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

[JoshuaJSlone]

Pretty sure it won’t be a successor. It’s a revision that’s slowly gonna replace the OG Switch.

And a synonym for replace is succeed.

I feel like Nintendo has different standards

they just launched a flagship long-term live game on their flagship (currently only) platform, I don't think they'll deprecate that platform so soon

Just because Nintendo has often ended up with hardware platforms having shitty, dry last years before launching something new doesn't mean it's intentional, a good plan, worked well, and something they desire to repeat.

PS4 is still getting games but its sales and public perception are completely gone

Hardware sales, yes, because Sony stopped shipping them in any real number. Software sales, no. It's hard to say what is PS4 and what is PS5 since Sony is weaselly and combines them, but it's sure not the 0-20m PS5 users alone keeping software sales as high as they used to be.

 

[Hermii]

I dunno about first and foremost, but of the top of my head?

Nintendo Switch. It was designed in a LOT of ways to facilitate 3rd-party development, learning from past failures in this regard. And it's impossible to look at the system and not say, in some pretty significant ways, that it was successful at doing just that.

Wii U was allegedly designed with 3rd-parties in mind, even though it was a super-bad attempt at it that sold poorly to consumers, but that was one of Nintendo's stated design principles for it and the first year of software wasn't terrible for games released on it, all things considered; still has more Call of Duty games on it than Switch does. They went as far as to include a free copy of Unity Pro middleware with every dev kit. A obviously bad attempt is still an attempt, though.

The Wii U was heavily constrained by the decision to have it BC. With that constrain in mind, I don’t know if they could have done much better.

With BC absent, the logical decision would have been to go with an off the shelf/ semi customized apu from AMD, either x86 or arm.

 

[Hajeman]

Does Nintendo need a showpiece title to launch new Nintendo hardware? No, but rising inflation is putting pressure on consumer disposable income. So, launching expensive hardware with a system-selling title is a very good idea.

3DS XL was launched with New Super Mario Bros 2.
Nintendo Switch Lite was launched with Legend of Zelda: Link's Awakening.
Nintendo Switch OLED was launched with Metroid Dread.

The truth is, there isn't a more highly anticipated Nintendo game in 2023 than "Legend of Zelda: Tears of the Kingdom". Not Fire Emblem, not Donkey Kong. Even if they released Metroid Prime 4 in 2023, TorK is still way more anticipated than that game. If you're launching new hardware, you couldn't pick a better game to launch with than 3D Zelda.

Ok. I'm also agreed with you. Rising costs are everywhere. Drake + TOTK almost confirmed

 

[Deleted member 1896]

Im pretty sure the successor SoC beyond Drake will be launching around 2026 or so…so the idea of Drake having mostly games in 2026 that the OLED Switch can’t play seems kind of silly to me



Imo, it could be any type of game that shows off what the new hardware can do. Doesn’t have to be AAA.

Think of Links Awakening remake selling Lite models or Metroid Dread selling OLED models.

Honestly, announcing and showing off the Metroid Prime remake on Drake hardware would be plenty for this holiday.




Haha.

Just imagine, I responded to your post that stated “ they’re going to be making a big push for third party support with this system. Its almost purpose-built to break down the excuses for not supporting the Switch. Not powerful enough for your PS4 games? Well, here you go.”

With just…….. “citation needed” mic drop

Just imagine I did that.

Now, after you’ve done that, pull up your big boy pants and actually respond in a mature manner to what I said…

I have tons of quotes of Nintendo reflecting on the Wii years and saying they want to be proactive in new game development technology for their games…during current success rather than waiting too long.

I’d love to read all your quotes from Nintendo reflecting on how they need to fashion their hardware development to insure maximum multiplat port support. Let’s see it.



I’m basing my responses on what Nintendo execs have literally said in public in the last few years.

That, coupled with what historically Nintendo has done when it comes to hardware/software design decisions…how am I wrong on this? In your opinion.





Cause when have they ever done that?

Give me some examples of a brand new Nintendo console or Nintendo system revision model that was designed to make 3rd party porting easier first and foremost.

It’s always been about Nintendo software designs and goals.




For a speculation thread, you are getting awfully heated about my speculation…

The people I respond to in this thread are stating very matter of factly what they expect will or won’t happen. This is all speculation/opinion. Don’t kid yourself.

Just admit you don’t like my POV compared to them.

