• Hey everyone, staff have documented a list of banned content and subject matter that we feel are not consistent with site values, and don't make sense to host discussion of on Famiboards. This list (and the relevant reasoning per item) is viewable here.
  • Do you have audio editing experience and want to help out with the Famiboards Discussion Club Podcast? If so, we're looking for help and would love to have you on the team! Just let us know in the Podcast Thread if you are interested!

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

Reader mode
Gay Bowser said:
Isn't that sort of making the assumption that Drake and the mid-gen refresh are the same, though?
Click to expand...
I thought you were sort of making that assumption when you posited that the OLED Model was a scrapped Pro without the new SoC. There's not really any other options for what said SoC could've been; Nvidia hasn't released a suitable chip in the meantime.

I don't see a problem with that assumption, though. We've been given no indication said refresh wasn't supposed to use Drake.
 
0
Dark Cloud said:
Can someone tell me where we stand right now?
Click to expand...

John on DF says from speaking to devs there was a Switch Pro that got cancelled. John feels we won’t see a new console in 2023. Nate says this ‘Switch Pro’ was the device he was referring to and basically isn’t happening. Drake could be Nintendo’s next generation console but no one truly knows when it will come out.
 
Although Nintendo's new hardware equipped with Drake seems more like a next-gen console than a mid-gen refresh from a hardware standpoint, that doesn't necessarily mean Nintendo's going to market the new hardware as a next-gen console (e.g. "Nintendo Switch 2"), at least not initially (e.g. "Super Nintendo Switch"). (Although people who have been into playing video games for a very long time may associate the name "Super Nintendo Switch" with a next-gen console, I don't think that necessarily applies to people who have only been recently into playing video games, which is why I used "Super Nintendo Switch" as an example.)
 
Btw it can also happen that was always going to be the same SoC but with a 8nm fabrication node, now its 5nm, more efficient and with more RAM.

Nintendo may want to be ambitious and have a console that would be possible to get mayor PS5/Xbox Series ports.

At least we know they are working hard to get COD somehow in their HW in the next 2 years.
 
Síriocaz said:
Digital Foundry just wanted to put a "/thread" here.
Click to expand...
If only it were that easy; the video is going to have the opposite effect.

And for the record, I don't know anything about this that anyone would care about (not that I could talk about it if I did), but I will say this:

Everyone, please try to be aware that you may not be privy to everything happening behind the scenes. Try not to make too many assumptions when you know your conclusions will be based on incomplete information.

As an indie dev, I basically know next to nothing about future Nintendo hardware aside from what has already been leaked, and I actually have a problem with that. I did my part; I have already given my pitch deck to Nintendo, I have already established a working relationship with them and signed the appropriate NDAs, and perhaps my expectations were too high, but I expected to know more about their plans by now, and I don't. So my focus will be on Steam release. Whenever Nintendo decides to be more forthcoming, perhaps I will reprioritize.

Why am I sharing this? Because you should understand that information can be lacking, even with people who have a direct, working relationship with their business partners, and that can cause confusion, especially when it comes to industry chatter and journalists reporting what they're hearing. Hopefully, that provides some perspective.
 
Hermii said:
I agree, a lot of things just don't add up.
Click to expand...

Skittzo said:
I have trouble believing they'd be putting driver information into the Linux kernel for a chip that is now being repurposed.
Click to expand...
A repurposed chip is most likely to be in a Linux kernel. As we discussed at the time, it sounded like Nvidia was being allowed to put Drake elsewhere.

I don't know what happened, but the idea that Drake isn't the 2023 device (regardless of the Status of the 2023 device) explains a lot. Why is Drake so damn big? Why does it have such a short marketing cycle? Why was Nano Next originally planned to release before Orin, but was delayed at the last minute to be after Orin, and is clearly just a binned AGX? Why is Dane a banned word in the Nvidia leak but there is no other reference to Dane?

Pro was Nano Next, Pro was cancelled, Nvidia slides in a floorswept Orin as Orin Nano, Drake is a reworked chip. I dunno if that is what did happen - and I will await further reporting - but it readily explains the data we have much more easily than anything else. There is a reason we keep going in circles on the process node/clock speed.
 
