 2011.
Then there's also N64 getting announced... what, 2 years in advance, with a release date announced for next year right before the holidays in August 1995? Must have been a huge blow to SNES/SFC sales.

And yet, according to Nintendo's own data, here's how those years panned out for Game Boy/GBC, DS and DS (since Nintendo's sales data records only go back to 1998, couldn't get the stats for how the SNES/SFC faired in the years since the N64 announcement and release date details).

FY03/2000 and FY03/2001: Some of the best sales of the Game Boy's entire life cycle, 17.45M and 18.86M respectively for hardware, 67.71M and 76.19M SW units.

FY03/2011: While not quite the absolute height of sales compared to the prior 3 years by any means (because not even Switch could compete with those years, HOLY CRAP), the fiscal year of the 3DS launch saw 17.51M DS hardware sales, and SW sales at 120.98M units sold. Not exactly the cataclysmic collapse in sales people seem to think should have happened, especially when HW and SW sales began to see modest decline in the prior fiscal year.

FY03/2017: Despite the impending launch of the Switch that everyone knew was coming, 3DS hardware sales were the best they had been in 2 fiscal years, posting 7.27M units sold, while SW sales were also the best since 2014, selling 55.08M units. By all accounts, with impending new hardware, those sales had no business going up according to some of you when they were already in decline anyways.

So y'all will have to forgive me if I think that, with Nintendo knowing it won't be able to sate demand due to component shortages anyways, they aren't too worried about demand for Switch flatlining with an announcement of new hardware. It's like some of you are so preoccupied with Nintendo's current balance sheet that you neglect that they have a storied history of doing the thing you think they'd never dare to do to their most lucrative hardware.

EDIT: Minor correction... they have a storied history of doing the thing you think they'd never dare to do to their most lucrative hardware AND experiencing no averse sales trends for doing it, sometimes even seeing a surprise upswing in sales.
 
Last edited:
karmitt said:
Are we all talking about the same thing here? I thought we had the potential rumor around a backplate with a cutout / different dimensions? This doesn’t fit that description
Click to expand...
Funcle mentioned seeing two things, one was a backplate piece of a new color version which had an identical shape to the OLED model, one was a backplate piece that had different dimensions. He said the new color one appeared in higher volumes or farther along so he suspected that would launch before the other one.

When the Splatoon 3 model was announced most of us assumed that was the new color model he mentioned but he said explicitly that it wasn't that, so it's very likely it was the pokemon model.
 
Skittzo said:
Funcle mentioned seeing two things, one was a backplate piece of a new color version which had an identical shape to the OLED model, one was a backplate piece that had different dimensions. He said the new color one appeared in higher volumes or farther along so he suspected that would launch before the other one.

When the Splatoon 3 model was announced most of us assumed that was the new color model he mentioned but he said explicitly that it wasn't that, so it's very likely it was the pokemon model.
Click to expand...

Thanks heaps. This all sounds very familiar, just couldn’t remember the specifics
 
0
Terrell said:
I'm hearing a lot of "the holiday season is coming, they won't announce hardware just before then" and it's like... 3DS feels bad that you forgot about it so badly that you don't recall that exact thing was done to it when Switch's launch date was pegged for March of 2017 in April of the prior year.
Or the Game Boy/GBC, when GBA got announced in autumn of 1999, allegedly undercutting TWO holiday seasons.
Or the DS being allegedly undercut in March 2010 by the impending 3DS launched in February 2011.
Then there's also N64 getting announced... what, 2 years in advance, with a release date announced for next year right before the holidays in August 1995? Must have been a huge blow to SNES/SFC sales.

And yet, according to Nintendo's own data, here's how those years panned out for Game Boy/GBC and DS (since Nintendo's sales data records only go back to 1998, couldn't get the stats for how the SNES/SFC faired in the years since the N64 announcement and release date details).

FY03/2000 and FY03/2001: Some of the best sales of the Game Boy's entire life cycle, 17.45M and 18.86M respectively for hardware, 67.71M and 76.19M SW units.

FY03/2011: While not quite the absolute height of sales compared to the prior 3 years by any means (because not even Switch could compete with those years, HOLY CRAP), the fiscal year of the 3DS launch saw 17.51M DS hardware sales, and SW sales at 120.98M units sold. Not exactly the cataclysmic collapse in sales people seem to think should have happened, especially when HW and SW sales began to see modest decline in the prior fiscal year.