To suggest I’m the only one in this thread pretending like they know how this will go…is very silly. Lots of people have strong, differing opinions on this.

I think you make some good points but you also undermine them with overconfidence. I actually agree with most of your interpretation of Nintendo's intent, but the problem is you don't seem to treat it as just that, intent. Nintendo themselves know much better than to do this. Perhaps your analysis would benefit from incorporating into it external factors that are out of Nintendo's control: think about manufacturing bottlenecks the entire industry is experiencing, chances of a post-Covid recession affecting people's gaming budgets, exchange rate fluctuations, potential production and shipping challenges, nVidia fucking Nintendo over somehow, the loss of significant 3rd party support due to current acquisitions, etc. If you want others to take your speculation more seriously, you need to demonstrate that you've taken these possibilities into consideration.

 

[YolkFolk]

Why would they care about everyone needing to “upgrade to Drake” by 2025? They won’t care. Most of the games will play the same across all systems.

Nintendo will be perfectly happy if people are buying Switch OLED’s in 2026 and playing 2026 games on Switch OLED’s.

All they care about is what drives their software engagement.



If they want as many people to have Drake as possible to play ToTK on, they should release Drake next month, not wait till two months before lol

Said this before but Nintendo will want big sales from this hardware. ‘Pro’ level sales won’t be enough to justify what it’s offering, which is looking to be a bigger jump than PS3 to PS4.

You’ve had this idea that this new console is just another addition like the Lite and OLED in the line up and that sales don’t matter but that’s just a bizarre way of thinking. The cost of making and putting out this device will be huge. It’s the value of putting out a next generation console in a lot of ways. The contracts, design, manufacturing, development tools, messaging and launch are light years beyond ‘just a new model’.

For all your arrogance, you don’t quite know anywhere near as much as you think you do. For me this was confirmed when you stated to myself in this very thread that porting Witcher 3 to Switch was no different than porting RE5 to Switch. This when I tried to explain to you can this new device would likely get quite a few PS4 ports.

I’m not really sure what else there is to say. This thread nose dives when you get involved. You quote almost everyone, breaking down everything they say bit by bit and put your own backstage pass arrogance over everything as if everyone is wrong but you. It’s a shame as I really enjoy the community in this thread otherwise.

 

[Thraktor]

Thanks for posting this, it's good to see someone put this much work into both obtaining the data and presenting it well. One small caveat I'd add to the A78/A710 comparison is that they're using Geekbench for performance comparisons, and as far as I'm aware Geekbench doesn't support ARMv9 yet. I'd expect the A710 might close the gap a bit with A78 with native ARMv9 code.

It's a shame they don't seem to have shared the raw data, as it would be helpful to get estimates for Drake. However, although they put a lot of effort into isolating the mainboard power draw, it's still going to include the power draw of the rest of the SoC, RAM, flash memory, etc., so we couldn't directly take these power figures directly as CPU draw, particularly at the lower end of power consumption. Still very interesting data nonetheless.

 

[ShaunSwitch]

Im pretty sure the successor SoC beyond Drake will be launching around 2026 or so…so the idea of Drake having mostly games in 2026 that the OLED Switch can’t play seems kind of silly to me

Respectfully, strongly disagree with this point, it kind of invalidates the rest of your argument against Drake Being any form of successor hardware.

You are forgetting the amount of R and D that's gone into Drake, not just the design of the chip, but Nvidia building an entirely new API for the new chipset, we know its been worked on since 2019, all of that time has a cost associated to it.

The next chipset on the nvidia Roadmap is Atlan launching in cars in 2025, it uses a custom arm CPU built by nvidia and lovelace on the GPU side. Using a derivative of this chip would reset the R and D costs as they would have to design a new API again as well as the new chip.

If you are arguing that Nintendo will not target Drake being the primary platform they are not going to have spent all of the money they have getting a custom chip designed, and having a new API built only to do it all again three years later on a chip that's not that big of a leap compared to the jump from tx1 to Drake.

Nintendo didn't offer a switch based on Parker or Xavier so I'm not sure why you think they would jump right into Atlan in 2026.

To justify the cost of designing Drake I imagine Nintendo will be looking for a life cycle as long or even longer than the original switch, so no new chipset until 2029. For me Nintendo will stop manufacturing tx1 based models as soon as they have manufacturing capacity ramped up enough to push out tens of millions of Drake units to meet demand and that's when they will focus development on Drake. Switch will be an iterative platform following this same cycle until some new technology comes along that completely changes the platform.