GamerJM said:
I think they planned another internals change in between the 2019 one and Drake that never saw production and thus never leaked from nVidia.
Click to expand...
There's enough wiggle room in the Nvidia info we've gotten for there to be an earlier version of the chip, but for it to have only been scrapped recently strains credulity.
Jersh said:
He's already elaborated, but frankly, I agree with him editing those away as someone who's supported him at every turn. They were clearly speculative, but were not being taken as such, which was confusing the discourse even more.


He never did that video because it didn't add anything new to what he reported, it just corroborated it. There wasn't anything for him to add. He stated this much closer to the actual NVN2 leak, and several times since when asked.



I see a few possibilties:

-The planned revision was an overclocked Mariko, and the "next-gen hardware" is Drake. There's several things that still don't quite fit here, but the refresh in this scenario would've essentially been the OLED model, but for whatever reason they just decided not to overclock it in the end. Some things make a lot of sense with this explanation, such as the under the hood changes to the dock, while other things don't add up at all (Nate claiming aspects of Drake matched what he heard about the dev kits, the timing being this year or next). We've also heard whispers that this was in fact planned at some point (not necessarily the OLED model, just using Mariko for a Pro), so who knows.

-The cancelled revision used Drake, as does the next-gen hardware. The way I reconcile the refresh vs. successor debate from a perspective that makes any sense here (since these would otherwise be the same device as far as devs are concerned) is that Nintendo is planning to move on from the Switch family entirely in the next few years. What the hardware would look like, I couldn't say. Maybe it has some critical new feature that needs more time in the oven. Maybe they're being bold enough to abandon the hybrid form factor for something entirely new. Nintendo is hard to predict at times.

-The canceled revision used Drake and whatever hardware we get next doesn't. This is perhaps the strangest, as clearly Nvidia's been putting in work for Nintendo and would likely be an expensive cancel. But it's possible.

-The info from today is wrong. Doesn't feel right either, but it's a possibility.

My mind leans towards #2 right now. But I can't say for sure. As far as I can tell, no one's said with any certainty that Drake wasn't for the refresh. Nate was speculating when he said it may not have been.


NVN2 is pretty suggestive, but Nvidia still could've had other plans for Drake. It could be entering a more limited production for use elsewhere.
Click to expand...
If we are to give Nate's statements today, the benefit of the doubt, which I'm not super convinced is deserved atm, the most reasonable read I can see is some fairly extreme miscommunications from some initial uncertainty over how Drake would be positioned.
Jersh said:
My issue with this explanation is that with the timetable Drake was on, it should've been known it wasn't coming until at least early 2022 before the pandemic even hit. The OLED Model was likely always going to be what it is (physically - in theory it could've also been overclocked, but still on Mariko), and the data on Aula in the firmware supports this.
Click to expand...
The OLED definitely was never Drake, but it could have been salvaged from a scrapped, more powerful Mariko revision.
 
f0b.jpg
 
I'm just going to post this, we know there has been no other hardware.

Drake started development in early 2019. From the Nvidia hack, we can see in Nvidia's private branch of NVN1 and NVN2 that at no time since 2019, has there been any other NVN hardware. It's just TX1 and Drake. Whatever information Nate or Digital foundry is discussing, is not in Nvidia's hack, even though Drake is.

Also from a Sarif post 10 pages back, DF is in conflict about 2023 and Drake is brought up as a possible hardware release, so it's unrelated to what we've been talking about. This thread spirals so easily, despite all of Dakhil's hard work.

We know Drake SoC is still coming, and that it is currently in production. Nintendo has no real reason to wait for 2024 or 2025, all components are ready right now and we've even hard reports from factory uncle that full production is about to begin.
 
Dark Cloud said:
Can someone tell me where we stand right now?
Click to expand...

We have just randomly and mysteriously appeared in unknown space. All around you there are no stars, no signs of life, no light. We don't know where we are, how we got here or what's going to happen next. We are sending out communication signals in hopes that somebody responds. A sign of life...
 
After the Nvidia leak, we understood that there was a console in development ("Switch Drake") that could not be called a revision, or a "pro".
From that moment, it was clear that the next platform would be a generational leap, perhaps iterative, but next gen in all respects.

Nate Drake himself talked about 4K via DLSS.

