Look over there
Bob-omb
Huh, didn't know that the UFS 3.x spec went that high. I pulled the 2,100 from this Samsung news post.
-
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)
- Thread starter Dakhil
- Start date
Dude_lookinatleak
Rattata
- Pronouns
- He/Him
I love when Bowser said "It's Bowsin time" and Bowsed over the Mushroom Kingdom
Look over there
Bob-omb
And clearly, when it's time to Bowse, one requires the power of Drake.
Cuzizkool
Shriekbat
- Pronouns
- He/Him
I wondered this myself when I saw how the new Ratchet and Clank can “only run on PS5” with its superior loading speeds. What system would Nintendo have to use to get close to that kind of performance? Can it be done on a hybrid?
Look over there
Bob-omb
There's some variance in there because it depends on how much is sequential vs how much is random.
Pure sequential? PS5 looks for sequential read of 5,500 MB/s. A mobile/hybrid device in the near future would peak at 4,200 MB/s with eUFS 4.0, but the more attainable best case would presumably be eUFS 3.x and its 2,100 or 2,900 MB/s peak.
I do have to point out though, that for multi-plats with a PC version, you should remember what parts of the market get cut out with certain hard speed requirements. You break into high 3 digit MB/s or above, you cut out SATA SSD. You go past 3,500 MB/s, you cut out PCIe gen 3. Reminder: consumer PCs didn't start officially supporting PCIe gen 4 until 2019 for AMD (X570 chipset specifically) (B550 in 2020) and in 2021 for Intel (with the 500-series chipsets). (technically late 2020 with Tigerlake laptops, but come on, I think that most Tigerlake laptops arrived in 2021)
As for the other end of the spectrum, pure random? eUFS can hit high 5 digits IOPs, so it's comparable to high end SATA SSD. PCIe gen 4 can hit 1 order of magnitude higher than that. That might sound like a lot. But real talk: in mainstream consumer PC usage, as a daily driver and when NOT working with giant individual files, there isn't significant difference in feel between SATA and the NVMe drives.
Pure sequential? PS5 looks for sequential read of 5,500 MB/s. A mobile/hybrid device in the near future would peak at 4,200 MB/s with eUFS 4.0, but the more attainable best case would presumably be eUFS 3.x and its 2,100 or 2,900 MB/s peak.
I do have to point out though, that for multi-plats with a PC version, you should remember what parts of the market get cut out with certain hard speed requirements. You break into high 3 digit MB/s or above, you cut out SATA SSD. You go past 3,500 MB/s, you cut out PCIe gen 3. Reminder: consumer PCs didn't start officially supporting PCIe gen 4 until 2019 for AMD (X570 chipset specifically) (B550 in 2020) and in 2021 for Intel (with the 500-series chipsets). (technically late 2020 with Tigerlake laptops, but come on, I think that most Tigerlake laptops arrived in 2021)
As for the other end of the spectrum, pure random? eUFS can hit high 5 digits IOPs, so it's comparable to high end SATA SSD. PCIe gen 4 can hit 1 order of magnitude higher than that. That might sound like a lot. But real talk: in mainstream consumer PC usage, as a daily driver and when NOT working with giant individual files, there isn't significant difference in feel between SATA and the NVMe drives.
Last edited:
- Pronouns
- He/Him
64GB Switch carts won't use 3D NAND, Game Cards use Macronix's XtraROM
Macronix will ship new 3D NAND modules in 2020, but Nintendo won't use them for Switch game cartridges.
www.tweaktown.com
That puts NAND flash-based XtraROM off the table.
And SanDisk/WD would do it if there was a market for it, and they’ve made good money on official Nintendo microSD cards, so my thinking is there is a market for it.
Automotive industry is rolling with UFS Card 3 for its ability to function as bootable non-embedded storage. Budget phone makers are considering using small UFS Card 3.0 as the shipped storage in phones (because again, it’s bootable) rather than embedded sources to lower production costs and allow end-user storage expansion, which would bolster their presence in retail settings. Its value is established, even in the new form factor, it just hasn’t happened at retail yet. They are already or will shortly be in production in that form factor. Orin was capable of using them for I/O before any customization work by Nvidia for Nintendo’s use case.