 

[Nintendojitsu]

Nintendo's future is as solid as its ever been thanks to the Switch. If it takes the TotK and "Switch Pro/2" to reinforce that, I am all for it.

The future's shape is ever evolving.

 

[Serif]

I don't see new hardware after Drake until 2030+, even if they start development of post-Drake hardware in the late 2020s.

This hardware seems purpose built to last a while. Game Boy lasted almost 20 years, could Switch go past that? Honestly I think it has the potential to.

I want them to keep pursuing the concept. I want a Series S++ machine approaching PS5 level with even more fine-tuned DLSS, a 1080p-1440p screen, hall-effect joycons, and killer battery in 2031. Not sure how possible this is based on Nvidia's roadmap but I can see myself just buying Switch upgrades forever.

 

[Deleted member 1896]

Respectfully, strongly disagree with this point, it kind of invalidates the rest of your argument against Drake Being any form of successor hardware.

You are forgetting the amount of R and D that's gone into Drake, not just the design of the chip, but Nvidia building an entirely new API for the new chipset, we know its been worked on since 2019, all of that time has a cost associated to it.

The next chipset on the nvidia Roadmap is Atlan launching in cars in 2025, it uses a custom arm CPU built by nvidia and lovelace on the GPU side. Using a derivative of this chip would reset the R and D costs as they would have to design a new API again as well as the new chip.

If you are arguing that Nintendo will not target Drake being the primary platform they are not going to have spent all of the money they have getting a custom chip designed, and having a new API built only to do it all again three years later on a chip that's not that big of a leap compared to the jump from tx1 to Drake.

Nintendo didn't offer a switch based on Parker or Xavier so I'm not sure why you think they would jump right into Atlan in 2026.

To justify the cost of designing Drake I imagine Nintendo will be looking for a life cycle as long or even longer than the original switch, so no new chipset until 2029. For me Nintendo will stop manufacturing tx1 based models as soon as they have manufacturing capacity ramped up enough to push out tens of millions of Drake units to meet demand and that's when they will focus development on Drake. Switch will be an iterative platform following this same cycle until some new technology comes along that completely changes the platform.

You don't think Nintendo would ideally prefer to have the Drake and current Switch sell side by side for a couple years? With Switch possibly receiving a price cut but sustaining high volumes of software sales until Drake install base passes ~30 million?

Is this scenario unlikely because they wouldn't be able to secure manufacturing for old tegra x1 chips and other components?

 

[Mr.Gamerson]

If the rumored specs are true, I wouldn't expect another major upgrade until at least 2028. Nintendo can die shrink drake and add a 1080p screen as a pro style upgrade for Drake while also introducing a Drake lite in 2026 with Animal Crossing and next gen smash that year.

 

[Dakhil]

It's possible, but it would require Tegra not continuing to be best in class in its power envelope available for Nintendo to use or a competitor equaling this best-in-class SoC with the same level of support as Nvidia provides at a cheaper cost to Nintendo. And the way things are going, it'll be 10 more years minimum before that's the case.

Although I agree that competitors won't have Arm based SoC and graphics API support offerings that can match Nvidia's Tegra SoC and NVNx* support offerings for while, I can argue that competitors don't need a minimum of 10 years to have offerings that can match Nvidia's offerings.

Victor Peng from Xilinx mentioned that consumer Ryzen chips with the Xilinx AI Engine arrived in the labs from TSMC's fabs and are being tested.


AMD mentioned being ready to design and manufacture Arm based SoCs for customers who want Arm based SoCs. So if Nintendo were to work with AMD, Nintendo would probably ask AMD to design an Arm based SoC with the Xilinx AI Engine included since the Xilinx AI Engine seems like a hardware component Nintendo could have use for.

* = x = (1), 2, etc.

 

[ShaunSwitch]

You don't think Nintendo would ideally prefer to have the Drake and current Switch sell side by side for a couple years? With Switch possibly receiving a price cut but sustaining high volumes of software sales until Drake install base passes ~30 million?

Is this scenario unlikely because they wouldn't be able to secure manufacturing for old tegra x1 chips and other components?

Sorry if I was vague but this is exactly what I am suggesting. I think we will see 1-2 years of Mariko based models still being manufactured as Nintendo ramps up Drake volumes.

