• 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| (Read the staff posts before commenting!)

Reader mode
I just had a thought. I've always thought Switch 2 will be a true next gen, with the majority of its titles being exclusives, and maybe Switch 1 will keep getting a few games like 3DS did. But many many people seem to think it's just a Switch Pro, where the entire library will be shared between Switch and Switch 2/Pro.

If that was the case, why would Nintendo tell Ubisoft it's best to wait with Sparks of Hope, and that it's best to put one of each series on each platform?
If the two consoles share a full library, then the next Switch is not its own platform and is no different to the OLED or Lite, it's the same platform. So why would Nintendo tell Ubisoft to wait for the next platform?

This isn't the only reason I believe the next Switch will be a true next gen, but for this post, this is what I want to draw attention to.
 
The Competition said:
I just had a thought. I've always thought Switch 2 will be a true next gen, with the majority of its titles being exclusives, and maybe Switch 1 will keep getting a few games like 3DS did. But many many people seem to think it's just a Switch Pro, where the entire library will be shared between Switch and Switch 2/Pro.

If that was the case, why would Nintendo tell Ubisoft it's best to wait with Sparks of Hope, and that it's best to put one of each series on each platform?
If the two consoles share a full library, then the next Switch is not its own platform and is no different to the OLED or Lite, it's the same platform. So why would Nintendo tell Ubisoft to wait for the next platform?

This isn't the only reason I believe the next Switch will be a true next gen, but for this post, this is what I want to draw attention to.
Click to expand...
I think many people got off the Switch Pro train a long time ago. a short cross-gen period like Xbox and PS5 went through could still happen though
 
oldpuck said:
First, thanks everyone who reached out privately. Ya'll are cool.

Second, let's do some speculating/wishing. What do ya'll want from the next console other than performance. Squishy triggers? A 1080p screen? A second screen? New colors? It can be literally anything.

The rules are - reply to this message directly, but no judging each other's picks. No telling folks why it's not possible, or what it's unlikely, or why the shouldn't want it. I just want people to say what they imagine the next thing might have. It's cool if it's a weird niche thing, it's cool if it's boring. Just let me know. I'm a little tired of this rut of "the same but better" and odds are Nintendo has one surprise cooking, and if it's yours, I want to celebrate that you get your weird niche thing!
Click to expand...
Something someone said previously, but expanding upon it abit; Wii-style pointer controls would not only be good for Wii ports, but it would also make games designed for PCs much easier to play. Games like the Sims, Cities: Skylines, Civilization; any game designed for a mouse would feel at home with pointer controls in docked mode while mostly still working in handheld mode via the touch-screen.
 
oldpuck said:
First, thanks everyone who reached out privately. Ya'll are cool.

Second, let's do some speculating/wishing. What do ya'll want from the next console other than performance. Squishy triggers? A 1080p screen? A second screen? New colors? It can be literally anything.

The rules are - reply to this message directly, but no judging each other's picks. No telling folks why it's not possible, or what it's unlikely, or why the shouldn't want it. I just want people to say what they imagine the next thing might have. It's cool if it's a weird niche thing, it's cool if it's boring. Just let me know. I'm a little tired of this rut of "the same but better" and odds are Nintendo has one surprise cooking, and if it's yours, I want to celebrate that you get your weird niche thing!
Click to expand...
An improved deck that has some good cooling (and power delivery) of some kind that would enable the switch 2 to play games that aren't possible without it

Kinda like a reverse wii u
 
ILikeFeet said:
I think many people got off the Switch Pro train a long time ago. a short cross-gen period like Xbox and PS5 went through could still happen though
Click to expand...
I'm glad to hear it, but there are many still on it, or they call the next Switch "Switch 2" but still think it'll share a full library with Switch 1, which basically means it's a Switch Pro. I think recent posts in this very forum were debating this within the last few days. And SwitchForce was a strong believer of this until a podcast starting to shift his mind just a bit a few days ago. I think this idea is still strong in a noticeable amount of people's heads.
 
The Competition said:
If that was the case, why would Nintendo tell Ubisoft it's best to wait with Sparks of Hope, and that it's best to put one of each series on each platform?
If the two consoles share a full library, then the next Switch is not its own platform and is no different to the OLED or Lite, it's the same platform. So why would Nintendo tell Ubisoft to wait for the next platform?
Click to expand...
Even if most games are shared, having compatibility with a fancier version should make a difference. Like, all the early Game Boy Color games that retained compatibility with the original model were still better off for being seen as new fancy color games. And a way-post-launch patch going "Hey, now Mario+Rabbids 2 is fancy too!" won't have the same effect.
 
Bonejack said:
giphy.gif


and Scrollwheel Shoulderbuttons!
Click to expand...
Obey the laws of physics and economics! Scroll wheel shoulder buttons would be too big, too hard to manufacture, and too custom!
 
The Competition said:
I just had a thought. I've always thought Switch 2 will be a true next gen, with the majority of its titles being exclusives, and maybe Switch 1 will keep getting a few games like 3DS did. But many many people seem to think it's just a Switch Pro, where the entire library will be shared between Switch and Switch 2/Pro.