For this reason, if now Nate tells us that when he spoke of "heavy" news, CLEARLY referring to "Switch Drake" was talking about this alleged cancellation of a revision, which CLEARLY cannot be Switch Drake, there is something not adding up...

I'm very sorry, but with this story, Nate's credibility as an insider (or Nate's source value) in my eyes has been completely destroyed by this incident.
 
oldpuck said:
A repurposed chip is most likely to be in a Linux kernel. As we discussed at the time, it sounded like Nvidia was being allowed to put Drake elsewhere.

I don't know what happened, but the idea that Drake isn't the 2023 device (regardless of the Status of the 2023 device) explains a lot. Why is Drake so damn big? Why does it have such a short marketing cycle? Why was Nano Next originally planned to release before Orin, but was delayed at the last minute to be after Orin, and is clearly just a binned AGX? Why is Dane a banned word in the Nvidia leak but there is no other reference to Dane?

Pro was Nano Next, Pro was cancelled, Nvidia slides in a floorswept Orin as Orin Nano, Drake is a reworked chip. I dunno if that is what did happen - and I will await further reporting - but it readily explains the data we have much more easily than anything else. There is a reason we keep going in circles on the process node/clock speed.
Click to expand...
I'm still not quite sure how this answers those questions. Why is Drake so big? How does it being repurposed explain its size? What do you mean by short marketing cycle, do you still think it's coming within 6 months?

I just feel like I'm missing some pieces here, I'm not sure how we're getting from point A to point B.
 
Who cares if a ‘mid-gen refresh’ is cancelled? It’s unprecedented and not possible that anyone outside of Nintendo would know whether new hardware is a revision or a successor. If the info DF and others have is from developers, they wouldn’t get information like this. Why would a developer know the specific marketing strategy of a device?

The most concrete information we have are not from devs. Some of it even being illegally leaked. With this info, we can only assume new hardware is coming. Is it a Shield TV or a Switch 2? Who knows
 
I do wonder if all this is enough for Bloomberg to drop their own findings soon. We need more concrete details

When one person / journalist reports or leaks in a topic, the flood gates open with others saying “yeah me too” or “I’ve heard something similar.” I assume it’s because at that point they can assume their source will no longer be clearly identifiable.

Edit: on that note I’ve not seen much corroboration as of yet - just Nate. Not nearly as much as we saw in 2021 when talk of the dev kits and device surfaced
 
lucapfstr said:
If the info DF and others have is from developers, they wouldn’t get information like this. Why would a developer know the specific marketing strategy of a device?
Click to expand...
Probably because how Nintendo's new hardware equipped with Drake is marketed to third party developers is different from how Nintendo would probably market to consumers. (I do agree that third party developers won't know any information about how Nintendo's new hardware equipped with Drake is going to be marketed to consumers.)
 
Gay Bowser said:
Isn't that sort of making the assumption that Drake and the mid-gen refresh are the same, though?
Click to expand...
Drake, as a chip, doesn't really seem to ever have been targeted at something that could meaningfully be called a revision.
Dark Cloud said:
Can someone tell me where we stand right now?
Click to expand...
Largely unchanged, but with some new reports that don't really fit well with anything.
 
lucapfstr said:
Who cares if a ‘mid-gen refresh’ is cancelled? It’s unprecedented and not possible that anyone outside of Nintendo would know whether new hardware is a revision or a successor. If the info DF and others have is from developers, they wouldn’t get information like this. Why would a developer know the specific marketing strategy of a device?

The most concrete information we have are not from devs. Some of it even being illegally leaked. With this info, we can only assume new hardware is coming. Is it a Shield TV or a Switch 2? Who knows
Click to expand...
Well one of the people who has been a source for this whole thing says the device he has been talking about is this now cancelled device. Which raises all sorts of questions. if Drake has been in development as long as claimed it would seem logical Drake was the chip intended for this now cancelled device.