In this time period Nintendo will be focusing on Drake as their primary platform. This is not to say that Nintendo will stop making games for older models, but they will stop focusing on them and may release some games as Drake only that would not be possible on the older models.

 

[Mirev]

PS4 is still getting games but its sales and public perception are completely gone

it was similar for 3DS

It's not a problem, Splatoon 3 and MK will live on both platforms with the same contents.

the game already released, it's not gonna be relased alongside the new switch

 

[Hosermess]

PS4 is still getting games but its sales and public perception are completely gone

it was similar for 3DS

I don't know about public perception, but at some point I'll get to playing Elden Ring, Cyberpunk, Horizon Forbidden West and God of War Ragnarok on my PS4 Pro and be perfectly happy with it.

 

[ReddDreadtheLead]

Thanks for posting this, it's good to see someone put this much work into both obtaining the data and presenting it well. One small caveat I'd add to the A78/A710 comparison is that they're using Geekbench for performance comparisons, and as far as I'm aware Geekbench doesn't support ARMv9 yet. I'd expect the A710 might close the gap a bit with A78 with native ARMv9 code.

It's a shame they don't seem to have shared the raw data, as it would be helpful to get estimates for Drake. However, although they put a lot of effort into isolating the mainboard power draw, it's still going to include the power draw of the rest of the SoC, RAM, flash memory, etc., so we couldn't directly take these power figures directly as CPU draw, particularly at the lower end of power consumption. Still very interesting data nonetheless.

To add to this, Geekbench is very bandwidth dependent. The more bandwidth, the better the score.

 

[ILikeFeet]

DF covered the Aya Neo Air duo and found that the power limit really puts a cap on things. not something I really think will be comparable to Drake, but it shows that when you peak with the available hardware, more of that hardware isn't necessarily going to help you. architectural jumps matter a hell of a lot more.

 

[Simba1]

I don't see new hardware after Drake until 2030+, even if they start development of post-Drake hardware in the late 2020s.

This hardware seems purpose built to last a while. Game Boy lasted almost 20 years, could Switch go past that? Honestly I think it has the potential to.

I want them to keep pursuing the concept. I want a Series S++ machine approaching PS5 level with even more fine-tuned DLSS, a 1080p-1440p screen, hall-effect joycons, and killer battery in 2031. Not sure how possible this is based on Nvidia's roadmap but I can see myself just buying Switch upgrades forever.

Things are changing quite fast on hardware market, especially on mobile market hardware, we don't know how situation will be around 2025-2026. not alone in 2030+.

 

[ShadowFox08]

DF covered the Aya Neo Air duo and found that the power limit really puts a cap on things. not something I really think will be comparable to Drake, but it shows that when you peak with the available hardware, more of that hardware isn't necessarily going to help you. architectural jumps matter a hell of a lot more.

In some CPU dependant games, the AyaNea Air and Pro model manages to consistently out perform the SD..
Kinda interesting they went with a 1080p screen and LPDDR4x RAM.

AyaNeo Air/AyaNeo Air Pro Review: OLED PC gaming in the palm of your hand

Can the smaller form factor and stunning OLED screen on the AyaNeo Air deliver a knock-out punch to Steam Deck? Digital Foundry investigates.

www.eurogamer.net

 

[ReddDreadtheLead]

In some CPU dependant games, the AyaNea Air and Pro model manages to consistently out perform the SD..
Kinda interesting they went with a 1080p screen and LPDDR4x RAM.

AyaNeo Air/AyaNeo Air Pro Review: OLED PC gaming in the palm of your hand

Can the smaller form factor and stunning OLED screen on the AyaNeo Air deliver a knock-out punch to Steam Deck? Digital Foundry investigates.

www.eurogamer.net

The ram itself isn’t really weird, AMD lists that the APU Ryzen 7 5825U only supports DDR4 or LPDDR4X memory, and that’s the APU in the Aya Neo Air. And since it’s a portable it’s going to use the LP variant. LPDDR4 isn’t really made anymore or at all for quite a while now if I’m not mistaken.


That said, the choice of 1080p is probably because it’s cheaper to acquire than say, a 800p display like the one on the Steam Deck.

Which is a custom order by Valve.