They’ve never pushed a storage format, but they have pushed new tech before they became industry standards. Gyro/accelerometer were pushed by Wii (predating their bigger mainstream utilization in consumer tech with the iPhone). Miracast was first used in consumer tech in Wii U (in its pre-standardized beta form, no less). Wireless controllers with Wavebird before becoming industry standard (pre-Bluetooth). That this would be their first foray into pioneering the use of an external storage medium, but I think their history here means they’ve got the chops to make it happen, especially with SanDisk as their go-to retail partner.
You forgot royalty-free and already integrated into the I/O for the SoC they’re basing Drake on, too.
UFS isn't proprietary. that's the difference. that makes it cheaper
mariodk18
Install Base Forum Namer
I guess I meant “proprietary” in the sense that you could only use them for that console and nothing else. So UFS cards would be even better right?
MP!
Like Like
UFS cards would be like faster better SD cards
Except they wouldn’t be as widely available …(at first)
ReddDreadtheLead
#TeamLate2025WithAPotentialForEarly2026
- Pronouns
- He/Him
Cameras actually do need fast storage, especially high end cameras. There’s a whole storage medium that only cameras use (others can adopt). But they are expensive, mainly due to being the only niche that uses it.
UFS is used by some phones and cars though I believe. ORIN for instance has support for UFS. But for this, it needs to have it in the silicon. If that remained in Drake, then it means that Nintendo has plans to incorporate something like UFS card in their future.
Top right, under USB. UFS x2^1
Also, UFS cards only have a single lane.
That said, what I want to know is this: if they do adopt UFS, supporting faster UFS cards shouldn’t be an issue and should provide a boost right? Or would they cap it to meet parity?
It can save at the cost of efficiency, since you’d need to clock it higher to enable the faster speeds.
Unlike UFS which can do the same performance at a lower power draw, or significantly better performance at an equal power draw or slightly above it. Since it has to be used in phones after all. UFS is intended to succeed eMMC after all.
Currently the switch doesn’t seem to even use it at full capacity and it’s set to operate at slower speeds, not like the CPU can do it well enough anyway… but still.
Unless that’s outdated and old information that I got wrong….
MP!
Like Like
Older form of eeprom I think
But I was talking about how it’s used
- Pronouns
- He/Him
The external cards always operate slower than embedded, because they only ever operate on a single lane, so for near-exact or approximate parity, they could use one of the following combinations:
Best cost-benefit balance: UFS Card 3.0 and eUFS 2.x on two lanes (both operate at 1200MB/s max bandwidth)
Most advanced: UFS Card 3.0 and eUFS 3.x on one lane (Card operating at 1200MB/s, eUFS operating at 1450MB/s)
Cheapest: UFS Card 1.x and eUFS 1.x on one lane (both operate at 600MB/s max bandwidth)
EDIT: It's also important to note that even the cheapest UFS option is faster than both eMMC 5.1 and microSD UHS-I cards.
EDIT 2: In real-world performance, eUFS 2.1 outperforms eMMC 5.1 in read speed 3 times over (250MB/s for eMMC 5.1 to 850MB/s for eUFS 2.1), all while being FAR more power-efficient in every variation.
It's also important to keep in mind that MMC (embedded or otherwise) has mostly peaked in terms of its possible speeds and is being abandoned by any hardware maker aiming to reach higher read-write speeds than what eMMC 5.1 can achieve even theoretically. To put it more bluntly, eMMC is a dead end that is being abandoned, there's no more blood to squeeze from that stone. When paired with the fact that the SoC they're getting a custom derivative of already supports UFS, there's no "if" involved, eUFS will be used in Drake, it's merely a matter of what version and if it will be paired with UFS Cards or if they abandon reading games directly off of external storage to stick with microSD.