Which then raises logical questions like did Nintendo really think a device launching in 2023 would be a midgen refresh? 2023 is way past midgen refresh period and is fully next gen window. Considering typical lifespan for Nintendo devices we are nearing EOL period not midgen.
 
antonz said:
Well one of the people who has been a source for this whole thing says the device he has been talking about is this now cancelled device. Which raises all sorts of questions. if Drake has been in development as long as claimed it would seem logical Drake was the chip intended for this now cancelled device.
Click to expand...
He also said pretty clearly today that the device he's referring to did not use Drake, so I think it's very possible that he's got conflicting or confused info.
antonz said:
Which then raises logical questions like did Nintendo really think a device launching in 2023 would be a midgen refresh? 2023 is way past midgen refresh period and is fully next gen window. Considering typical lifespan for Nintendo devices we are nearing EOL period not midgen.
Click to expand...
I'm still of the opinion that they don't need to pick and choose between mid gen refresh and next gen anymore. The distinction can be entirely arbitrary with the way cross platform development and ecosystems work these days.
 
Sol said:
And if 2023 is off the table as John seems to think, that would obviously mean a 2024 release at the earliest - meaning Drake launches with CPU and GPU tech that is already 4 years old.

So yeah, it would still be a massive increase over the current Switch....but it would still be graphics tech that would be on the verge of already becoming obsolete. Nvidia would be two full generations ahead of Ampere by that point.
Click to expand...
Nintendo
 
Eclissi said:
After the Nvidia leak, we understood that there was a console in development ("Switch Drake") that could not be called a revision, or a "pro".
Click to expand...
This is baseless. Both those words come down to marketing.

If Nintendo wanted to frame it as a revision at release, then only release exclusives for it a few years down the road and support it for years after - exactly like the PS5 is doing - then that was their right. It was never 1:1 with the PS4 Pro and Xbox One X, as exclusive titles were part of the rumors surrounding this thing from the get go.

I'm curious - why home in on Nate here? The only thing that a 2023 spec bump Switch revision could've reasonably been was Drake, and John is implying knowledge of said device's existence. There really isn't anything else this device could've been. If it was planned to happen next year, it was Drake, unless you have a chip to pull out of thin air.
 
Skittzo said:
He also said pretty clearly today that the device he's referring to did not use Drake, so I think it's very possible that he's got conflicting or confused info.
Click to expand...
Features of the hardware that was relayed to me as a "Switch revision" are similar to those of the leaked Drake specs.

4K, DLSS and such were all reported well before the NVN2 leak. The leak only served to back that information as credible.

As said, I'll discuss the matter of hardware for 2023 in the coming weeks -- with additional info acquired over a span of many months.

[Speculation Citation] Could the Drake SoC have been the base for the revision and plans changed once the SoC evolved beyond original vision & became better suited for a next-gen successor? Maybe.
 
In the podcast, when Oliver brings up the T239 as possible hardware for the successor, John doesn't comment on that (the camera is only on Oliver so you can't see his reaction). Wish they got more into that. Probably legal concerns.

Also, DF calling the Tegra X1 'state of the art' for 2015 is a nice contrast to the overwhelming amount of comments out there claiming the Switch was 'laughably outdated' at launch. And they agree T239 would be a massive increase in power.
 
Skittzo said:
He also said pretty clearly today that the device he's referring to did not use Drake
Click to expand...
He did not. Nate said the cancellation of a device that may or may not have used Drake doesn't affect Nintendo using Drake going forward. He even reiterated today that some of Drake's features lined up with what he heard the dev kits could do.

His stance is that he doesn't know for sure what chip the cancelled device was going to have, which has also been his stance the entire time AFAIK. He's leaned Drake. Today he seems less sure, but in no post did he rule it out.

Edit: The man himself spoke, just scroll up two posts instead of paying this any mind
 
Hmm. Who, here, expected whatever device we end up getting to be a Switch Pro of sorts and not literally the successor?

This changes nothing? We knew that boat sailed whenever Furukawa said we were halfway through the Switch’s life cycle. It was a few months out of when OLED came out meaning if we were to have a Pro it should have come out at that time.

Now, the real question is: do insiders still stand by H1 2023?
 
Jersh said:
This is baseless. Both those words come down to marketing.

If Nintendo wanted to frame it as a revision at release, then only release exclusives for it a few years down the road and support it for years after - exactly like the PS5 is doing - then that was their right. It was never 1:1 with the PS4 Pro and Xbox One X, as exclusive titles were part of the rumors surrounding this thing from the get go.

I'm curious - why home in on Nate here? The only thing that a 2023 spec bump Switch revision could've reasonably been was Drake, and John is implying knowledge of said device's existence. There really isn't anything else this device could've been. If it was planned to happen next year, it was Drake, unless you have a chip to pull out of thin air.
Click to expand...
John can't know how Nintendo intends to place a new console... John can possibly hypothesize it based on the generational leap. If he talks about refresh, about pro, it's clear that he's not talking about Switch Drake. And if you watch the video, it's clear that it contrasts a Switch Pro expected in the past and canceled to a next gen Switch expected soon even if maybe not in 2023... Which of the 2 do you think Drake would be?
 
NateDrake said:
Features of the hardware that was relayed to me as a "Switch revision" are similar to those of the leaked Drake specs.

4K, DLSS and such were all reported well before the NVN2 leak. The leak only served to back that information as credible.

As said, I'll discuss the matter of hardware for 2023 in the coming weeks -- with additional info acquired over a span of many months.

[Speculation Citation] Could the Drake SoC have been the base for the revision and plans changed once the SoC evolved beyond original vision & became better suited for a next-gen successor? Maybe.
Click to expand...

This just feels like the Switch 2 is pulling a Tears of the Kingdom; it was initially supposed to be a new edition for the OG Switch, but too much happened, and now it's for the next-gen.

Speaking of TOTK, I doubt you could say but have you heard of a TOTK Switch 2 port?
 
NateDrake said:
Features of the hardware that was relayed to me as a "Switch revision" are similar to those of the leaked Drake specs.

4K, DLSS and such were all reported well before the NVN2 leak. The leak only served to back that information as credible.

As said, I'll discuss the matter of hardware for 2023 in the coming weeks -- with additional info acquired over a span of many months.

[Speculation Citation] Could the Drake SoC have been the base for the revision and plans changed once the SoC evolved beyond original vision & became better suited for a next-gen successor? Maybe.
Click to expand...

Per your last statement, what’s the earliest you could see such a decision having been made? I was considering if Nintendo’s rejection of Bloombergs article about providing “4K Switch dev kits” in late 2021 might have been as simple as that.
 
We are at the table and we know that a succulent steak is about to arrive. The DF waiter arrives and says "sorry, we served you a not very fresh salad before"... Yes, but who cares now that we are already smelling the steak?

The only thing important to me about this story is having understood that Nate, unfortunately, is not the person to listen to.
 
Thugstas said:
2023 is the year . With a business view … it can’t be later . March 2023= 6 years … wii syndrome isn’t a good sign … so thinking bout 2024 … I let you guess
Click to expand...
The Switch doesn't suffer from "Wii syndrome." Besides, 7 years is a typical life cycle for an HD console, so I wouldn't be surprised if it's closer to that.
 
NateDrake said:
Features of the hardware that was relayed to me as a "Switch revision" are similar to those of the leaked Drake specs.

4K, DLSS and such were all reported well before the NVN2 leak. The leak only served to back that information as credible.

As said, I'll discuss the matter of hardware for 2023 in the coming weeks -- with additional info acquired over a span of many months.

[Speculation Citation] Could the Drake SoC have been the base for the revision and plans changed once the SoC evolved beyond original vision & became better suited for a next-gen successor? Maybe.
Click to expand...
Okay then I'm even more confused about what has been newly developed here. AFAIK there was never a definitive answer on whether whatever Drake would be in would be called a revision or successor, likely because that's all marketing which partners wouldn't need to know about.

But if an actual product launch was shelved so that they can then use the same chip in what would ostensibly be the same product, that's even more confusing.
Jersh said:
He did not. Nate said the cancellation of a device that may or may not have used Drake doesn't affect Nintendo using Drake going forward. He even reiterated today that some of Drake's features lined up with what he heard the dev kits could do.

His stance is that he doesn't know for sure what chip the cancelled device was going to have, which has also been his stance the entire time AFAIK. He's leaned Drake. Today he seems less sure, but in no post did he rule it out.

Edit: The man himself spoke, just scroll up two posts instead of paying this any mind
Click to expand...
He may have edited it out, but earlier he did say something along the lines of "who said that Drake was the chip used by the revision I've been talking about?"