If that was the case, why would Nintendo tell Ubisoft it's best to wait with Sparks of Hope, and that it's best to put one of each series on each platform?
If the two consoles share a full library, then the next Switch is not its own platform and is no different to the OLED or Lite, it's the same platform. So why would Nintendo tell Ubisoft to wait for the next platform?

This isn't the only reason I believe the next Switch will be a true next gen, but for this post, this is what I want to draw attention to.
Click to expand...
The Competition said:
I'm glad to hear it, but there are many still on it, or they call the next Switch "Switch 2" but still think it'll share a full library with Switch 1, which basically means it's a Switch Pro. I think recent posts in this very forum were debating this within the last few days. And SwitchForce was a strong believer of this until a podcast starting to shift his mind just a bit a few days ago. I think this idea is still strong in a noticeable amount of people's heads.
Click to expand...
There's been an idea floating around in this thread, for a long time now, that the new device will blur the lines between a pro device and a new console, at least in regards to how Nintendo will market it.

If the new device is one using the T239 SoC like we believe, then it will definitely be a successor to the Switch in terms of power. But we've never been sure if that's how Nintendo will market it as. If it has robust backwards compatibility, then it might just be referred to as another part of the "Nintendo Switch family of systems", one that initially shares the same library of games as all the other Switches but simply plays those games at higher resolutions.

This idea has died down over the past year as many now expect a more traditional console transition, but because of this thread's history with the topic, this is why you still see the terms "Switch 2" and "Switch Pro" used interchangeably (the name of the new device is another long debated topic in this thread).
 
JoshuaJSlone said:
Even if most games are shared, having compatibility with a fancier version should make a difference. Like, all the early Game Boy Color games that retained compatibility with the original model were still better off for being seen as new fancy color games. And a way-post-launch patch going "Hey, now Mario+Rabbids 2 is fancy too!" won't have the same effect.
Click to expand...
I think this gives me the perfect chance to explain my problem with the whole Switch Pro shared library concept.
This will be nothing like going from black & white -> colour. Either the new system will be a big leap or it won't be, but either way this concept makes no sense:

Small leap scenario:
Games won't look noticeably different, so the original argument falls (i.e. people won't be very excited by the Switch NG).

Big leap scenario:
For Switch NG games to run on Switch 1 they will have to either hold themselves back for Switch 1, in which case the difference between the two versions won't be very noticeable, and therefore the original argument fails - people will not be excited for Switch NG.
Or the games can take maximum advantage of Switch NG but have to be nastily scaled back for Switch 1 the same way The Witcher 3, Mortal Kombat 11, Doom Eternal, Outer Worlds etc all were. Don't get me wrong, I played some of those games and enjoyed them, but they are intensely compromised experiences, and I can't see Nintendo ever intentionally creating a situation where the standard practice is for their 1st party and 3rd party devs to do this with every (or most) games. Those multiplats aren't designed for Switch, they are cut back for it, and they are only just serviceable, and ugly, and imo only acceptable as a temporary solution until better hardware comes, not something to be proud of happening for another 6/7/8 years, and not something Nintend would do for their first party games imo.

Finally, I'm adamant, though I won't go through scouering the internet for quotes, but I'm certain Nintendo has said twice or three times in the last few years that they continue to want to make their hardware with the aim of enabling experiences not possible on their previous hardware. I'm certain they said words to this effect multiple times, and it's not a surprise at all, this has been their philosophy since the beginning of their time in this industry is it not?
 
Concernt said:
Obey the laws of physics and economics! Scroll wheel shoulder buttons would be too big, too hard to manufacture, and too custom!
Click to expand...
Also it wouldn‘t even be that cool of a gimmick. It would be overall inferior in its functionality to the Touchpad of a PS5 Controller I feel like.
 
I don’t get why there’s disagreement over the next Switch either being a mid gen or next gen upgrade (Pro vs. 2).

At this point in the Switch’s lifetime, a successor console is coming. The next gen device won’t immediately phase-out the previous gen, much like how the OLED is phasing out the older devices still.

Yes, the Switch 2 will coexist with the OLED and other two devices. Yes, we’ll have a crossgen period and Nintendo will release software for the Switch, but it won’t be permanent.
 
carbonaxiom said:
But we've never been sure if that's how Nintendo will market it as. If it has robust backwards compatibility, then it might just be referred to as another part of the "Nintendo Switch family of systems", one that initially shares the same library of games as all the other Switches but simply plays those games at higher resolutions.
Click to expand...
Last post from me for a bit cos I know I've spammed the community a bit.

I just want to say, I think this would be the worst thing Nintendo could do in my opinion.
When they say they want a "smooth transition" I'm pretty sure that means fast adoption of the new hardware, with no signs of stumbling or reluctance from consumers i.e. not what the 3DS went through, and not what the Wii U went through.
If they advertise the Switch NG as just another one in the family, I can't see any world where that doesn't cut sales in half at least. Why would they want that?
The whole point of a smooth transition is to get people to move over quickly and happily. Yes they can have backwards compatibility, and they can even release more Switch 1 games for a couple of years, I DO expect that, but they should, and probably will, still market the Switch 2 as a new gen, and give it exclusives to push sales as quickly as possible. I don't see any incentive for Nintendo to intentionally try to tell people they don't have to upgrade. Sony released games for PS4 for a while, but they never told people PS5 is just another one in the family - that would be like shooting themselves in the foot for not benefit at all imo.
 
lexony said:
Also it wouldn‘t even be that cool of a gimmick. It would be overall inferior in its functionality to the Touchpad of a PS5 Controller I feel like.
Click to expand...
It wouldn't be "inferior" it would be different. Scroll wheels would be genuinely inferior, of course, but pressure sensitive capacitance has a lot of advantages over the DualSense touchpad, and a lot of disadvantages. There's two instead of one, but they're small. They're pressure sensitive but have no travel. Only one axis but frees up the thumbs.

