• 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!
  • General system instability
    🚧 We apologise for the recent server issues. The site may be unavaliable while we investigate the problem. 🚧

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

Reader mode
Goodtwin said:
NVIDIA GeForce RTX 4050 Max-Q

This is an interesting graphics card to look at to extrapolate what Drake clock speeds may look like assuming its on 4N. Its a 35 watt TDP card with 2560 GPU cores and 6GB of GDDR6 memory on a 96 bit bus. The base clock speed is 1140 Mhz and can boost to 1605 Mhz. Drake has 40% fewer GPU cores and more power efficient memory. So with some cave man math we can slash off 40% of the power draw from 35 watts down to 21 watts. Not sure what power draw for 12GB of LPDDR5 looks like compared to 6GB of GDDR6, but I would assume its less. We have a few watts needed to push the CPU cores, but from looking at this lower powered graphics card, I would think clocking in right around 1 Ghz would fit the expected 15w TDP for Drake. Maybe a bit lower or maybe a bit higher, but it seems a good ballpark estimate when looking at this graphics card for comparison.
Click to expand...
I think TechPowerUp's data points here should be taken with a huge grain of salt, especially since laptops with the RTX 4050 haven't been released yet.
 
sagadego20 said:
Click to expand...

People need to stop using using names (Super, 2, successor etc.) as shorthand for their beliefs/speculation about the new hardware. They don't work because no one agrees on what they mean. If Grubb or anyone else has thoughts about aspects of the system like marketing, controls, gimmicks, power, games, etc., then you can just talk about those directly.

And if he did get into specifics in this clip, I haven't watched it so I wouldn't know, but he shouldn't be using the name thing ("between a Pro and a 2") to frame it at all. It's actively interfering with the ability for people to share and discuss their speculation at this point.
 
Why does a 'new generation' for Nintendo have to mean everything starting over and them creating the Nintendo Flip Z with vinyl records as physical media and triple foldable screen asymmetrical gameplay or whatever? They are fully capable of creating a new generation that is just a refinement of the previous concept and have done so before.
 
LiC said:
People need to stop using using names (Super, 2, successor etc.) as shorthand for their beliefs/speculation about the new hardware. They don't work because no one agrees on what they mean. If Grubb or anyone else has thoughts about aspects of the system like marketing, controls, gimmicks, power, games, etc., then you can just talk about those directly.

And if he did that in this clip, I haven't watched it so I wouldn't know, but he shouldn't be using the name thing ("between a Pro and a 2") to frame it. It's actively interfering with the ability for people to share and discuss their speculation at this point.
Click to expand...
I think 2 is fine. I see it as a placeholder to denote it's a successor. And It's pretty much guaranteed it will be a successor (with some compatibility with switch games) at this point based on the years passed and huge leap in technology.


What triggers me is "Switch Pro," and "[Redacted]" to a certain extent. We know for certain it's not a pro at this point, because that implies a mid gen upgrade like New 3DS, PS4 pro, and X bone X, with not much architecture change (or any at all) and often not a huge leap in power (x bone to x bone X being the only exception), which can't be now (beefed up tx1 lol). T239 is several generations ahead in GPU and CPU architecture. The SoC is completely different and far more powerful and more efficient.

The latter is just extra, and kinda annoying because it's turned into a meme here. But whatever if people use it...
 
Pro dream was dead in 2022 and with that the major cross-gen support, there is no way that major new EPD titles like new 3D Mario are crossgen. They aren't. Even with how huge the Switch instalbase is now.
 
LukasManak22 said:
"Not Pro, maybe even not necessarilly Switch 2 maybe something like in between that is definitely something like in between of actual hardware upgrade"

How does this even make sense lol
Click to expand...
Sounds like what Nate has been saying all this time: It's just another Switch, but more powerful and with tons of exclusives.

I'm not gonna be surprised if Nate turns out to be correct in the end. It just makes a lot of sense.
 