Last edited:
ReddDreadtheLead
#TeamLate2025WithAPotentialForEarly2026
- Pronouns
- He/Him
Yes I know that, but it doesn’t exactly answer what I’m looking for. Let’s picture the scenario that they utilize eUFS and they get 1.2 GBps in speed, now UFS 3.0 cards has speeds that can reach 1.2 GBps at the moment. If in a chance that there is UFS 3.1 cards, and they offer say, 35% faster speeds (1.62GBps), will this device see any improvement of using that faster card or will things be limited to the 1.2 GBps speed rather than the above to keep parity? Is it advisable in a device like this to keep it as parity? Or if the storage is just faster, would it offer improvement in speeds whilst also not being an issue? Or even if Nintendo didn’t limit it for parity, would it offer any change at all? Would to see it the same in this case?
See this is why I was curious on if they implemented a faster media will there actually be any benefit, because there’s a possibility that even if they went with eUFS 2.x, they cannot use UFS 3.x cards or later, because they are not supported.
Edit: disregard the stricken through part.
Last edited:
ertaboy356b
Resident Troll
Worst case scenario with UFS is if they take the Current Gen route where you install the games on internal memory or buy physical (with comparable speed) for parity purposes. That means the next switch will only have a micro sd slot for backward compatibility purposes.
Edit: Does macronix offers similar speed as UFS?
OP
OP
UFS Card 3.0 is based on eUFS 3.0. And going by the features of MIPI's UFS 3.1 device controller IP and UFS 3.1 host controller IP, JEDEC designed UFS 3.x to be backwards compatible with UFS 2.1. So if Drake supports up to UFS 3.x, then theoretically speaking, Drake should be able to support UFS Card 1.0, UFS Card 1.1, and/or UFS Card 3.0. (UFS Card 2.x doesn't exist.)
Last edited:
ReddDreadtheLead
#TeamLate2025WithAPotentialForEarly2026
- Pronouns
- He/Him
I’m not sure I follow on the need of mSD cards for BC, UFS supports mSD cards anyway.
Unless you mean that because it has a UFS card slot, the mSD would only be for BC purposes, and not for actual games.
UFS offers standards that are followed by all that aim to make UFS cards.
So something like how Xbox Series handles games? Using an mSD would allow storing Switch and successor games, but successor games would require installation to internal before they could be played. Using a UFS would allow the same, but no internal copying of successor games required.
ertaboy356b
Resident Troll
Since the original switch uses Micro SD for storing and playing games, it makes sense that Switch 2 should include it. But Switch 2 games, if they want to follow the Sony/MS trend, won't be using this slot for exclusive games and instead games will be installed into the faster internal memory (or a comparably fast physical format).
ShaunSwitch
Moblin
Personally, from an ease of use perspective, if microsd isn't usable for some titles I don't see Nintendo using it at all. There is no way they risk confusing the user base with two slots on the console for microsd and a faster medium so if there are going to be instances where microsd isn't usable they will drop the format.
It would require far too much micromanagement of resource on the users part to provide a streamlined experience if this was the case. So if games requiring streamed assets will launch on drake, its getting faster external storage as its only option for external storage.
It would require far too much micromanagement of resource on the users part to provide a streamlined experience if this was the case. So if games requiring streamed assets will launch on drake, its getting faster external storage as its only option for external storage.
But the beauty of the UFS design is that there isn't a need for a separate mSD slot. The contact points on the cards are different, allowing a single reader to support both if the reader is made that way. Samsung did this back in 2016. They can then do what MS has done with Series games not supported on slower media and require copying to internal.
- Pronouns
- He/Him
OK, let's try and answer this, hope I'm understanding the questions right.
1200MB/s is max bandwidth, in most applications, it is limited by what CPU, GPU and RAM can process in a given second and what the I/O configuration allows. That means a practical read speed that can vary by device from ~500-850MB/s for eUFS 2.1 on average, which is why people tend to lean on the maximum figures. So if the I/O configuration has an upper limit, then any improvements will run up against it. If the speed offered by the eUFS chip does not exceed what the I/O config or the SoC/RAM allow, then yes, there would be a read speed boost.
More speed is always good and should not be an issue, because the hardware would only read data when it calls for it, it'd just maybe get that data faster, which is rarely a bad thing.