Overall it's more important, I think, for it to enable new inputs rather than emulate others. Nintendo's answer to pointer controls is and will continue to be gyro/motion.
 
The Competition said:
Last post from me for a bit cos I know I've spammed the community a bit.

I just want to say, I think this would be the worst thing Nintendo could do in my opinion.
When they say they want a "smooth transition" I'm pretty sure that means fast adoption of the new hardware, with no signs of stumbling or reluctance from consumers i.e. not what the 3DS went through, and not what the Wii U went through.
If they advertise the Switch NG as just another one in the family, I can't see any world where that doesn't cut sales in half at least. Why would they want that?
The whole point of a smooth transition is to get people to move over quickly and happily. Yes they can have backwards compatibility, and they can even release more Switch 1 games for a couple of years, I DO expect that, but they should, and probably will, still market the Switch 2 as a new gen, and give it exclusives to push sales as quickly as possible. I don't see any incentive for Nintendo to intentionally try to tell people they don't have to upgrade. Sony released games for PS4 for a while, but they never told people PS5 is just another one in the family - that would be like shooting themselves in the foot for not benefit at all imo.
Click to expand...
Thank you. They won’t place the Switch 2 as part of the Switch Family of Systems. They’ll position it as the New/Next Generation of the Switch, and once a Lite 2 enters the market, it’ll be the New/Next Generation of the Switch Family of Devices.
 
ziggyrivers said:
Thank you. They won’t place the Switch 2 as part of the Switch Family of Systems. They’ll position it as the New/Next Generation of the Switch, and once a Lite 2 enters the market, it’ll be the New/Next Generation of the Switch Family of Devices.
Click to expand...
Idk about that. I expect it to be more akin to Xbox Series X|S marketing.
 
oldpuck said:
First, thanks everyone who reached out privately. Ya'll are cool.

Second, let's do some speculating/wishing. What do ya'll want from the next console other than performance. Squishy triggers? A 1080p screen? A second screen? New colors? It can be literally anything.

The rules are - reply to this message directly, but no judging each other's picks. No telling folks why it's not possible, or what it's unlikely, or why the shouldn't want it. I just want people to say what they imagine the next thing might have. It's cool if it's a weird niche thing, it's cool if it's boring. Just let me know. I'm a little tired of this rut of "the same but better" and odds are Nintendo has one surprise cooking, and if it's yours, I want to celebrate that you get your weird niche thing!
Click to expand...
  • Full BC, with patches so that Switch 1 games can take advantage of Drake's hardware to have better frame rates, resolution, draw distance, better image quality overall and faster loading times
  • A 1080p screen 7 inch screen maybe even 7.5, OLED would be preferable but LCD is fine as long as the quality is good.
  • Most importantly, I want the screen to take up all the space on the console and have no borders. I remember seeing the Switch for the first time in the 2016 reveal trailer and immediately thinking "They will definitely release a model that takes up that border in the future". I really don't want a repeat of that.
  • Better, much more ergonomic joy-con that don't hurt my hands in handheld mode with analog triggers and hall effect sticks (Of course with no drifts or other malfunctions, I feel like I shouldn't even mention this but the original joy cons are so awful in all their aspects, when mine started drifting I bought bigger 3rd party joy con and the different is like night and day)
  • An OS that Isn't as barebones and soulless as the Switch one but still as fast, with music, themes, folders and movable icons like the Wii U and 3DS and most importantly doesn't force me to access a second menu to see all of my games and that renders at 4K in docked and 1080p in handheld
  • A proper capture feature that can take PNG screenshots in the resolution the game is actually running at (not crusty 720p jpgs full of artifacts) and video capture that can take at least 10 minutes of video at 1080p 60fps at least with a good bitrate
  • Quick Resume feature, like the one the Xbox
  • Other stuff like HDR, ethernet port, microphone
I really just want the Switch again but more powerful, with more features, better quality and gimmicks kept to a minimum.
 
lexony said:
Selling over 200 Million software in FY 2023 sounds to me they pretty much need third parties, even when there is not a single third party game which rivals the sales of Nintendo First Party titles. Except for maybe Monster Hunter and Minecraft (of which we don‘t know the sales numbers but it‘s likely over 20 million).

Still the business of Nintendo dosen‘t work with First party games alone. In theory as long as Switch is selling, most third parties will decide to bring games to the platform if possible. But at some point this is getting harder and maybe not worth the money to invest the time for a Switch port. Not even for indie games, which are getting more complex too.

Now you can say, so what, as long as Nintendo is releasing new games for their platforms? Though getting continuously new third parties on your platform is something that even your average Joe is noticing.

Be it the various collaborations Nintendo is doing with third parties, miracle ports like Witcher 3, being it preceived as a JRPG machine, getting ports of old games, being the number 1 indie console or even something simple like receiving all Lego Games; all this contributes to their Nintendo Switch has Games for everyone that you can play everywhere at any time marketing. Something they push from day one and is in my opinion a huge part why the Switch is selling so well. It’s the quantity that matters to get a diverse user base that buys your product for all different kinds of reasons. I think past consoles have shown what happens when First Parties is the only thing that‘s left on a Nintendo console.

Or to put it in other words: You don‘t necessarily need to buy Nintendo titles to have fun on Switch. I know many people that own the console and don‘t have more than 1-3 first party titles.
Click to expand...
I'm genuinely very curious what kinds of third party ports folks think the Switch 2 needs in order to thrive? The current model has gotten by with mostly ports from the 360/PS3 era and the early PS4/XBO years; it didn't have Elden Ring, or Red Dead Redemption 2, or Call of Duty...and it was totally fine? A successor that can play ports from the PS4/XBO generation with a handful of early PS5/XSX ports should be similarly fine, though I often see it suggested to the contrary here (not saying that you have said this, but I know I've seen it suggested here and...ugh...Reddit).

As far as I can tell, the third party support that actually matters on Nintendo platforms is the support that "vibes" with the ecosystem. The Switch 2 will have a new Monster Hunter, billions of JRPGs, and ports of PS4/XBO games. Does it need more than that?
 
The Competition said:
Last post from me for a bit cos I know I've spammed the community a bit.

I just want to say, I think this would be the worst thing Nintendo could do in my opinion.
When they say they want a "smooth transition" I'm pretty sure that means fast adoption of the new hardware, with no signs of stumbling or reluctance from consumers i.e. not what the 3DS went through, and not what the Wii U went through.
If they advertise the Switch NG as just another one in the family, I can't see any world where that doesn't cut sales in half at least. Why would they want that?
The whole point of a smooth transition is to get people to move over quickly and happily. Yes they can have backwards compatibility, and they can even release more Switch 1 games for a couple of years, I DO expect that, but they should, and probably will, still market the Switch 2 as a new gen, and give it exclusives to push sales as quickly as possible. I don't see any incentive for Nintendo to intentionally try to tell people they don't have to upgrade. Sony released games for PS4 for a while, but they never told people PS5 is just another one in the family - that would be like shooting themselves in the foot for not benefit at all imo.
Click to expand...
There have been some good, detailed responses about this that I don't have saved, but this was my summary of the idea, and why it might be possible for Nintendo to pull it off:

carbonaxiom said:
The argument that Nintendo doesn't strictly need new software for a hardware launch is one that comes with specific context.

There's an oft-cited chart about how Sony's transition from PlayStation 4 to PlayStation 5 was the first time the company managed to avoid an operating loss for a new home console's first year since they entered the video game business:



Because of the substantial increase in users for console subscription services, and the resulting heavily-extended shelf life of older games, it's possible that traditional rules about launch lineups no longer apply. In Nintendo's case, this would mean that they plan to launch the console with mostly (or even entirely) cross-generation games, and then slowly transition towards the new console exclusives over the following months and years. This is where Nintendo's emphasis on having a smooth transition for accounts and digital services comes into play.

In this scenario, the primary buyers of the new device for its first few months would be people who want to play older Nintendo games with higher resolutions and frame rates, while most others would continue to buy older Switches at the same steadily declining pace that existed before launch.

This is actually the implicit position that anyone expecting a 2023 or Q1 (January to March) 2024 launch has had for a long time, which is why most recent pieces of information, like the Q&A sessions at the investor meetings and the video games announced at the June Direct, have done little to dissuade anyone who thinks an announcement might be coming soon.

Of course, it's easy to reasonably disagree with this position. One counterargument is that, unlike with Sony, there aren't enough people willing to buy the new console just for older upscaled Nintendo games. If Nintendo is indeed waiting for a better launch lineup because of this, then the wait is very likely for the second half of 2024, at least, given current information.
Click to expand...

To condense this even further, you're right in saying that sales of some other Nintendo consoles of the past, such as the Wii U, were hurt at least in part because of the lack of a clearly defined console transition. But things have changed quite a lot since then. It might be different now because of the existence of subscription services and the fact that Switch owners seem to be prone to buying the latest version of Switch over time. We've been seeing a steady increase in Switch OLED sales since it released, and a lot of those sales seem to be people replacing their old Switch with the new one.

A clearly defined console transition might be less risky all things considered. It'll definitely be interesting to see what happens with marketing and how Nintendo deals with the current Switch player base.
 
oldpuck said:
First, thanks everyone who reached out privately. Ya'll are cool.

Second, let's do some speculating/wishing. What do ya'll want from the next console other than performance. Squishy triggers? A 1080p screen? A second screen? New colors? It can be literally anything.

The rules are - reply to this message directly, but no judging each other's picks. No telling folks why it's not possible, or what it's unlikely, or why the shouldn't want it. I just want people to say what they imagine the next thing might have. It's cool if it's a weird niche thing, it's cool if it's boring. Just let me know. I'm a little tired of this rut of "the same but better" and odds are Nintendo has one surprise cooking, and if it's yours, I want to celebrate that you get your weird niche thing!
Click to expand...

  • Maintain the same screen as the Switch OLED. It’s so good. No need to go making a new part.
  • Analog ZR/ZL triggers. Even if it’s only like, half a centimeter of “throw,” I’d rather have the ability to play a driving game where I might want some granularity on the triggers than not.
  • Hall Effect sticks
  • a half-way decent camera (or maybe 2???) on the back for AR. I think AR is far from dead and, frankly, I think Nintendo has historically been the company to do the most interesting stuff with it. I’d love for them to have the ability to continue doing AR.
 
oldpuck said:
First, thanks everyone who reached out privately. Ya'll are cool.

Second, let's do some speculating/wishing. What do ya'll want from the next console other than performance. Squishy triggers? A 1080p screen? A second screen? New colors? It can be literally anything.

The rules are - reply to this message directly, but no judging each other's picks. No telling folks why it's not possible, or what it's unlikely, or why the shouldn't want it. I just want people to say what they imagine the next thing might have. It's cool if it's a weird niche thing, it's cool if it's boring. Just let me know. I'm a little tired of this rut of "the same but better" and odds are Nintendo has one surprise cooking, and if it's yours, I want to celebrate that you get your weird niche thing!
Click to expand...
  • Analogue triggers, idc if it's like the clicky GC ones or the modern ones over at Sony and Microsoft.
  • Buttons on the backside, I love them on the Steam Controller
  • Hal-Effect Joysticks.
  • Don't make me wait half a generation to get on the same level as the OLED. Give me that sweet screen, preferably with even less bezel from the get go and a dock that has a LAN-Port, maybe even seperate audio out! Also Bluetooth Audio pls.
  • Don't even know what else, I'd love to see something that makes people go "oh Nintendo", but in a positive sense. Something that nobody has thought about yet, something that only they would be brave enough to include. Maybe Labo 2.0? Weird eyetracking stuff? Idk.
  • BRING BACK THE MIIVERSE!
 
Quangcute03 said:
After reading this article Ampere has its shader array underutilize many of the times as SM occupancy is pretty low. It's worth mentioning that they're using the giant 3090 in the test, and smaller cards would have better shader utilization.
Click to expand...


Thraktor said:
It's difficult to tell from the article whether low shader utilisation is a general architectural issue with Ampere, or if it's the result of them comparing the huge 3090 to a couple of Pascal GPUs which are less than a quarter of the size, or indeed if it's particular to the benchmark they're using.
Click to expand...
As the article itself points out, "if the top SOL is under 60%, Nvidia considers that unit under-utilized or running inefficiently." If you look at the benchmarks, none of the Nvidia GPUs have great utilization here.

I could be wrong, but my first instinct would be that this benchmark isn't great on Nvidia, period, but the smaller cards are somewhat compensating by just having so many warps relative to the number of SMs, there is always something that can execute. As the GPU gets bigger and bigger, and the number of SMs gets closer to the number of warps, you see better and better the underlying utilization issue.

There still is some interesting data here.

image-9.png



What you're seeing here is latency of the cache in the GPU - basically how long before you start getting data from the cache. Lower is better. The Ampere and RDNA are tied at the beginning - then you get two wildly different curves. Ampere slows down a lot, levels off, slows down a lot. RDNA stays faster, and has this weirder curve with more bends in it.

That's Infinity Cache versus Ampere's more standard design. This graph is a little confusing because the bottom access isn't linear, it's logarithmic. It looks like Ampere's advantage at the bottom of the curve is less than double the length of RDNA's, but it's actually 4 times as large.

You can see from this graph (I hope) that different workloads will prefer different architectures. Which brings me back to the question of SM utilization. I suspect that this benchmark just hits a lot of pain points on Nvidia, and it's not an overall utilization issue.

Thraktor said:
One thing I would say is that this is one of those cases where developing for a console, and being able to optimise around a single hardware configuration, really helps. Switch developers are looking at exactly the same statistics as they run through in the article, and I mean exactly. They're using Nvidia's Nsight tools, which are the same tools provided to Switch developers to perform this kind of performance profiling, except tweaked for Nintendo's use-case (eg supporting NVN).
Click to expand...
Quangcute03 said:
Still I'm thinking about Drake and its rather big GPU (for its class) and wonder if Drake would be bottlenecked in the same way as I mentioned above, or devs would find a way to better fill all those hungry 12SM.
Click to expand...
Not all games - or even a majority - will use NVN, but NVN is lower level than Vulkan/DX12 in this regard. Both Vulcan and DX12 have generic work queues. Applications pick the number of queues that their workload supports, and then the driver farms those queues out to various SMs/compute units. In NVN, the underlying SM arch is exposed directly, and while applications can create the number of queues as needed, you are heavily encouraged to map queues to the SMs, exactly matching your renderers parallelism to the GPUs
 
oldpuck said:
As the article itself points out, "if the top SOL is under 60%, Nvidia considers that unit under-utilized or running inefficiently." If you look at the benchmarks, none of the Nvidia GPUs have great utilization here.

I could be wrong, but my first instinct would be that this benchmark isn't great on Nvidia, period, but the smaller cards are somewhat compensating by just having so many warps relative to the number of SMs, there is always something that can execute. As the GPU gets bigger and bigger, and the number of SMs gets closer to the number of warps, you see better and better the underlying utilization issue.

There still is some interesting data here.

image-9.png



What you're seeing here is latency of the cache in the GPU - basically how long before you start getting data from the cache. Lower is better. The Ampere and RDNA are tied at the beginning - then you get two wildly different curves. Ampere slows down a lot, levels off, slows down a lot. RDNA stays faster, and has this weirder curve with more bends in it.

That's Infinity Cache versus Ampere's more standard design. This graph is a little confusing because the bottom access isn't linear, it's logarithmic. It looks like Ampere's advantage at the bottom of the curve is less than double the length of RDNA's, but it's actually 4 times as large.

You can see from this graph (I hope) that different workloads will prefer different architectures. Which brings me back to the question of SM utilization. I suspect that this benchmark just hits a lot of pain points on Nvidia, and it's not an overall utilization issue.



Not all games - or even a majority - will use NVN, but NVN is lower level than Vulkan/DX12 in this regard. Both Vulcan and DX12 have generic work queues. Applications pick the number of queues that their workload supports, and then the driver farms those queues out to various SMs/compute units. In NVN, the underlying SM arch is exposed directly, and while applications can create the number of queues as needed, you are heavily encouraged to map queues to the SMs, exactly matching your renderers parallelism to the GPUs
Click to expand...
Excuse my ignorance and unfamiliarity with the specifics, but can an engine like Unreal Engine make use of NVN? If so, whose responsibility is it to integrate it? Epic, or the developer (in the case of Pikmin 4, Nintendo)?
 
oldpuck said:
First, thanks everyone who reached out privately. Ya'll are cool.

Second, let's do some speculating/wishing. What do ya'll want from the next console other than performance. Squishy triggers? A 1080p screen? A second screen? New colors? It can be literally anything.

The rules are - reply to this message directly, but no judging each other's picks. No telling folks why it's not possible, or what it's unlikely, or why the shouldn't want it. I just want people to say what they imagine the next thing might have. It's cool if it's a weird niche thing, it's cool if it's boring. Just let me know. I'm a little tired of this rut of "the same but better" and odds are Nintendo has one surprise cooking, and if it's yours, I want to celebrate that you get your weird niche thing!
Click to expand...
I just want the Activity Log back maaaaaaan. I don't wanna wait after a week of starting a game to know how much time I've put into playing it. I'm not a fan of play time in your Switch profile being only in increments of 5 hours. I don't want being informed about cool play time statistics to only be a once a year thing.

I want to know again how much time I played everyday
5qbfe38dlzd71.jpg


It was just cool how Nintendo presented your play time like this
GIh6j1k.jpg


and how you could know stuff like, how many times you opened an app/game
2.jpg
 
oldpuck said:
First, thanks everyone who reached out privately. Ya'll are cool.

Second, let's do some speculating/wishing. What do ya'll want from the next console other than performance. Squishy triggers? A 1080p screen? A second screen? New colors? It can be literally anything.

The rules are - reply to this message directly, but no judging each other's picks. No telling folks why it's not possible, or what it's unlikely, or why the shouldn't want it. I just want people to say what they imagine the next thing might have. It's cool if it's a weird niche thing, it's cool if it's boring. Just let me know. I'm a little tired of this rut of "the same but better" and odds are Nintendo has one surprise cooking, and if it's yours, I want to celebrate that you get your weird niche thing!
Click to expand...

  • Full backwards compatibility, no questions. A slot for Nintendo Switch cartridges.
  • 720p screen is fine, as long as it's OLED.
  • Joy Con 2, aka Joy Con but more ergonomic and longer lasting.
  • much higher memory bandwidth and whatever else it takes to port Dark Souls 3 to the system.
  • 2.5K output at the very least.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
GrandDemand said:
Why do you think it would be higher than $40? Are you assuming that the cost paid by Nvidia would be higher due to a more expensive 5N/4N wafer price or worse yield than I estimated? Or do you think Nvidia would be seeking a higher margin per chip. Thanks!
Click to expand...
That nvidia would be seeking a higher margin. Since, in this process Nintendo is paying in millions for the Silicon from Nvidia, and Nvidia is paying TSMC.


What Nvidia would charge Nintendo is with the packaging, the software, their IP, TSMC’s IP, the actual physical die, the labor that went in this, etc.

And all this can double or even triple the price of the chip. Nvidia can avoid a cost (their IP) because they are directly buying it. But Nintendo is buying from someone who is buying.

Having a smaller chip though does reduce cost and increases yield, so it would be in Nintendo’s interest to try to get a small chip of the sub-100mm^2 category.




Of course, Nvidia is not expecting to make the same margin as their GPUs, which have insanely high margins that they leave Nintendo in the dust. For example, the 4090 makes about 50-60% profit just for Nvidia.


With the console business, Nvidia and Nintendo would be aware of the market and what it can work with, if it doesn’t work out Nintendo would simply look elsewhere and Nvidia would have screwed up a major customer. But since they don’t want to screw up they would be willing to take a significantly lower margin. And Nintendo wouldn’t want to sell at any loss whatsoever, so they’ll avoid having something too expensive that pushes them into having to sell at a loss territory per console unit, since they also don’t want to price people out of the reach of buying.
KarmaDesires said:
seanmalstrom.wordpress.com

Longtime Industry Observer Admits He Has No Idea What Nintendo Is Doing

Take a look at Rob Fahey’s opinion piece at Gameindustry.biz. My first take is, “This guy is STILL THERE?” Rob Fahey has been doing opinion pieces at Gameindustry.biz as long as I…
seanmalstrom.wordpress.com seanmalstrom.wordpress.com

Sean Malstrom is #Team2025 going into #Team2026. Sean can be a broken clock but I think he makes some pretty good points here. (this can't be worse than linking to 4chan, can it?)
Click to expand...
Good. Now you all suffer and have no games to play.


mwuahahaha
Νεφέλωμα said:
It's gonna be announced in 2024 and release in 2025. There is no other way.
Click to expand...
Nintendo: don’t dare me because I will do it.
 
oldpuck said:
First, thanks everyone who reached out privately. Ya'll are cool.

Second, let's do some speculating/wishing. What do ya'll want from the next console other than performance. Squishy triggers? A 1080p screen? A second screen? New colors? It can be literally anything.

The rules are - reply to this message directly, but no judging each other's picks. No telling folks why it's not possible, or what it's unlikely, or why the shouldn't want it. I just want people to say what they imagine the next thing might have. It's cool if it's a weird niche thing, it's cool if it's boring. Just let me know. I'm a little tired of this rut of "the same but better" and odds are Nintendo has one surprise cooking, and if it's yours, I want to celebrate that you get your weird niche thing!
Click to expand...
  • 100% Backwards compatibility
  • Driftless controllers
  • VRR support
  • Better OS UI (settings are fine, but the home menu/eshop can easily get some improvements)
  • OLED

bellydrum said:
  • Full backwards compatibility, no questions. A slot for Nintendo Switch cartridges.
  • 720p screen is fine, as long as it's OLED.
  • Joy Con 2, aka Joy Con but more ergonomic and longer lasting.
  • much higher memory bandwidth and whatever else it takes to port Dark Souls 3 to the system.
  • 2K output at the very least.
Click to expand...
Do you mean 1440p? If so that would be 2.5k
 
bellydrum said:
  • Full backwards compatibility, no questions. A slot for Nintendo Switch cartridges.
  • 720p screen is fine, as long as it's OLED.
  • Joy Con 2, aka Joy Con but more ergonomic and longer lasting.
  • much higher memory bandwidth and whatever else it takes to port Dark Souls 3 to the system.
  • 2K output at the very least.
Click to expand...
That is some real grade-A pessimism right there folks.

Nevermind the fact "what it takes to port Dark Soils 3 to the system" applies more to Switch than Drake. Hell, Elden Ring launched on last-gen. Enough jiggery-pokery would get that going on Switch 1, nevermind Dark Souls 3. Maybe it's just me, but I'm fairly sure Witcher 3 wins against both in the visual department, and that runs on Switch. There isn't a single PS4 or Xbox game that objectively, never in a million years not FUNCTION on Switch, it would be more a case of whether it would be worth playing at that point. However, in broad strokes, the answer to that question is an emphatic yes, given Nier Automata functions on Switch with a HIGHER resolution than PS4, even if it is on a technicality.
 
1UpMango said:
I just want the Activity Log back maaaaaaan. I don't wanna wait after a week of starting a game to know how much time I've put into playing it. I'm not a fan of play time in your Switch profile being only in increments of 5 hours. I don't want being informed about cool play time statistics to only be a once a year thing.

I want to know again how much time I played everyday
5qbfe38dlzd71.jpg


It was just cool how Nintendo presented your play time like this
GIh6j1k.jpg


and how you could know stuff like, how many times you opened an app/game
2.jpg
Click to expand...
THIS!!!!! SOMEONE ELSE UNDERSTANDS 😭😭😭😭😭
 
Lancelot said:
He's right, though? The chip goes way beyond that and it's not even close, pessimism should be called out when it's lacking a base.
Click to expand...
Doesn't matter. Oldpuck doesn't want this kind of scenario going down. Hence the rules.
 
Lancelot said:
He's right, though? The chip goes way beyond that and it's not even close, pessimism should be called out when it's lacking a base.
Click to expand...
I mean, I'm not judging Bdrum for posting it. But I stand by the fact it's pessimistic. Not that Bellydrum is himself a pessimist, which I don't believe.
 
oldpuck said:
First, thanks everyone who reached out privately. Ya'll are cool.

Second, let's do some speculating/wishing. What do ya'll want from the next console other than performance. Squishy triggers? A 1080p screen? A second screen? New colors? It can be literally anything.

The rules are - reply to this message directly, but no judging each other's picks. No telling folks why it's not possible, or what it's unlikely, or why the shouldn't want it. I just want people to say what they imagine the next thing might have. It's cool if it's a weird niche thing, it's cool if it's boring. Just let me know. I'm a little tired of this rut of "the same but better" and odds are Nintendo has one surprise cooking, and if it's yours, I want to celebrate that you get your weird niche thing!
Click to expand...