 

[Marce-chan]

Seems like a pretty extreme reaction, man. Producing any games in 2023 that aren't possible on 2017 hardware is letting you down? The last time they went seven years without releasing a new level of software was because the Super Famicom wasn't available yet.
.

their most ambitious game ever is coming to current Switch in may 2023. I don´t see how any Nintendo developed game can be not possible on the 2017 tech in 2023 if TotK is. Also there´s Metroid Prime 4 announced in 2017 and rebooted in 2019 coming to current Switch whenever it comes.

there´s quite a difference between not being possible and not being the absolute best graphics and performance it can have. I wouldn´t not buy a new 3D Mario game because it´s 30FPS and 900p and not 4K60. Let alone Nintendo wouldn´t ditch a game for OG Switch because it won´t be as high resolution and framerate as Drake. Xenoblade Chronicles 3 looks absolutely amazing despite the sub native resolution that´s fixed by TAAU. God some super tech heavy next gen games like God of War Ragnarok are coming to past system(and GoW 2018 was 30fps on OG PS4).

 

[YolkFolk]

It's a Nintendo Switch: 4K Model revision, not a Switch 2.

My understanding from the leaks was that this is likely a bigger jump in tech than PS3 to PS4 even was. Then there’s the exclusive games in development as well.

I guess the reality is that it’s a next gen Switch in terms of hardware but the marketing might be different and we see it marketed as something in between.

Certainly interested to see how it plays out.

 

[Magic-Man]

for the love of god they will not call it that

Why not? It's simple, distinguishes itself from the other models, and it shows the main selling point. 4K. Nintendo already did the Nintendo Switch: OLED Model instead of something like Nintendo Switch Clear.

 

[lexony]

The current Switch will definitely stay relevant until at least 2024 for Nintendo IMO. Maybe the hardware will stop selling after drake release, but the Userbase is just to big to pass on these software sales. Series like Mario Party or Pokémon I see getting games for an even longer time. Just Dance and some less technically challenging games possibly forever lol.

Hardware sales for Drake Switch will be huge alone from the appeal to possibly play virtually any third party game released until now on the go and new (+ some old) Nintendo First Party games that will be better looking from first glance. While shitty from a consumer perspective maybe there will also be exclusive GCN and Wii games for NSO. The possibilities are endless to make Drake more appealing over time. After its install base has a certain size after 1 or 2 years or so, it will also get first party exclusives.

It isn‘t even that important that Drake sells as much as current Switch. They just need to remain a big enough active userbase and members in NSO.

If the rumored specs are true, I wouldn't expect another major upgrade until at least 2028. Nintendo can die shrink drake and add a 1080p screen as a pro style upgrade for Drake while also introducing a Drake lite in 2026 with Animal Crossing and next gen smash that year.

I fully agree. One thing we also know is that there will not be much of a hardware upgrade with the Sony and Microsoft consoles until that time, if their generation goes to 2027. If Drake Switch is strong enough to receive the better chunk of third party games (new set of miracle ports) from those consoles I see no problem to survive that long for Drake. And I think this is important, history showed Nintendo needs third parties (including indies).

My speculative prediction is that we‘ll see Mai 2023 Drake, some kind of VR system in 2024-2025 and the Switch Successor in 2028-2029.

edit: grammar

 

[Kingpin722]

Tbh me myself am going to freak out if they announced Drake exclusive first party titles in 2023 already. I bought the Switch in 2021 and they released OLED that year, they're also releasing special edition OLED's, releasing Splatoon 3 and open world Pokémon, Fire Emblem and Zelda early 2023, which are both system sellers and games that current Switch owners will buy, they definitely aren't going to just let us down like that.

Sony released Tushima, GoW, Spider Man, & Last of Us 2 from 18-20. They also released a special edition Spider Man PS4 Pro, and GoW PS4 Pro in that time. Then PS5 released in 2020. It’s possible but I don’t think it’s a let down.

 

[Raccoon]

Why not? It's simple, distinguishes itself from the other models, and it shows the main selling point. 4K. Nintendo already did the Nintendo Switch: OLED Model instead of something like Nintendo Switch Clear.

there are multiple reasons, but primary among them is precedent

Nintendo Switch OLED model has an OLED screen

Nintendo Switch 4K model has...

 

[ShadowFox08]

The ram itself isn’t really weird, AMD lists that the APU Ryzen 7 5825U only supports DDR4 or LPDDR4X memory, and that’s the APU in the Aya Neo Air. And since it’s a portable it’s going to use the LP variant. LPDDR4 isn’t really made anymore or at all for quite a while now if I’m not mistaken.