But Nintendo seemed to aim for near-parity in read speeds across all media inputs for Switch (microSD, eMMC 5.1 and Game Card, with Game Cards running a touch bit slower, because it's hard to hit pinpoint precise speed parity) and that's IMO likely to avoid accusations of "steering", or giving the appearance of guiding customers to a preferred way to buy and play games based on grossly unequal performance in loading. Whether that goal of near-parity continues is not assured, but it seems likely Nintendo will repeat that, the question is how.
In the x.1 or x.2 updates to UFS, they were mostly to improve write speeds (which were barely better than eMMC but have dramatically increased over time and constantly improving) and random read/write speeds (which have always been better than eMMC but can always improve), with sequential read speeds remaining largely consistent across big numbered updates more often than not.
If you're asking if Macronix chips for Game Cards can read at the same rate as UFS, the answer is yes in theory. The bottleneck with Game Cards is likely some facet of the I/O configuration, as I've discussed before here and here.
Otherwise, it may help to clarify your question.
Thraktor
"[✄]. [✄]. [✄]. [✄]." -Microsoft
- Pronouns
- He/Him
The only value to the customer is using them as memory cards for the Switch, regardless of whether a thousand other devices support the standard or zero do. Interoperability with other devices isn't relevant when the primary use is storing games which will only run on the Switch (and actually only run on that specific Switch unit, for that matter). As a Vita and a Switch owner, the difference between the Vita memory cards and microSD is that the latter is much cheaper and available in a wider range of capacities than the Vita memory cards ever were. Whether I could use a Vita memory card or a microSD on any other device doesn't factor into it when they're just going to be permanently plugged into their respective consoles.
The reason a faster alternative to SD hasn't become widespread is because basic UHS-I speed is sufficient for most use-cases, but Nintendo is in a very different position to the rest of the market when it comes to removable storage. On the microSD side, phones would have been the major driver (and I'm sure still account for the considerable majority of the market), but support for expandable storage of any variety has dropped significantly, particularly in the higher end of the market that may have driven performance increases. Meanwhile the (now quite small) dedicated camera market has split into the low to mid-range being fine with standard SD cards, and the high end moving to CFexpress. CFepxress has a similar benefit to UFS in that it's based on existing NVMe technology, reducing cost to market, but the higher power consumption probably rules it out for a device like the Switch. It's also currently quite expensive, although I'd put that down to the very small size of the high-end camera market and the fact that professional photographers are going to be much less sensitive to price than someone buying a card for an entry-level camera or a Switch.
There aren't really many other devices in Switch's position of needing removable storage that balances speed, power consumption and cost. The market around them has shrunk significantly, and other products either need cheap storage and to hell with performance (UHS-I SD cards) or maximum speed and to hell with cost and power consumption (CFexpress). The next Switch model isn't going to be in either camp, and if they want a baseline performance level above the 100MB/s that microSD provides, then the only option is to adopt a format which isn't already widely used. Whether other devices use the standard doesn't really matter that much so long as Nintendo themselves can create a big enough market, and they're in as good a place as anyone to do so.
I also wouldn't say Nintendo would need to "bankroll" the rollout of cards. They presumably charge a licensing fee to SanDisk for branded microSD cards, and I assume the same would be true with Switch branded UFS cards, or CFexpress or SD Express or whatever. The difference being they'd have to work with SanDisk (or another manufacturer) further in advance to make sure the cards are actually in production, rather than just slapping a Switch label on existing cards. The reason I'm not 100% sure that Nintendo would go this route is just that they've never done it before. In the past 20 years, every device they've released has used removable storage that's already widely available (SD cards or USB hard drives), so trying to push a new storage medium would be a change in course for them.
Do you have a reference for the bolded? Not that I don't believe you, I'm just curious about the practicalities of it. Namely how users would go about installing the OS on a UFS card if they wanted to upgrade the storage. I suppose they could have a small amount of internal storage for use as a recovery partition, just enough to connect to the internet and download and install the latest OS.
- Pronouns
- He/Him
I'll have to wade through the links I read on this topic to find which company/companies I heard considering the idea (I think it was Xiaomi, but definitely one or more of the Chinese phone makers). Hopefully still in one of my search histories.