FY03/2017: Despite the impending launch of the Switch that everyone knew was coming, 3DS hardware sales were the best they had been in 2 fiscal years, posting 7.27M units sold, while SW sales were also the best since 2014, selling 55.08M units. By all accounts, with impending new hardware, those sales had no business going up according to some of you when they were already in decline anyways.

So y'all will have to forgive me if I think that, with Nintendo knowing it won't be able to sate demand due to component shortages anyways, they aren't too worried about demand for Switch flatlining with an announcement of new hardware. It's like some of you are so preoccupied with Nintendo's current balance sheet that you neglect that they have a storied history of doing the thing you think they'd never dare to do to their most lucrative hardware.
Click to expand...

Great Post and I agree 100% I made a post earlier in the thread stating something similar around announcement timing. In addition, Nintendo usually releases multiple special editions right before a hardware reveal so I can honestly see them doing a reveal of Drake two weeks after the pokemon switch launches to get ahead of leaks giving them a 5/6 month production window until release in April or May.

Nintendo does this often. Probably my favourite example is the Smash Limited edition 3ds, announced 13/08/2014 for an October 3rd release date, reggie denies any plans for new 3ds hardware shortly after and on August 29th Nintendo Announces the new 3ds for release in February 2015. As we know smash performed much better on the new 3ds which made the limited edition smash 3ds a complete kick in the balls. But Nintendo did it anyway and didn't care about fan sentiment, lost holiday sales, they did what made sense for their manufacturing timeline.

I suspect they will do the same again for whatever date they are targeting. As its still H1 2023 according to our sources that leaves a late 2022 announcement as a possibility given past behaviour.

Actually given what they did with the smash 3ds, a September or October Drake reveal isn't off the table before the pokemon OLED releases.
 
Terrell said:
I'm hearing a lot of "the holiday season is coming, they won't announce hardware just before then" and it's like... 3DS feels bad that you forgot about it so badly that you don't recall that exact thing was done to it when Switch's launch date was pegged for March of 2017 in April of the prior year.
Or the Game Boy/GBC, when GBA got announced in autumn of 1999, allegedly undercutting TWO holiday seasons.
Or the DS being allegedly undercut in March 2010 by the impending 3DS launched in February 2011.
Then there's also N64 getting announced... what, 2 years in advance, with a release date announced for next year right before the holidays in August 1995? Must have been a huge blow to SNES/SFC sales.

And yet, according to Nintendo's own data, here's how those years panned out for Game Boy/GBC, DS and DS (since Nintendo's sales data records only go back to 1998, couldn't get the stats for how the SNES/SFC faired in the years since the N64 announcement and release date details).

FY03/2000 and FY03/2001: Some of the best sales of the Game Boy's entire life cycle, 17.45M and 18.86M respectively for hardware, 67.71M and 76.19M SW units.

FY03/2011: While not quite the absolute height of sales compared to the prior 3 years by any means (because not even Switch could compete with those years, HOLY CRAP), the fiscal year of the 3DS launch saw 17.51M DS hardware sales, and SW sales at 120.98M units sold. Not exactly the cataclysmic collapse in sales people seem to think should have happened, especially when HW and SW sales began to see modest decline in the prior fiscal year.

FY03/2017: Despite the impending launch of the Switch that everyone knew was coming, 3DS hardware sales were the best they had been in 2 fiscal years, posting 7.27M units sold, while SW sales were also the best since 2014, selling 55.08M units. By all accounts, with impending new hardware, those sales had no business going up according to some of you when they were already in decline anyways.

So y'all will have to forgive me if I think that, with Nintendo knowing it won't be able to sate demand due to component shortages anyways, they aren't too worried about demand for Switch flatlining with an announcement of new hardware. It's like some of you are so preoccupied with Nintendo's current balance sheet that you neglect that they have a storied history of doing the thing you think they'd never dare to do to their most lucrative hardware.
Click to expand...
slow clap
 
0
Look over there said:
Took me a bit to reply to this one, but I just want to point out that the bolded isn't possible with LPDDR in a straightforward manner, as far as I'm aware. That is, with either LPDDR4X, 5, or 5X, you cannot hit 10 GB using multiples of the same module and land on 64-bit or 128-bit.