That said, the choice of 1080p is probably because it’s cheaper to acquire than say, a 800p display like the one on the Steam Deck.

Which is a custom order by Valve.

I do find it weird. It's 2022. LPDDR4x RAM for something that is steam deck level is underwhelming.

I guess I'm not too surprised with the screen since a lot of PC handhelds have been doing it these days. But less bandwidth isn't going to help as much with the 1080p resolution.

 

[lexony]

My guess for the name still is something in the vein of New Nintendo Switch OLED model.

 

[ShadowFox08]

Why not? It's simple, distinguishes itself from the other models, and it shows the main selling point. 4K. Nintendo already did the Nintendo Switch: OLED Model instead of something like Nintendo Switch Clear.

IMO, couple of things.

1.Its not "Wii U" bad, but it can cause some confusion on whether it's a revision or a successor to the mass audiences.

2. "Switch 4k" is pretty loaded. It implies it's backwards compatible with all Switch games and that they will be in 4k (which Nintendo may or may not fulfill for only the most popular older switch games). On the flip side, we know when it comes to 3rd party games that are PS4 level and above, it will absolutely not be native 4k, and certainly not 4k in DLSS. Will be 1080p to 2k at best. Though perhaps some xbone level games could reach 4k with DLSS if we get 3 TFLOPs Drake.

 

[Kingpin722]

I think the avg modern consumer is being underestimated a bit. Not saying Nintendo could be reckless with the marketing or timing but the avg consumer’s relationship with technology has evolved and matured a lot over the last half decade.

I also understand the trepidation from the Wii U debacle, but we live in an entire new world with technology where phones companies literally release 3 new models every year. As long as Drake clearly defines and executes its purpose and doesn’t break compatibility in any way, it’ll pick up right where Switch 1 leaves off imo.

Switch is in a unique position where consumers not only love playing the unique software it offers, but people just generally enjoy the way it allows them to experience those games due to its hybrid nature. I think we’re at a point where we’re so thirsty for concrete news we’re overthinking everything.

 

[JoshuaJSlone]

their most ambitious game ever is coming to current Switch in may 2023. I don´t see how any Nintendo developed game can be not possible on the 2017 tech in 2023 if TotK is.

Ambitious doesn't have to equate with most technically complex. And it's a pretty easy thing to imagine a game started after TOTK where they didn't go in with the mindset "and this must work on Tegra X1" producing different results. Just as it does for developers who have been working on the other stationary platforms in recent years. I don't think you think not a single Nintendo team is doing this, you just seem to think they all started doing it very late.

 

[Pokemaniac]

It makes less sense to pass Drake off as a gen breaking successor in the way Sony and Microsoft positioned ps5/Series SX

Why doesn’t it make sense to say “hey, here is a new Switch model that plays Switch games with better graphics/performance” in the same way OLED Switch was “hey, here is a new Switch model that plays Switch games portably better on a much better/bigger screen”

?

Why doesn’t this make sense.

Drake is a pretty radically different chip with a brand new iteration of their graphics API to go with it. It just doesn't make sense to put this level of R&D into it unless it's something they intend to become the new baseline, even if not right away. Their long term goal will most likely be to get Switch owners to upgrade, so I think sending an initial message of "Drake is our future, but Switch isn't done yet" will probably be most conducive to that.

 

[hologram]

Drake is a pretty radically different chip with a brand new iteration of their graphics API to go with it. It just doesn't make sense to put this level of R&D into it unless it's something they intend to become the new baseline, even if not right away. Their long term goal will most likely be to get Switch owners to upgrade, so I think sending an initial message of "Drake is our future, but Switch isn't done yet" will probably be most conducive to that.

The "even if not right away" was why I thought they'd market it initially as a revision. This whole revision vs successor discussion (which I feel I might have accidentally rekindled and I apologize for that) is kinda moot if we all agree that eventually it will replace Switch as the default, and possibly only, console they are making games for. The rest really is marketing. There are valid reasons to argue either path will be what they choose to begin with, but I definitely think that the plan is for this device to be their primary focus after a certain amount of time, and remain that way for several years at least

 

[Deleted member 2551]

there are multiple reasons, but primary among them is precedent

Nintendo Switch OLED model has an OLED screen

Nintendo Switch 4K model has...

4K output.