While I do my digging, I think those practicalities you mentioned are why it's not happened already, cuz you either need 2 card slots or, as you mentioned, an embedded chip just big enough to function for recovery booting and you want to pick the economical choice. The standard for UFS Card 3.0 also didn't get published until December 2020 and there is a delay between publication of JEDEC standards and when production typically begins (1-1.5 years, based on the rollout of eUFS 3.0), so any movement on this front has likely only just started this past spring or summer.
- Pronouns
- She/Her
Wait, are people taking the UFS card idea seriously?
Nintendo makes some funky moves, but a dead (well, never alive really; failed) format being required for the next system, a system which at launch will primarily just play existing games better?
If they adopt UFS card I will eat a shoe.
I fully expect them to stick with SD... Not least because they're part of the SD consortium, but also because of backwards and forwards compatibility. I don't think the Drake Switch could really insist on a new format, but maybe the one after it. If and when they move to a new storage expansion format, there's little to no reason for them not to go with SDExpress. The power consumption is higher than SD, but it fits within Switch's power constraints with an absolute max of 1.2W, but which can be driven far, far below that. The price consideration isn't a considerable issue, the price will come down with enough time, just like 256GB and 512GB Micro SDXC before it. There simply isn't a reason for them not to go straight down the line of "whatever minimum SD card speed works".
Nintendo makes some funky moves, but a dead (well, never alive really; failed) format being required for the next system, a system which at launch will primarily just play existing games better?
If they adopt UFS card I will eat a shoe.
I fully expect them to stick with SD... Not least because they're part of the SD consortium, but also because of backwards and forwards compatibility. I don't think the Drake Switch could really insist on a new format, but maybe the one after it. If and when they move to a new storage expansion format, there's little to no reason for them not to go with SDExpress. The power consumption is higher than SD, but it fits within Switch's power constraints with an absolute max of 1.2W, but which can be driven far, far below that. The price consideration isn't a considerable issue, the price will come down with enough time, just like 256GB and 512GB Micro SDXC before it. There simply isn't a reason for them not to go straight down the line of "whatever minimum SD card speed works".
UFS is a very alive format, just in a different packaging
it fits within the system power constrants
readers can be made to support both SD cards and UFS cards
much lower power than SDexpress
Sata SSD-like speeds
all benefit, no drawbacks (or very few). it's not as crazy as you think it is
D
Deleted member 887
Guest
Yeah, I think they're going to stick with SD...
...but I don't see how that is relevant. Combined UFS/SD card slots exist. We're talking about the expansion slot, after all
Well, yes, there is a reason, which is that SSDs are pretty much standards in PCs, and in other consoles. Going cartridge over spinning media gave Nintendo the clear performance advantage, but now that games effectively require installs to the SSDs, random read clearly favors the rest of the industry.
UFS gets brought up in the context of "how does Nintendo get read speeds within the same distance of SSD that Drake gets GPU performance to current consoles." I think here, in the twilight of spinning rust hard drives and cross-gen, Nintendo doesn't need to get past their current cartridge/expansion speeds, but in the Drake followup, something will have to give.
- Pronouns
- She/Her
UFS? Sure. UFS Card? Absolutely not.
The drawbacks are pretty severe; lack of existing production capacity.
Lack of software, hardware, and vendor support.
Lack of economies of scale (comparatively).
Lack of input from Nintendo.
Nintendo quite literally sits on the board of SD. Why would they abandon their own product in favour of a competing, dead format?
While SDExpress might have its disadvantages, they don't outweigh the advantages. Nintendo had a say in developing the spec to begin with. It can use lower power consumption if it sacrifices speed, something Nintendo is familiar with, and even if they don't it can, technically, fit within the power envelope of even the existing Switch.
Also saying readers CAN support both. But have any been made? Will any ever be? Given how hard it flopped, I'm doubtful.