If 10 GB comes to mind because of the Xbox Series systems, the difference there lies in that manufacturers offer different options for GDDR. GDDR6 is made in chips of 1 GB 32-bit or 2 GB 32-bit. This is something more directly observable with graphics cards, but also still checks out with the PS5/Series consoles.
Click to expand...

I dont say they will use 10GB just that would be sweet spot regardless needs of Drake hardware, I also think its more possible 8GB or 12GB than 10GB,
talking about possible 10GB, maybe they could use separate RAM module of 2GB for OS for instance and other 8GB for games.
 
Angel Whispers said:
I don't get the claim that "it won't go for high end graphics" when the leaked GPU at its core is better than the XSS's, it will have DLSS on a neural unit to allow the GPU more room for manoeuvre. It will share many 3rdP titles with all those platforms, and when it will have the better ray tracing feature set. I suspect it WILL become the lead platform among some developers in their domestic markets, notably some of the lower-budget JRPG stables, and for many Indie developers, who have been banqueting on the Switch VS other platforms. Saying it's a portable hasn't stopped the existence of Steam Deck or Apple's M-Series SoCs, or phones adopting 16GB, or Nintendo apparently going harder than what "the consensus" told us to expect - Please, don't assume that I haven't considered a host of factors, too. If I hadn't, I wouldn't even post here.
Click to expand...
just because it has more shaders than the Xbox series S does not inherently mean it will be doing more than what the Xbox series S does. DLSS helps alleviate some of the issues of this portable system in having to display visual fidelity, however a gaming system is not simply its GPU.


This will still have lower memory bandwidth than the Xbox series S, who already struggles with Xbox series X and PS5 titles because it is displaying higher fidelity at lower resolutions and memory bandwidth is one of the issues. For this to work fine for a switch Drake with it’s very low memory bandwidth compared to the other systems, it would have to be very low to start with and this still has to be a portable gaming device that will downclock further. The thread focused on the maximum but forget that this device will have a very clear minimum.


Games will be downgraded to suit the needs of the system in a much organic fashion, and there’s nothing wrong with that. The only issue comes to play is if a developer is unable to mask the downgrades in a proper manner and make us so obvious that people choose other versions because the switch Drake version is so ugly. these are intelligent cuts, and for a device that still has to be clocked for a portable life, intelligent cuts are necessary especially to suit the 720P display


If the switch to has 8 physical CPU cores, then this makes the process much easier of bringing a game over and shooting for what the systems needs.

I’m going to have to question if you even consider what the fact is because clearly by this post it does not illustrate that you have, you are quite literally comparing a closed platform that developers come to and choose to develop games on two platforms that quite literally has no developer requirement whatsoever or isn’t meant for gaming at all. The steam deck for all intents and purposes is just a PC, the 16GB is for longevity reasons and is shooting for the same ideology as a laptop, are you going to really say that the switch Drake is comparable to a laptop that you can just buy and load a game on? There is no low level optimization there, it just runs. The user chooses to adjust the settings as they so please. Devs don’t have to worry about this at all.

The group of phones that have a ton of memory to them are very niche type of phone aiming to appeal to a very niche type of consumer, on top of that android is incredibly heavy as an operating system and going with low amounts of RAM makes absolutely no sense for a system like that.


Apple has a platform that barely gets any video games whatsoever, and the platform is not meant for gaming, it is meant for constant creation, so again please do take into mind what it is that you’re going to include as a point. It makes no sense for you to compare a closed platform that’s dedicated to gaming to an open platform that has no low level of optimization done to it by developers or a platform whose main focus is not video games for gamers. Apple literally has to fund these projects to come over, the Steam deck doesn’t need this as it is an extension of an existing platform and has to deal with several layers for compatibility and is hardly low level.

It uses Vulkan of all APIs which is more higher level than something like DX12U.



And finally, I don’t understand how we go from me mentioning high end games and then you focus on the low budget and the JRPGs as the ones targeting the switch Drake. These are not the games I’m referring to. I mentioned high end games for a reason. And my point still stands, high end games will not target in Nintendo Switch a Drake and I’m not sure why that is considered controversial. Low end Indie and Japanese games will target to switch because it will be the only platform that they can target that offers them a possibility of showing their games to the audience at large via media channels like Directs and such.





Angel Whispers said:
But as I wrote, ambitions don't stand still. There is a strong case for the 16, and if it's true that 16GB is in the devkits, I struggle to understand how, in a speculation thread, we can not begin to consider this possibility, and straight-up gloss over it. I don't apologise for being on the more optimistic side of this discussion, and I hold nothing against those who disagree. There's no hostility intended on my part. Perhaps a little frustration at the reverting to type with the disbelief in light of what is known, and at some of the persistent ignorance... but I'm not saying anything over the top here, only that better is possible, and the confidence is there, as the Switch has been a clear success.
Click to expand...
There’s nothing wrong with the optimism, but at times I feel like we have to come into terms of realism. Whenever I discuss the system I don’t look at it as the window or the lens of “oh it’s because Nintendo” what is likely to view them from, I look at it from the perspective of “oh this is a system with these capabilities what does it actually need in order to function properly in this environment?” Nintendo then becomes a secondary perspective that I take to look into as in “what would they actually do though in this context based on previous circumstances that have occurred? They are very efficient and can do a lot with a little so it isn’t as though they need a ton, and have been a cornerstone of ‘less is more’ approach that others need to adopt”


In essence well the system can have 16 GB of memory, I question if it has enough in every other department to actually facilitate the need for 16 GB of memory. On top of that I also start to look at it as, the other systems that games targets have at most 13.5 GB of available memory to developers, why or what does Nintendo need a whole extra gigabyte or two of memory for their games for a system that will target a lower profile Than those systems?

At that point if you have more memory that’s just having more memory to have it. And you have to balance this out, if it has a very fast drive such as ultra flash storage, they can get away with less memory but if it has a very slow storage then this is where more memory may be required. It’s always a balancing act.

More is preferred if the other circumstances are pushing you to go for more, however more is not necessary if the rest of the system is giving you enough to work with that it is perfectly acceptable to have say 12 GB over 16 or 24 GB of memory.


And finally, developer kits tend to have more memory than the system for debugging reasons, usually they have twice or more memory than the actual retail product. If this product has 12 GB of memory, then the developer tools/kits should have 24 GB of memory at minimum. But it can be done with 16GB, so long as it has more.

More is preferred there for those environments.


And this should be more apparent, but Nintendo does have foresight into seeing whether it is a good idea to have so much memory that they have to have another bigger increase with their following device, memory is not cheap at all. Price really matters here.

Sony is leaning towards PC like MS so this isn’t so much of a concern for them.

Angel Whispers said:
Furthermore, I don't think it's just a case of "same product, better internals" - That, too, would be complacent. PS5's OS is very different to PS4's. I'm not as well-versed on XBox's, but they have Quick Resume and playing multiple games at a time. XBox Game Pass is also available on Samsung's flagship phones.
Click to expand...
That is via a cloud service actually.

Angel Whispers said:
If we look at phones again, Android and iOS have new versions, with updates, as well as events to show people what they mean. Why, then, are we just assuming that the OS will be the same for Nintendo? Who's to say they won't try to reform Miiverse and bring it back, for example? Or other multimedia apps won't be possible this time? Expansion strategies exist, and I don't believe they're bound by the same conditions which existed in 2017. One recent move was Nintendo Pictures - It's possible that future Switch owners will be able to watch their output on their devices. We don't have Art Academy on Switch yet - It's possible that they could have art studio apps. There are so many reasons why more RAM might be needed, and all I've done here is present that case. That isn't the same thing as saying these things will happen, but we can, at least, consider it.
Click to expand...
I would agree, however, Nintendo does not seem to be the type to make very bloated operating systems that take up more than what I would say is “necessary“, they tend to be very small and very well-kept.

Unlike Sony and Microsoft who do not mind putting a ton of resources into their operating systems and taking a couple gigabytes of memory, Nintendo aims to keep it very light and very low profile and not to take up a ton of storage or a ton of system memory when in operation. Even with the Wii U, it was feature rich but only took 1GB unlike the other systems that took like 3GB and were also feature rich.

On top of that, one of Nintendo’s Goals was to make the system very snappy and quick as a direct response to the Nintendo Wii U who used up half of its total memory for the operating system.


I forgot where I read it but apparently they had people try out the switch and basically tell them how it was in snappiness and how their goal was basically to have a very snappy and fast operating system for the Nintendo switch.

it was something like this, but from a tweet I saw: https://nintendowire.com/news/2018/...t-the-design-of-the-switchs-os-at-cedec-2018/


And just like how the Nintendo switch OS is based off of the 3DS OS, a.k.a. it is a forked version of the original Horizon OS, it is safe to assume that Nintendo will fork it again and it’ll be a pretty low profile operating system.