He edited some posts earlier for clarity, I guess the clarity here is that he wasn't trying to imply it wasn't Drake, just that he is unable to confirm for sure that it was Drake.
 
Eclissi said:
John can't know how Nintendo intends to place a new console... John can possibly hypothesize it based on the generational leap. If he talks about refresh, about pro, it's clear that he's not talking about Switch Drake. And if you watch the video, it's clear that it contrasts a Switch Pro expected in the past and canceled to a next gen Switch expected soon even if maybe not in 2023... Which of the 2 do you think Drake would be?
Click to expand...
I've hinted already that there's reasons unrelated to spec improvements to push for a successor instead of a refresh, and because of that the same chip could theoretically power both devices.

So to answer your question, both. My best guess right now is that Nintendo cancelled a Drake-powered refresh to go in a different direction, which also happens to be a device powered by Drake. But something happened that caused them to abandon the refresh route.
 
Jersh said:
He did not. Nate said the cancellation of a device that may or may not have used Drake doesn't affect Nintendo using Drake going forward. He even reiterated today that some of Drake's features lined up with what he heard the dev kits could do.

His stance is that he doesn't know for sure what chip the cancelled device was going to have, which has also been his stance the entire time AFAIK. He's leaned Drake. Today he seems less sure, but in no post did he rule it out.

Edit: The man himself spoke, just scroll up two posts instead of paying this any mind
Click to expand...
Tom saying he is hopeful for switch "2" in 2023, and them acknowledging Drake is really meaning they are talking about something separate here imo. Drake is also still very current hardware, well after Nate's info was given to him.
NateDrake said:
Features of the hardware that was relayed to me as a "Switch revision" are similar to those of the leaked Drake specs.

4K, DLSS and such were all reported well before the NVN2 leak. The leak only served to back that information as credible.

As said, I'll discuss the matter of hardware for 2023 in the coming weeks -- with additional info acquired over a span of many months.

[Speculation Citation] Could the Drake SoC have been the base for the revision and plans changed once the SoC evolved beyond original vision & became better suited for a next-gen successor? Maybe.
Click to expand...
With Drake's updates being weeks old, it's clearly not a canceled device. What you could have heard about was a new 2ds xl type of switch model, but because that info is not what df is seemingly discussing, I think we should just look at the most recent info, and that is that just weeks ago, Drake is in testing and Linux updates are currently happening for a finished silicon that is still getting NVN2 work done.

I think it is also worth noting that with Drake not being canceled, Nvidia's leak from March 1st, shows us no other chip exists for Nintendo apis outside of TX1 and T239.

Basically whatever you've heard, isn't being done internally at Nvidia, which is odd if it does exist, given Nvidia would be needed for any DLSS hardware.
 
Mekanos said:
The Switch doesn't suffer from "Wii syndrome." Besides, 7 years is a typical life cycle for an HD console, so I wouldn't be surprised if it's closer to that.
Click to expand...

That is true.

The Switch is the first HD Nintendo system that's been successful; if the Wii U had sold well, the Switch probably wouldn't have been released until 2019.
 
karmitt said:
Per your last statement, what’s the earliest you could see such a decision having been made? I was considering if Nintendo’s rejection of Bloombergs article about providing “4K Switch dev kits” in late 2021 might have been as simple as that.
Click to expand...

Likely not the best for me to even speculate about such a thing.

Eclissi said:
We are at the table and we know that a succulent steak is about to arrive. The DF waiter arrives and says "sorry, we served you a not very fresh salad before"... Yes, but who cares now that we are already smelling the steak?

The only thing important to me about this story is having understood that Nate, unfortunately, is not the person to listen to.
Click to expand...

Everything I reported was backed by the NVN2/Nvidia leak and Bloomberg reporting.
 
Skittzo said:
But if an actual product launch was shelved so that they can then use the same chip in what would ostensibly be the same product, that's even more confusing.
Click to expand...
Why would it ostensibly be the same device? The implication here, I think, is that it's not, despite using the same chip. At least, that's my running theory of what's going down.
 
Reader mode
You must log in or register to reply here.
Please read this staff post before posting.

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


Back
Top Bottom