Onizuka
Great Player Onizuka
I just came across this, is it related to Drake or does it give us new clues?
wccftech.com
NVIDIA Jetson Orin Nano Creates New Standard For Entry-Level Edge AI & Robotics
NVIDIA Jetson Orin Nano and NVIDIA Jetson AGX Orin will push developers with easy access and emulation of entry-level AI computing.
wccftech.com
I heard the steam deck's sd card reader is limited to UHS-I speeds. This leads me to believe the same will apply to drake.
But here's hope they'll adopt UHS-II support.
But here's hope they'll adopt UHS-II support.
D
Deleted member 887
Guest
They do not. They're just general members of the SDA, not board members.
SD isn't "their" product.
This isn't uncommon at all. You sit on a standards org in order to steer the direction of the industry. The industry doesn't produce a product that works for you, you go with something else. Sometimes that independent development gets licensed back into the standards body/3rd party org and becomes the basis of the next iteration of the standard.
Not to mention that membership usually involves some patent sharing and IP cross licensing, which can remain useful to be a member of even if you have no products that use the standard - but Nintendo does have such a product, for as long as they manufacture Classic/Lite/OLED models.
And, finally, engineers like to be members of standards orgs because that's where their peers are. It's not uncommon in standards working groups to see the same person change emails as they swap from company to company, while maintaining their exact role inside the standards group. This isn't their parent company supporting the standards development, it is the parent company paying for membership as overhead to get access to a first class engineer in that particular field, and to pay for them to have constant access to their peers working on the state of the art. Since Nintendo develops their own proprietary flash storage format, that likely matters to them.
Samsung manufactures them, I believe. Samsung, who does sit on the SDA board has been attempting to move entirely to UFS away from SD. I believe that transition has been mostly unsuccessful, and I would not be surprised to hear that they've decided to retrench.
Again, I agree with you that Nintendo likely won't go UFS. But this is the speculation thread, let's go wild for a second.
Nintendo launches the Switch Ultra. Supports your old SD cards for storage, backwards compatible with old games. But then Nintendo reveals a suite of accessories that aren't backwards compatible, just for Ultra players - a pro controller with a headphone jack (that takes advantage of the improved BT hardware), a dock that lets you stream to the TV, and an "Ultra Expansion Card" - an expensive, Nintendo branded UFS card that goes into the same slot, but offers "near instant loading times."
Is this so insane? Nintendo using non-standard tech is the norm, with the Switch's aggressively off the shelf strategy (except for the game cards) more an exception than the norm.
OP
OP
An Anandtech review mentioned that a SD Express 7.0 card can reach temperatures as high as 96°C. So I don't know if microSD Express 7.0 cards are mature enough to be used for Nintendo's new hardware. And I haven't seen any recent SD Express 7.0 card reviews that mention the temperature when running synthetic tests and/or running in real world applications.
Yes. The 15" LG Gram (2020) and the Samsung Notebook Flash do come included with a UFS Card slot.
ShadowFox08
Paratroopa
Not much if anything. It's not that different from a Tegra x1 nano, conceptually at least.I just came across this, is it related to Drake or does it give us new clues?
NVIDIA Jetson Orin Nano Creates New Standard For Entry-Level Edge AI & Robotics
NVIDIA Jetson Orin Nano and NVIDIA Jetson AGX Orin will push developers with easy access and emulation of entry-level AI computing.
Likely salvaged/binned parts from the 8GB Orion NX module with those specs (with has 6 A78 cpus)
Drake is supposed to have much higher clocks, more bandwidth, +1500 cuda cores, 8 A78 CPU cores.
It does look like it's more stripped of it's auto parts from the original AGX and NX models. The 8GB nano variant happens to fit switch's 15 watt max profile, but has 6 CPU cores at 1.5Ghz max, 68 GB/s bandwidth, and 1024 cuda cores at 625Mhz clock speeds .. So it's 4x slower than the most powerful AGX Orion model that has double the cores and 2x the clockspeed It's 5.3/4 = around 1.3 TFLOPs GPU.
The 4GB nano variant module has half the GPU cores and bandwidth.
Last edited:
regarding SD Express, I still wonder if it can be limited without such a drastic hit on the IOPS to cut down on heat and power consumption without affecting the performance too much
- Pronouns
- he / him
I find it pretty valuable that when I've upgraded to a larger microSD for my Switch, the previous one doesn't go to waste, but can still be used on half a dozen other devices I own.