DS <=> Switch
DS Lite <=> Switch Lite
DS i <=> Switch OLED
3DS <=> Switch Next

You could align it similarly with Gameboy/GBA. It dosen‘t compare 1:1 in both cases, but there is definitely a (obvious) pattern there in how they market every second generation as a softer update in terms of branding and hardware features (not necessarily power). You can observe something similar with their successful home consoles (NES -> SNES / Wii -> WiiU).
 
lexony said:
DS <=> Switch
DS Lite <=> Switch Lite
DS i <=> Switch OLED
3DS <=> Switch Next

You could align it similarly with Gameboy/GBA. It dosen‘t compare 1:1 in both cases, but there is definitely a (obvious) pattern there in how they market every second generation as a softer update in terms of branding and hardware features (not necessarily power). You can observe something similar with their successful home consoles (NES -> SNES / Wii -> WiiU).
Click to expand...
Let's call it 3DSwitch
 
The Grubb clip is uncontroversial.

People are getting hung up on the GBC comparison even though he said it would be significantly above that.

The takeaway for me is he believes the next Switch will retain compatibility with Switch and Nintendo is looking to keep the ecosystem going as one rather than starting from zero

That's a good news story
 
Serif said:
I don't see what's hard to believe about Switch 2 being cross-gen and sharing an eShop and ecosystem, isn't that what other consoles have been doing?
Click to expand...
Absolutely nothing is hard to believe about it. People tend to worry themselves over nothing. Nintendo has stated their plans with the switch brand and ecosystem. Nothing much more needs to be said but there are those that won't settle down without a hard "confirmation".
 
Eh, whatever he stumbled around saying at the end of the clip, his first sentence - "It's still on the table that we get something" - is the only thing I would want him to go into more. I could not care less about whatever made up names/labels/descriptions he (or anyone else) tries to apply to it.

Even though it is obvious something is on the table and of course we will get something eventually.
 
Concernt said:
You could have said that about any Nintendo console until NSO launched.

Everything is "impossible" until it happens.
Click to expand...
Sure, I hate the "Nintendo would never do X" narrative as much as the next guy - and I'd never definitively rule anything out 100%, I'm just seeing i can't see it at all.

But I do have to argue that you couldn't have said that about any Nintendo console until NSO launched, because my whole point is that GC games are close enough to Switch games to be actually competitive with Switch games on a gameplay level, rather than appealing to people primarily through nostalgia. That was not the case with NES, SNES and N64 games when Virtual Console first launched with the Wii, and it remained not the case for those systems when their games appeared on all subsequent Nintendo consoles.

Once you get to GC and Wii, it's a fundamentally different category of games you're putting out there, and fundamentally more valuable.

We can't see play time stats for the VC games or NSO apps (not that I know of), but I'd wager play time on a per game basis is tiny compared to the actual native Switch games people buy. With GC games, i think this would shift.
Pokemaniac said:
The more of their back catalog is available, the more of it can be actively earning them revenue.
Click to expand...
That doesn't mean it's the most efficient way of making revenue. Adding GC games to NSO in some higher tier most likely isn't the most efficient way to monetize those games.

I could be wrong - Nintendo will be the ones crunching those numbers, projected sales vs projected subscription increases etc. But I'd wager that 5 strong GC remasters would be better for revenue than adding 20 emulated GC games to NSO in search of more subs at a higher price.
 
Heron said:
Sure, I hate the "Nintendo would never do X" narrative as much as the next guy - and I'd never definitively rule anything out 100%, I'm just seeing i can't see it at all.

But I do have to argue that you couldn't have said that about any Nintendo console until NSO launched, because my whole point is that GC games are close enough to Switch games to be actually competitive with Switch games on a gameplay level, rather than appealing to people primarily through nostalgia. That was not the case with NES, SNES and N64 games when Virtual Console first launched with the Wii, and it remained not the case for those systems when their games appeared on all subsequent Nintendo consoles.

Once you get to GC and Wii, it's a fundamentally different category of games you're putting out there, and fundamentally more valuable.

We can't see play time stats for the VC games or NSO apps (not that I know of), but I'd wager play time on a per game basis is tiny compared to the actual native Switch games people buy. With GC games, i think this would shift.

That doesn't mean it's the most efficient way of making revenue. Adding GC games to NSO in some higher tier most likely isn't the most efficient way to monetize those games.

I could be wrong - Nintendo will be the ones crunching those numbers, projected sales vs projected subscription increases etc. But I'd wager that 5 strong GC remasters would be better for revenue than adding 20 emulated GC games to NSO in search of more subs at a higher price.
Click to expand...


I think that depends a lot on the TYPE of game being played. If they add Sim City to SNES and/or NES, Pokémon to GB/A, you'd see my NSO playtime shoot through the roof in weeks. 😂

Honestly I don't think they're that worried. It's not like Super Mario Advanced 4 replaces New Super Mario Bros. U deluxe in the minds of consumers. Why would Luigi's Mansion replace 3, or Sunshine Odyssey? It's not like the barrier of entry to NSO+EP is negligibly small anyway.
 
Last edited:
I can see Nintendo following the Apple model of producing regular updates for the same base hardware, gradually creeping the power upwards until the old models are slowly but surely rendered obsolete, as opposed to lurching forward in one big go. It doesn't make sense to completely abandon the Switch's library, so there was always going to be a degree of backward compatability/cross gen continuation happening. The question is how far will they leap, and whether we'll get exclusive content for this new updated console or not
 
Hosermess said:
Eh, whatever he stumbled around saying at the end of the clip, his first sentence - "It's still on the table that we get something" - is the only thing I would want him to go into more. I could not care less about whatever made up names/labels/descriptions he (or anyone else) tries to apply to it.

Even though it is obvious something is on the table and of course we will get something eventually.
Click to expand...
The lead-in was him reiterating the thing that he "heard but couldn't confirm" about an announcement this year. So that's probably what he was then referring to as still being on the table. Or maybe "getting something" referred to a release this year still being on the table, since he also commented before he thought there was a 45% chance of that happening.
 
Galgavias said:
I can see Nintendo following the Apple model of producing regular updates for the same base hardware, gradually creeping the power upwards until the old models are slowly but surely rendered obsolete, as opposed to lurching forward in one big go. It doesn't make sense to completely abandon the Switch's library, so there was always going to be a degree of backward compatability/cross gen continuation happening. The question is how far will they leap, and whether we'll get exclusive content for this new updated console or not
Click to expand...
This with an emphasis on adding new services/features (music to the home menu, street pass, VR, etc) seems like the no brainer move.
 
sagadego20 said:
Click to expand...



@Grubb quote (minor edits):
It’s still on the table that we get something Switch, not Pro, maybe even not necessarily Switch 2, maybe something in between that that is definitely an actually upgrade in terms of hardware, but in terms of the way that Nintendo positions it, it feels like they could try to straddle the line a little bit and do like a Super Switch that continues the generation, in a way that is more significant than the Game Boy Color - but even more significant than that.

And the thinking there clearly is, they have Nintendo Switch Online, they have a lot of subscribers, they have a lot of people that are spending a lot of money buying video games, and they don't want to disrupt or lose any of that momentum, cause all of the other companies have figured out how to maintain it.
Click to expand...

The bolded is all he's said. And it's been said in here countless times before.

Using the Super Switch or Game Boy Color example was a mistake, because Super Nintendo was as clear as generations get, and Game Boy Color is vastly underselling the proposed hardware. Whatever.
 
ShadowFox08 said:
I think 2 is fine. I see it as a placeholder to denote it's a successor. And It's pretty much guaranteed it will be a successor (with some compatibility with switch games) at this point based on the years passed and huge leap in technology.


What triggers me is "Switch Pro," and "[Redacted]" to a certain extent. We know for certain it's not a pro at this point, because that implies a mid gen upgrade like New 3DS, PS4 pro, and X bone X, with not much architecture change (or any at all) and often not a huge leap in power (x bone to x bone X being the only exception), which can't be now (beefed up tx1 lol). T239 is several generations ahead in GPU and CPU architecture. The SoC is completely different and far more powerful and more efficient.

The latter is just extra, and kinda annoying because it's turned into a meme here. But whatever if people use it...
Click to expand...
[REDACTED] is useful shorthand and the closest thing to an official name we have, given that's the actual term used to refer to it in legal documentation 😛

Can't believe I started a Famiboard meme, I barely post... Outside this thread.
 
karmitt said:
@Grubb quote (minor edits):


The bolded is all he's said. And it's been said in here countless times before.

Using the Super Switch or Game Boy Color example was a mistake, because Super Nintendo was as clear as generations get, and Game Boy Color is vastly underselling the proposed hardware. Whatever.
Click to expand...
To be fair, GameBoy Color vastly undersold GameBoy Color.

It was a generational leap in capabilities and had more colours than SNES. Games like Wario Land 3 and Shantae play and look closer to GBA games than they do GameBoy games.
 
Concernt said:
I'm baffled there's no CD or 32X games offered in the existing app.
Click to expand...
Could they be? Even though they were positioned and labeled as other systems weren't they basically just lightly piggybacking off the Genesis hardware? I wouldn't be surprised if the emulator could run them.
 
karmitt said:
@Grubb quote (minor edits):


The bolded is all he's said. And it's been said in here countless times before.

Using the Super Switch or Game Boy Color example was a mistake, because Super Nintendo was as clear as generations get, and Game Boy Color is vastly underselling the proposed hardware. Whatever.
Click to expand...

Not a Pro, but not a 2...it's
Hosermess said:
I've got it. The perfect name to make everyone happy.

The Nintendo Switch Too Pro
Click to expand...
 
LukasManak22 said:
"Not Pro, maybe even not necessarilly Switch 2 maybe something like in between that is definitely something like in between of actual hardware upgrade"

How does this even make sense lol
Click to expand...
My theory is that the idea of Nintendo going after the PS4->PS5 style transition - releasing a new gen that has no defining gimmick while also having near 100% compatibility with the previous - is breaking people's brains so hard that they end up articulating it into nonsense like this
 
karmitt said:
Using the Super Switch or Game Boy Color example was a mistake, because Super Nintendo was as clear as generations get, and Game Boy Color is vastly underselling the proposed hardware. Whatever.
Click to expand...
Yes it was odd to me when folks were suggesting 'Super Switch' as a name for a Switch Pro when 'Super Nintendo' was NES2 in all but name, likewise 'Game Boy Advance' was Game Boy 2 (or 3) in all but name. Nintendo has done '2' consoles before, they just didn't name them as such. So just because Nintendo calls the next Switch 'Switch Ultra' doesn't mean it's some half step in between a Switch Pro and Switch 2, it's a generational leap with a new architecture, BC, and exclusive games and that's sufficient for me.
 
We shouldn‘t care to much of the branding. It won‘t reveal how much power the upcoming hardware has. WiiU was way more powerful than a Wii, but still had pretty much the Wii branding but with an U (which made it confusing but that it is a different story). The Switch is more powerful than a WiiU but clearly not by that much. Though it was marketed as their next big step.
 
Last edited:
karmitt said:
Using the Super Switch or Game Boy Color example was a mistake, because Super Nintendo was as clear as generations get, and Game Boy Color is vastly underselling the proposed hardware. Whatever.
Click to expand...

The GBC comparison has nothing to do with power and everything to do with market positioning and consumer perception. Everyone looks at the GB/GBC as one long generation. GBC had a few hundred exclusives that couldn't be played on the original GB, the PS4 Pro and One X did not have exclusives. Just like Nintendo lumped GB and GBC sales together, they may do this with the next Switch, making Switch the first platform to reach 200 million units sold. Its cheating the system of course, but I really think this is how Nintendo is positioning this new hardware. GBC added color to original GB games, a popular opinion here has been adding 4K rendering to Switch games as a feature rather than a paid upgrade.
 
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