Angel Whispers said:
It's my view that Nintendo already produces the best graphics, anyway, but I will say that on the graphics front, the perception that they don't go high-end exists for dishonest reasons. Screenshots and stills don't tell the whole story; Sony 1stP has long notoriously sacrificed 60FPS for perceived "high-end visual spectacle" - If they prioritised 60FPS, as Nintendo had in the Wii U era, I don't think anybody could say with a straight face that their graphical output was orders of magnitude more than anything Nintendo put out in the same time, and the receipts are out there.
Click to expand...
The reason that Sony 1st party sacrificed 60 frames per second was due to a hardware limitation of the previous generation and the one before that, namely the complex CPU or the terrible one. So far with the new system, a.k.a. the PlayStation 5, they have can do 60 framed per second and above.

Nintendo uses modern rendering techniques in their titles but they most certainly do not target a higher visual fidelity than or equal to Sony first party software, and I don’t need a still to see that.

Nintendo‘s first party has very visually appealing art direction though, but they are not at the same level of visual fidelity as Sony first party studios and I don’t think we need to have a more in-depth discussion as to why because this is pretty obvious to almost everybody else.


60 frames per second is a developer choice in the end, if they aim for 30 frames per second instead they will gain a lot of performance back which they can use for visuals and fidelity instead.


Nintendo did not aim to have such high visual fidelity, they aimed to have high performance. There is always a trade-off, if you have high frame rate you will have to sacrifice a level of visual fidelity for a closed platform, and vice versa. It’s hard to have both unless you’re on PC and have monstrous setup that can do both without breaking a sweat.




Angel Whispers said:
I will try my best to break my longer posts down into smaller paragraphs. I have a learning disability, which I have spoken more openly about in many places for almost 7 years, and understand how difficult it can be to process. This also means I can find it difficult to express my thoughts, and all the more so because I'll write on these topics in bursts, saying my bit and disappearing. It can mean that the content, although coherent, can be lengthy... But I hope I can say I bring some thoughtful and considered responses to the table.
Click to expand...
You do! I do like your posts I only get lost in reading them on my phone. Most of the text I do here is speech-to-text which greatly reduces any time I have to type personally. I just say and it types, and then quickly skim and fix any typos.


If you see any typos or words that don’t make sense in my post, it’s the AI that didn’t pick up what I actually said and inserted a word there.

Has happened numerous times unfortunately for me….
 
Last edited:
Simba1 said:
I dont say they will use 10GB just that would be sweet spot regardless needs of Drake hardware, I also think its more possible 8GB or 12GB than 10GB,
talking about possible 10GB, maybe they could use separate RAM module of 2GB for OS for instance and other 8GB for games.
Click to expand...
That would raise the price and I know you know they won’t do that :)
 
Nintendojitsu said:
12GB is the floor. I honestly don't know how that 8GB nonsense managed to gain so much traction. As if the mobile space had any influence on the Switch other than the obvious.
Click to expand...

Its not nonsense, its realistic possibility, Drake hardware could run with 8GB of RAM,
also don't forget current Switch was launched with 4GB of RAM in time when PS4/XB1 consoles with 8GB of RAM were already 3.5 years on market.
 
0
Simba1 said:
Offcourse, and thats why I think that option is less likely compared to 8GB or 12GB.
Click to expand...
If they have a 192-bit interface, they probably could have done 1 64-bit 2GB module and 2 4GB 64-bit modules.

And worked it out to 10GB.

(It would have also been higher memory bandwidth, but also higher power draw)
 
0
Let’s talk about something else that we will inevitably get tired of by page 499 of the same discussion

Should we do storage? Node? CPU Core count? Size of the device? Release date? Drive-by posters getting run out of the thread? Pro vs succ? Whether the leaks are real? Chinese forum posters?


These are the most common topics we burn to the ground after all and retouch on again and again 🤣


What did I miss?


im kidding, I don’t want another +30 pages of these topics that we ran drier than the Wii U gaming scene
 
Eclissi said:
We are in Groundhog Day
Click to expand...
Groundhog Drake

giphy.gif
 
Maybe we you guys can talk about earlier patents that were filled but never implemented yet and whether they could turn up for Drake? I love to hear some educated opinions on those but I'm just a bing bing wahoo fan without any noteworthy knowledge about the inner workings of Nintendo.
 
0
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