ReddDreadtheLead
#TeamLate2025WithAPotentialForEarly2026
- Pronouns
- He/Him
Weeeeeellllllllll, it’s a bit more than that, it’s more that it’s this: how can Nintendo achieve faster speeds for storage while also being affordable enough, accessible enough, small enough and low power enough for their device and for their use case?
There were options, but UFS seems like it’s the path of least resistance if they wanted faster storage. It’s not proprietary in the same sense as the Vita Cards, so its dynamic is completely different than the scenario that’s presented here as though it would be difficult and expensive in the same sense as XBox Series storage cards.
Which I need to remind people in case they forgot, what Xbox is doing is taking a format and retrofitting it into a form that is only possible on their device. What Nintendo will be doing, if they adopt it, is taking an open format, and accepting the form in which it is acceptable in more than that one device. That would mean it is a card that can work for automotive, it can work for cameras, it can work for Internet of things, for smartphones, etc. The Drake, if it adopts it, would just be riding the coattails of a format that exists.
It would be like the PS5. And no one has an issue with that really.
Yes, you can buy one from Amazon.
Tegra Xavier also supports UFS.
So it’s been supported by the Tegras for a little while now.
D
Deleted member 887
Guest
In @Concernt 's defense, Samsung's attempt to migrate away from SD to UFS seems to have mostly been aborted. They've started sticking UFS cards as bonuses in orders, with hardware that's not compatible. If I wanted to buy a UFS card today I'm not even sure how I would. it may not be proprietary but it's certainly not widely available.
I thought the "stickable in a Switch" was a given
But let's not get lost in the weeds on speed of expansion storage. Developers can't treat read performance as a feature until said read performance hits game cards/internal storage. Game data being read off SD cards is the minority case, and even if Nintendo preserves the SD card, devs can gain access to the higher read speeds by requiring install and/or caching to onboard storage, exactly the same way they do on PS/Xbox.
UFS might be a reasonable strategy for that for internal storage, but likely not for expansion. Nintendo will either go with the most popular format and ride the wave of cost decreases at scale, or they'll design a custom solution and make money off of accessory sales.
Can you? How? They don't seem to be for sale, any attempt to find them by me just gets me Amazon sending me multifunction readers and a bunch of SD cards back. I can't even find one at specialist camera sites.
I don't think there is an UFS support on the SOC, but I could be wrong. I believe the development kits have a UFS slot, and the Linux drivers for it, but I think it just rides the existing PCIe lanes, and there is no custom hardware on chip for that support.
Yeah, this is my thing. SD Express seems like a bad fit. It doesn't seem to have any efficiency wins, just the ability to use more PCIe lanes.
But again, I expect Nintendo to just punt with Drake entirely and wait for UHD phone cameras to drive a solution into the marketplace. The most I can imagine happening is that, if Drake gamecards are physically different, to keep them out of regular Switch's (and I kind of don't expect that, for Reasons), then perhaps Nintendo ups the speeds of Drake gamecards and internal storage. But I still expect expansion to be SD.
D
Deleted member 887
Guest
No new clues. We know Drake is related to Orin, and this Orin Nano looks like exactly half of an AGX. I assume it's just a binned chip in that case.I just came across this, is it related to Drake or does it give us new clues?
NVIDIA Jetson Orin Nano Creates New Standard For Entry-Level Edge AI & Robotics
NVIDIA Jetson Orin Nano and NVIDIA Jetson AGX Orin will push developers with easy access and emulation of entry-level AI computing.
I don't think anything major new has come up. Some details have been wrangled out of the Linux drivers, but nothing that radically changes our view of the device, or the timing.
- Pronouns
- he / him
Searching for ufs reader, the first result seems to be a USB device that reads both microSD and UFS.