 

[Mr Swine]

I’m thinking that Nintendo releasing Drake as a revision instead of a successor could be seen as a way of just lengthening the old switch product line instead of a brand spanking new hybrid aka Switch 2.

Especially when it’s going to cost more than Oled does

 

[aus89]

I think the gaming marketplace is much more savvy and mainstream now and people are able to understand this stuff better than Wii U time.
As easy as announcing it with a tweet that says "The next generation of Nintendo Switch is coming" or "Nintendo Switch is evolving" etc... and making sure they focus on easy to understand upgrades - 4K, better graphics, new games, (haptics? 3d audio?) etc... and not got stuck in the Nintendo gimmick mud and have quirky presentations of Koizumi with ice cubes in his controller - it'll be fine regardless if its called Pro/2/2022/Super OLED 4K

 

[Raccoon]

4K output.

bzzrt wrong it has a 4K screen

 

[Deleted member 887]

Respectfully, strongly disagree with this point, it kind of invalidates the rest of your argument against Drake Being any form of successor hardware.

You are forgetting the amount of R and D that's gone into Drake, not just the design of the chip, but Nvidia building an entirely new API for the new chipset, we know its been worked on since 2019, all of that time has a cost associated to it.

The next chipset on the nvidia Roadmap is Atlan launching in cars in 2025, it uses a custom arm CPU built by nvidia and lovelace on the GPU side. Using a derivative of this chip would reset the R and D costs as they would have to design a new API again as well as the new chip.

This is an inaccurate description of how the dev process works.

Nvidia has not designed a new API for Drake. It’s an identical API to the Switches + the existing DLSS API.

Nvidia has to reimplement the API but this is identical to developing a graphics card driver. Drake’s GPU is Ampere. Nvidia had to build a Switch driver for Ampere, the same way they made a Vulcan driver and a DX driver and a Metal driver.

The R&D process for Drake is not different from the one for the APU in the last few PlayStation consoles, or Xboxen, or even the Wii U. Nintendo’s decision to use a off the shelf chip for Switch is unusual.

I think your base point that Nintendo will want to use Drake for an extended period going forward to recoup those costs is likely true, but it also doesn’t preclude a die shrink with much faster clocks and/or cortex upgrade in 2026

 

[Deleted member 2551]

bzzrt wrong it has a 4K screen

This makes less sense than my life.

The Switch is both a handheld and console. 4K is a well known video standard in the TV space. If anything "Switch 4K" makes MORE sense than the existing "Switch Lite" that doesn't actually switch.

 

[Kenka]

One possible upgrade path or segmentation for Drake would be a to go from a 720p screen to a 1080p one with VRR and HDR.

 

[Serif]

Switch 4k doesn't work for me, personally. It undersells this device. Drake isn't just about enabling 4K for base Switch games, it will improve IQ and performance for all game modes and will benefit those without 4k screens or play handheld only. It will bring more PS4 / XBO ports. 4K won't even be output for every game. They could give it this name and be very clear in the marketing, but the name is part of the marketing, they shouldn't have to put in more work to communicate "yes this is more powerful, it isn't just 2160p enabled".

I'm also thinking about devices that make a distinction between 4k output enabled models, and more powerful models. There's the Fire TV 4k, then theres the Fire TV 4k Max and Roku Ultra which are explicitly more powerful and faster models and not just 4k enabled. Then there's the mobile devices that also use Max and Ultra to indicate an upgrade, whether power or functionality.

I'm in the boat of thinking Drake will be marketed as a power upgrade. The last times Nintendo were explicitly marketing more powerful next gen devices sharing branding with their predecessors, were the Super NES and Game Boy Advance. In these instances "more powerful" was a main selling point made clear by the name, which is why I'm excluding 3DS. Super and Advance are similar monikers to Max, Ultra, and Plus. I think any of these have a fair shot of being the name if they're not using 2.

 

[Marce-chan]

Sony released Tushima, GoW, Spider Man, & Last of Us 2 from 18-20. They also released a special edition Spider Man PS4 Pro, and GoW PS4 Pro in that time. Then PS5 released in 2020. It’s possible but I don’t think it’s a let down.

well, yes. Then they released/are releasing all of their first party games on both machines with the exception of two remakes. Horizon Forbidden West, God of War Ragnarok were/will be PS4/PS5, a lot of japanese developers are still PS4 only. RE4 is gon be cross gen, a 2024 Yakuza game too. The point isn`t they are going to release hardware, is that they won´t be doing next gen only for a while.

 

[ReddDreadtheLead]

I do find it weird. It's 2022. LPDDR4x RAM for something that is steam deck level is underwhelming.

I guess I'm not too surprised with the screen since a lot of PC handhelds have been doing it these days. But less bandwidth isn't going to help as much with the 1080p resolution.

It’s more that AMD hasn’t had all APUs with LPDDR5 and RDNA2 iGPU imo.

 

[brebre73]

This is definitely looking too far into the future, but I feel like the name Switch 4K would put whatever system that comes after it in a weird position. The most obvious name to me would be Switch 8K, but it most likely won't be running any game close to that resolution. They would have to come up with a different naming scheme, which can lead to confusion like the Xbox Series X did when it was announced

 

[kvetcha]

Switch 4k doesn't work for me, personally. It undersells this device. Drake isn't just about enabling 4K for base Switch games, it will improve IQ and performance for all game modes and will benefit those without 4k screens or play handheld only. It will bring more PS4 / XBO ports. 4K won't even be output for every game. They could give it this name and be very clear in the marketing, but the name is part of the marketing, they shouldn't have to put in more work to communicate "yes this is more powerful, it isn't just 2160p enabled".

I'm also thinking about devices that make a distinction between 4k output enabled models, and more powerful models. There's the Fire TV 4k, then theres the Fire TV 4k Max and Roku Ultra which are explicitly more powerful and faster models and not just 4k enabled. Then there's the mobile devices that also use Max and Ultra to indicate an upgrade, whether power or functionality.

I'm in the boat of thinking Drake will be marketed as a power upgrade. The last times Nintendo were explicitly marketing more powerful next gen devices sharing branding with their predecessors, were the Super NES and Game Boy Advance. In these instances "more powerful" was a main selling point made clear by the name, which is why I'm excluding 3DS. Super and Advance are similar monikers to Max, Ultra, and Plus. I think any of these have a fair shot of being the name if they're not using 2.

Switch Fancy.

 

[taptaps]

my useless drive-by take is that i'm not buying it unless it's called the Super Nintendo Switch

 

[Hermii]

Switch Fancy.

Switch Deluxe. Not my idea, but I like it.

 

[Raccoon]

Switch 4k doesn't work for me, personally. It undersells this device. Drake isn't just about enabling 4K for base Switch games, it will improve IQ and performance for all game modes and will benefit those without 4k screens or play handheld only. It will bring more PS4 / XBO ports. 4K won't even be output for every game. They could give it this name and be very clear in the marketing, but the name is part of the marketing, they shouldn't have to put in more work to communicate "yes this is more powerful, it isn't just 2160p enabled".

exactly, it both undersells it and oversells it. it implies it's a switch in 4K, which it is more than and less than.

 

[Coco98bisFR]

I'm always surprised how active this topic is despite having any news about the Switch successor, can someone give me the last news or rumors (with a simple vocabulary please because I'm really not into all of the technical things, lmao). Guess we're having the Switch 2/Pro the same day as ToTK.

 

[Look over there]

Things are changing quite fast on hardware market, especially on mobile market hardware, we don't know how situation will be around 2025-2026. not alone in 2030+.

Fair point, though I'm leaning towards:
Mid-late 2020's would likely only offer an opportunity for a relatively incremental upgrade. For example, let's say you can go from Drake theoretically being at the midpoint between the PS4 and PS5 generations to revised-Drake-plus-ultra/Drake-next potentially landing in the ballpark of being a peer of the PS5 generation. A half gen bump or so. Now, I'm not saying that would be a bad device. It'd still be impressive! But at the same time, it's still within the neighborhood of 'eh, we can still live off of Drake/revised-Drake-for-battery-life for now'.
2030+ is probably the earliest for the next BIG leap, like OG to Drake.

A lot of my thinking goes back to the physical semiconductor fabrication side. We're hitting the limits of the current transistor type (FinFET) and now we're waiting to see the fabs try to execute the transition to the next type (GAAFET/RibbonFET). How much of an increase we get in theoretical transistor density and perf/watt in the near future is murky. The way $$$/transistor ratio has been trending recently is also very not so fun to work with. Increasing the GPU size again by multiple times while keeping costs within feasible range is gonna take a while.
It'll also take some time for architectural gains to accumulate to gigantic levels again. CPU-side at least, ARM has been slowing down recently with the transition to ARMv9.