I would like Nintendo to fill the gap in my soul that wants to connect with other people in a novel way, which is why I didn't like the Switch GUI.

Remember Streetpass, Miiverse and Wii Channels? All these things get more interesting when the install base becomes larger. So... missed chance there for Switch.

I remember Pokemon Go initially became somethinmg beyond games, I met new people and joined the local message group. that was a rare moment I really felt connected to people in a novel way.
 
Concernt said:
That is some real grade-A pessimism right there folks.
Click to expand...
It's not pessimism if it's not a prediction. If it's just what Belly wants to be satisfied, then it's merely low standards for personal happiness. The rules of the game are no yum-yucking :) For the record, I'm with Belly here at what would be enough to make me happy, even if I expect more.

Edited to add: Not to pile on @Concernt, since I now see a couple other folk said so. I get where you're coming from, in the context of the thread as a whole

Concernt said:
Excuse my ignorance and unfamiliarity with the specifics, but can an engine like Unreal Engine make use of NVN? If so, whose responsibility is it to integrate it? Epic, or the developer (in the case of Pikmin 4, Nintendo)?
Click to expand...
Sure it could. I don't know if UE4 is using NVN or Vulkan right now on Switch, but it would usually be Epic who took care of this. It would be a smart use of resources, one of the advantages of using an engine like UE4 is they've got plenty of engineers to throw at highly optimized rendering backends for each platform

UE4 is powerful, but it's also very easy to use, and that easy to use can be a problem, because unless the game starts on Switch, it's very easy to have your game/rendering logic not match up closely with what NVN provides. But still, there are smart optimizations that can be made.

ngpdrew said:
I'm genuinely very curious what kinds of third party ports folks think the Switch 2 needs in order to thrive? The current model has gotten by with mostly ports from the 360/PS3 era and the early PS4/XBO years; it didn't have Elden Ring, or Red Dead Redemption 2, or Call of Duty...and it was totally fine? A successor that can play ports from the PS4/XBO generation with a handful of early PS5/XSX ports should be similarly fine, though I often see it suggested to the contrary here (not saying that you have said this, but I know I've seen it suggested here and...ugh...Reddit).
Click to expand...
I think the current model remains a good one. There are plenty of last gen games I haven't played that I would if I could play them in bed or on the train. That remains a selling point for both the hardware and third party ports - lots of multiconsole owners will double dip for that reason. Some miracle ports and cross-gen multiplats continuing to come, along with a boatload of indies would make a robust 3rd party line up, where [redacted] owners would have access to a lot of titles, and 3rd parties would have access to more than just "hardcore Nintendo fans" when they port stuff over.

The hardware market has changed a bit however. Switch benefited from last gen consoles being somewhat limited relative to what the tech could do, and from establishing the modern handheld market. The cross-gen period has artificially constrained modern console games a bit, but we might be looking at a sudden spike where 8th games start to feel dated more rapidly after launch than 7th gen games did, or where dedicated handheld players have other options. That might dull the virtuous cycle that the Switch enjoyed. We'll see!
 
0
Yavga said:
I would like Nintendo to fill the gap in my soul that wants to connect with other people in a novel way, which is why I didn't like the Switch GUI.
Click to expand...
Interesting.

What would you say was the closest to your ideal GUI as far as Nintendo consoles and handhelds have been, perhaps as a springboard for how the next GUI could be improved?
 
KeijiKG said:
Interesting.

What would you say was the closest to your ideal GUI as far as Nintendo consoles and handhelds have been, perhaps as a springboard for how the next GUI could be improved?
Click to expand...

While Switch is sleek, fast and minimalistic I think Nintendo's charm has always been that they dare to do a gimmick or 2.

I think the 3DS made me feel most connected to others because Streetpass was created within the GUI, so everytime I took a hike and opened the 3DS there were possible surprises waiting, coins to be collected and whatnot. Many games had their own implementations that extended towards the homescreen. I remember you could ''unwrap'' new games like a present and that felt very rewarding. also, each and every 3DS game had its own spinning little piece of art with its own sound effect as a title, very cute.

All that charm was removed, Nintendo grew up but I don't know if I want it to.

But yeah, 3DS was the sweet spot for me personally.

Picture: "Look! You are not alone! there are actually people living near you who also play!"
streetpass-by-wong-junhao-0.jpg
 
Last edited:
KarmaDesires said:
Sean Malstrom is #Team2025 going into #Team2026. Sean can be a broken clock but I think he makes some pretty good points here. (this can't be worse than linking to 4chan, can it?)
Click to expand...

IMHO his blog posts are unworthy of dissecting. Witness his pearl of wisdom regarding Zelda and Aonuma:
I’m really tired of talking about Zelda. Zelda is now a crappy series no one plays. It has no future. You don’t see new generations of kids excited about Zelda. The last generation of Zelda fans that give a damn about Zelda are those who grew up with Ocarina of Time. Aonuma has done nothing to create new Zelda fans. All he has done is driven them away with his crappy ‘creativity’. Has Aonuma ever made an interesting game in his life?
Click to expand...

Edit: This is not to discourage OP or anyone from sharing content in this thread. Hope it doesn't come off that way.
 
Last edited:
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