Regardless of that, though, I feel like if Nintendo were going to be using anything that was neither microSD nor proprietary and needing it available in volume within a year, there'd probably be some rumbling about that.[/url]
japtor
Rattata
I've always considered the most damning thing against UFS cards is that Samsung appears to have ditched them. They're the biggest possible beneficiary from multiple angles, from manufacturing/selling the cards themselves to all the end devices, and have the most power to push them to market with hundreds of millions of devices per year, yet...nothing in years.
ShadowFox08
Paratroopa
man I hope Nintendo is ready for 50-100 GB games. I don't like the idea of 100GB third party games, but If they want more third party support, they need better DRM and more freedom/less restriction for third party devs.. They probably should match Sony and MS. Though I wish devs put more effort in compression and less on multiple copies of files to bloat storage of their games up.
I would gladly pay $500 for a UFS 3.0 or whatever 1TB storage included in Drake as a higher SKU option.
I would gladly pay $500 for a UFS 3.0 or whatever 1TB storage included in Drake as a higher SKU option.
Look over there
Bob-omb
Samsung was producing UFS card 1.0 until... was it early this year that they started going out of stock? Are they converting the production lines to 3.0 or stopping with card production altogether, who knows.
Hmm, power draw aside (why's the reference card averaging 3.25W when the spec limit is supposed to be 1.8!?), availability and price is still... not impressive. Ritz Gear Golden Eagle SD Express 256 GB for $200 on Amazon? Oof. Back when they were in stock, Samsung UFS Card 256 GB were sold for $60.
Wait, I see a Adata Premier Extreme SD Express 256 GB for ~$102 on Newegg, that's less bad.
Hmm, power draw aside (why's the reference card averaging 3.25W when the spec limit is supposed to be 1.8!?), availability and price is still... not impressive. Ritz Gear Golden Eagle SD Express 256 GB for $200 on Amazon? Oof. Back when they were in stock, Samsung UFS Card 256 GB were sold for $60.
Wait, I see a Adata Premier Extreme SD Express 256 GB for ~$102 on Newegg, that's less bad.
ReddDreadtheLead
#TeamLate2025WithAPotentialForEarly2026
- Pronouns
- He/Him
Can also buy them on Newegg: https://www.newegg.com/amp/p/0DS-01X6-008P0
I’m referring to the UFS CARD slot, to support UFS you need the M-PHY and UniPro supported in the silicon (also needs the controller for the UFS), which would be in the area of I/O in the SoC. The Xavier dev kit comes with eMMC, but it supports UFS too, along with other storage protocols like NVMe.
Look over there
Bob-omb
So the SD card specifications are UHS-I (version 3), UHS-II (version 4), UHS-III (version 6), and SD Express (version 7 and 8).
UHS-I goes up to a theoretical sequential read of 104 MB/s, and it's the one that's cheap and common.
UHS-II by spec goes up to triple that, so 312 MB/s. Not as cheap, but still available. Nowhere near as many devices support it.
UHS-III by spec doubles the previous, so up to 624 MB/s. I don't see any UHS-III cards on Amazon or Newegg? Yes, I'm aware that if you search for UHS-III on Newegg, you'll get a result or two with 'UHS-III' in its name, like this. That name is a lie. See the 'I' below the V10? It's UHS-I. Plus, notice the 1 inside the U? That U1 asserts a minimum write performance of 10 MB/s; that's UHS-I range. You can see U3 on UHS-II cards, which asserts a minimum write perf of 30 MB/s.
SD Express (version 7) by spec goes up to 985 MB/s. Another step up in price. Or more steps, really.
Steam Deck uses UHS-I, like everybody else. I'm assuming that it doesn't cap the speed?
Switch... caps to 25 MB/s to maintain parity across the board, IIRC? But I'm a bit fuzzy on that one. Actually, make that really fuzzy on that one. Regard this one with a big
- Pronouns
- he / him
This can't be the case, as there's the occasional situation like L.A. Noire specifying a higher minimum speed.Switch... caps to 25 MB/s to maintain parity across the board, IIRC? But I'm a bit fuzzy on that one. Actually, make that really fuzzy on that one. Regard this one with a big
EDIT: They also link to this page where Nintendo recommends a card with 60-95MB/s capability.Rockstar said:
Last edited by a moderator:
