• Hey everyone, staff have documented a list of banned content and subject matter that we feel are not consistent with site values, and don't make sense to host discussion of on Famiboards. This list (and the relevant reasoning per item) is viewable here.

StarTopic Future Nintendo Hardware & Technology Speculation & Discussion |ST| (New Staff Post, Please read)

Could Nintendo, with the power of DLSS, push last gen games to around 4K120 via DLSS Ultra-Performance?
DLSS comes with a fix cost in terms of processing time that increases with the target resolution.

If in the case of the Switch successor, this cost at 4k is superior to 8 ms, then no game will run at 120 FPS no matter how demanding they are.

DLSS-powered games on Drake will likely target resolutions below 4k. 1440p/1080p, with a frame-rate of 40 or even 30 FPS will be perceived like much more practical goals by the majority of devs.

Of course, if you ditch DLSS and go with raw rasterization instead, there is an aboundant number of legacy titles that could in theory run on the Drake hardware at 4k and 120 FPS if the console's output allows it.
 
Last edited:
If you're asking if a developer could, with a custom port designed to use these technologies, take a PS4 era game and make it 4k120fps on something roughly Switch 2 performance, with DLSS?

Theoretically yes. Would it happen? I would bet money against it, for myriad technical reasons, but also because I think it would look like vaselined donkey ass.



I think 4-5x is actually about what you'd expect.

This benchmark is a little hard to read. You've got the 8 core Orin NX variant clocked at 1.98 Ghz. Technically, Switch 2 is a slightly better performing CPU, and we don't know final clock speeds, but I think this is a really good estimate for what Switch 2's CPU perf would look like.

The other half of the benchmark is the A9-9820, which was a super-rare, Chinese only desktop kit from AMD. It turns out, it was literally AMD trying to fob off old Xbox One APUs they had lying around. So exactly the same CPU as the PS4/Xbox One... except the default clock here is much higher than either machine by about 30%.

So while this benchmark shows a 3.5x leap, in practice it's probably closer to 4.5x.

Spicy. So yeah, I do think the Switch 2 could run some reasonably heavy games at 120fps while docked, but nothing crazy. Maybe the least heavy Gen8 games?
 
0
It was this tweet. It mentions low-powered consoles, and was written in January 2023 (meaning months after the rumoured tape-out). Unless they’re making one for a platform host other than Nintendo, that is surely the closest thing we have to nailing on the likeliest amount of RAM. It’s entirely possible that there are games in development right now, which didn’t require the full 16GB (Cross-Gen stuff, late wave XB1/PS4 ports), and so, the reports of 12GB for consumer products could be what was understood earlier on. 💕✨
I mean, its very likely that 16GB NX Jetson Orins are/were already being used as early dev kits with the expectation that the retail product is only going to be 12GB, especially since often dev kits will have more RAM than the retail product.
 
The price is such a dangerous thing for this new device. Ultimately one of the reasons the Switch is successful is because it is seen as being affordable and a comparatively inexpensive product.

If Nintendo make the new console much more expensive because the last one was so successful then they run the risk of forgetting one of those reasons it was so successful in the first place.

We’ve seen this mistake by Nintendo before with the launch of the 3DS. They thought that because the DS was so successful they could charge a premium price and it ended up biting them on the arse.

What does “comparatively inexpensive” mean?

The Switch launched at the price of the other, more powerful, consoles on the market. It wasn’t “relatively inexpensive”. Heck, the ps4 was even $50 cheaper than the Switch much of 2017 through various promotions and holiday sales.

Switch sold gangbusters against them regardless.

This model can easily launch at series X/ps5 prices and sell well.
 
I mean, its very likely that 16GB NX Jetson Orins are/were already being used as early dev kits with the expectation that the retail product is only going to be 12GB, especially since often dev kits will have more RAM than the retail product.
Ok i keep seeing people say that the dev kits aim for higher amounts of RAM, but I've also seen people bring up the Wii U and Switch dev kits having the same RAM as their consumer counterparts. Can someone weigh in definitively on this?
 
What does “comparatively inexpensive” mean?

The Switch launched at the price of the other, more powerful, consoles on the market. It wasn’t “relatively inexpensive”. Heck, the ps4 was even $50 cheaper than the Switch much of 2017 through various promotions and holiday sales.

Switch sold gangbusters against them regardless.

This model can easily launch at series X/ps5 prices and sell well.
I can try to explain it, but no promises that it'll be a good explanation.

For a start, the prospect of a handheld system with console-quality graphics has been the dream for a long time, especially at an affordable pricepoint. At 300 quid, that's a massive boon for a lot of people, especially for office workers or people who travel a lot. Unlike it's competitors at the time, it didn't need to be anchored down to a single TV most of the time and could be taken on the go. At the end of the day, you could simply put it back and continue on your couch. For a lot of people, that's huge. The games for the system were also very impressive for many people, especially consumers. A brand-new open-world Zelda game on the go? That's madness to a lot of people, you'd be insane to not pick that up.

It's worth reminding people that the novelty AND practicality of a hybrid system was huge in 2017 and still is to this day. Time hasn't been the kindest on the Switch's hardware itself, but the value prospect of the Switch itself is still nigh-unbeatable for most people on earth.
 
AMD did the same thing with binned PS5s that they did with the binned Xbox One, which means we can head to head that comparison as well. You can see the leap for Sony and Microsoft was even larger.

AMD basically made every bet wrong on the Jaguar CPU design. So part of that huge leap is because the last gen consoles had very bad CPUs. The current Switch CPUs, despite being little mobile cores from 11 years ago, are fairly competitive against them

Single core and multi-core both have similar leaps against last gen, in this benchmark. Which matches with roughly what the theoretical leap is between those two, so I large expect it to play out in games.


Locking in their hardware partner has been a huge help here I imagine. We know from the gigaleak that Nintendo was given demos of DLSS 2 well before it released, and started exploring building the console around it then, and there have been indications that Nintendo has been consolidating around one big internal engine. And not for nothing has this generation been a little longer than expected, giving them a little more time to adapt.
Incredible... Simply incredible, I'm dying to see how their simulation improves by the end of the generation, along with everything else.
 
Last edited:
The following info is extremely vague, and only fit for entertainment purposes. If vaguebooking frustrates you, feel free to skip.

Short version: On Tuesday buyer uncle encountered a leak that shookt him. His cryptic tweets seem to be related to either Nintendo or Sony’s console models. The timing led him to suspect an announcement at the Tokyo Game Show.

Long version: At 1:04 PM on Sep. 5th (Japan time), buyer uncle posted the following tweet.

Based on his past tweeting pattern (example), I think that “某〇〇” mean “某機種” (certain console model). If so, the tweet can be translated to: “A surprising disclosure regarding a certain console model. Confidentiality?”

23 minutes later he posted an update:

“It has been corrected, hastily. This is peculiar.”

55 more minutes passed and he tweeted:

“〇-ムショウ” is obviously “ゲームショウ” (Tokyo Game Show), and “〇〇〇” is likely either “任天堂” (Nintendo) or “ソニー” (Sony). The translation would be: “That thing was corrected, but one would notice before [Nintendo or Sony fixed it]. Perhaps they’ll announce it at the Tokyo Game Show. I don’t know.”

My interpretation is that buyer uncle saw something regarding a certain console model on his wholesale ordering system. The info was so surprising that he immediately questioned its confidentiality. Lo and behold the info was hastily fixed (modified or deleted? unclear) in the system, causing buncle to suspect that it wasn’t a simple mistake. His last tweet seems to suggest it being a Nintendo or Sony product. Possibly due to the timing, he speculated that the info may be revealed at the Tokyo Game Show.

Personally I believe that it’s too early to see the Switch NG in the wholesale system. A few potential explanations include a new PS5 revision, end-of-life for Switch v2, or permanent price cut for a Nintendo/Sony model. There’s not enough to go on, but fun to chew on.
If it's TGS then I suspect it's Sony probably revealing their new "slim" model.
 
Incredible... Simply incredible, I'm dying to see how their simulation improves by the end of the generation.
I've no doubt that whatever they make that squeezes every last drop out of the NG will amaze us.
As in, I will be thinking "truly, the boundlessness of human creativity is most beautiful" as a tear rolls down my cheek.

*note to self: remember that I used the word 'boundlessness' to easily search for this post years down the road.
 
idk about Nintendo announcing the Switch 2 at TGS, doesn't seem like they'd use such an event as a platform for doing that.
 
If it's TGS then I suspect it's Sony probably revealing their new "slim" model.
Agreed. I believe it was reported to have a September reveal or launch (or at least 2023), and time is running out. I've been expecting this model to get announced some time around TGS. If it's coming this year, I think it's basically guaranteed to be out before Black Friday, and I'm personally thinking this will be the primary model on store shelves when Spider-Man 2 launches.

I'm surprised we haven't seen more supply chain leaks or posts from someone who got one early. That's the main reason I have some doubt.
 
Ok i keep seeing people say that the dev kits aim for higher amounts of RAM, but I’ve also seen people bring up the Wii U and Switch dev kits having the same RAM as their consumer counterparts. Can someone weigh in definitively on this?
ZachyCatGames posted a comprehensive list here.

I’m surprised we haven’t seen more supply chain leaks or posts from someone who got one early. That’s the main reason I have some doubt.
The PS5 revision was leaked on Chinese forums, first a description, then a photo, and lastly a video. Here is a western report of these leaks. Factory uncle #2 also confirmed that these leaks are “100% real”.
 
ZachyCatGames posted a comprehensive list here.


The PS5 revision was leaked on Chinese forums, first a description, then a photo, and lastly a video. Here is a western report of these leaks. Factory uncle #2 also confirmed that these leaks are “100% real”.
True. The leaks have only been for the case so far, right? I'm expecting someone to leak a video turning the system on or to pick one up from a retailer weeks early. I may be ahead of schedule and greedy with my expectations, though. :p
 
I'm kind of confused by the dlss 3 thing.

The only difference between 2 and 3 is frame gen. So is means Drake can do frame gen?

Or is it just branding?
Unknown if it can do frame gen but unlikely. 3.0 was just the start for framegen. Every numbered update still comes with enhancements and things that don't necessarily rely on framegen. So, it will most likely only support DLSS and all that entails + the non-frame generation additions of later numbered updates.
 
They don't market it at all, I am betting. Nintendo has avoided drawing attention to their underlying technologies, even when they're impressive. They're not fighting in the Graphics Wars, so drawing attention to their graphics technologies - even when they're better than the competition - is kinda bad marketing because it just draws attention to where you are behind.

The Switch had several hardware features that, if they were introduced in Sony console for the first time, you can imagine being in a Mark Cerny presentation. But if Nintendo had done so, you can imagine the discource. "Nintendo thinks tiled rendering will make them compete against Playstation?" from the Power Nerds and "What the hell is tiled rendering" from the core Nintendo fans.

There are few (if any?) games that let you disable/enable similar technologies, like Unreal's TAU, on Switch. So I would bet it's going to be the same on NG, where at most you'll get something like a "performance" and a "graphics" mode, which might, under the hood, change the DLSS settings. But the whole appeal of console gaming is you don't need to understand what resolution even is. So DLSS presets are probably right out.

Yep I fully agree on this about how Nintendo will handle this hardware.

That’s why I maintain the positioning of the new model will be more subdued and subtle than people are imaging.

The reveal will be Nintendo basically showing how current Switch games like BotW look and run better. That’s all they have to do. Not get into specs or the technical achievements of a new SoC. Nvidia and gaming sites will do that heavy lifting, not Nintendo.

Nintendo will show the games looking and running better and say if this excites you, get the new Switch for Switch gaming. If not, hey look…we have the OLED and Lite really cheap with the same games! It’s your choice!

If they do reveal this hardware with a Nintendo exclusive, it will be a 1-2 Switch type gameplay oriented title that the non tensor core Switch can’t do. Maybe some title that uses them for unique AI gameplay or something, not for mind blowing 4k graphics and high framerates.

But the gist of the new model will be to just play the Switch game library with better graphics and performance. They will let 3rd party devs do the heavy lifting with UE5 and showing how games on this model compare closely with current gen gaming. Nintendo isn’t going to do it.
 
I'm kind of confused by the dlss 3 thing.

The only difference between 2 and 3 is frame gen. So is means Drake can do frame gen?

Or is it just branding?
I wrote (an attempt at) a brief explanation of the DLSS version thing here.

DLSS 3.0 is the first version of the tech suite that included frame gen as a feature, so sometimes when people say "DLSS 3" they mean upscaling plus frame generation. DLSS 3.5 is the version that added ray reconstruction. All versions have DLSS itself (the upscaler) as a feature, obviously.

Of these features, frame gen is the only one where the hardware support is not universal. Right now it's only supported on Ada-generation/40-series GPUs. But the rest of the features in the DLSS 3.x suite (the notable ones being the upscaler and the new ray reconstruction) are supported on all RTX GPUs. So that makes talking about "DLSS 3" support confusing.

T239's GPU is not Ada, it's Ampere. So by Nvidia's current definition of support, Drake would not be supported for it. But since it's a custom chip for one customer, and we're not really sure of the technical reality behind Nvidia's support decision, we don't know if Drake can do it.
 
I'm kind of confused by the dlss 3 thing.

The only difference between 2 and 3 is frame gen. So is means Drake can do frame gen?

Or is it just branding?
Frame gen is not the only difference. DLSS3 introduced frame gen but was also updated with enhancements to the upscaling feature as well. And since iirc frame gen requires specific hardware that Drake doesn't have, it could be using DLSS3.1 just for the more advanced upscaling and leaving frame gen out of it.

This post by oldpuck lays it out well. Pay particular attention to what he says about "DLSS-G":
A Quick Deconfuser on DLSS 3.5 - it's not your fault you're confused. It's Nvidia's.

DLSS is a tool for using AI to improve the visual quality of video games. DLSS 2, 3, and 3.5 each introduced major new features. Because of that, gamers tend to use the version number to refer to the feature added.

But the version you use doesn't mean you use every feature.

There are four features we care about in DLSS.

DLSS Upscaling - this was the only real feature in DLSS 1, and DLSS 2 radically changed how it worked, vastly improving. So most of the time when people say "DLSS" they mean "DLSS 2 Upscaling." It lets you take a low res game, that runs at a higher frame rate, and then keep that good frame rate while upscaling the image to a higher resolution.

DLAA - a high quality antialiasing. DLSS Upscaling always includes AA. DLAA just lets you use the anti-aliasing by itself.

DLSS-G is the official name of DLSS Frame Generation. This uses AI to make new frames between the frames the game draws directly, increasing smoothness. It was introduced in DLSS 3 so it is sometimes called DLSS 3, which is confusing, and we're all trying to stop. It is very cool, but it has lots of non-obvious limitations.

DLSS-RR
short for DLSS Ray Reconstruction. This replaces part of the ray tracing pipeline with the same AI that Upscaling uses. It can vastly increase RT quality, and sometimes increases RT performance too. It was introduced in DLSS 3.5, so it is sometimes called DLSS 3.5, but I think at this point you can see how that is super fucking confusing.

These DLSS features can be combined in lots of different combinations. Just because you have DLSS 3.5 in your game, doesn't mean you are using every feature.

Just to add to the complications Every version of DLSS as brought improvements to all of these features, not just adding new ones. So in general, you want the latest version, even if you don't use any of the new features.

TL;DR: Just because the New Switch has the latest DLSS version, doesn't mean every feature is on in every game, or that they will all work on the new hardware.

DLSS upscaling and DLAA will definitely work on the New Switch.

DLSS-G will probably not
though there are some smart people who think otherwise, but even those folks would recognize there are serious caveats.

DLSS-RR probably will but the tech is very early, so there isn't the kind of data out there to be super sure. Yet.
 
Yep I fully agree on this about how Nintendo will handle this hardware.

That’s why I maintain the positioning of the new model will be more subdued and subtle than people are imaging.
...
But the gist of the new model is to play the Switch game library with better graphics and performance. They will let 3rd party devs do the heavy lifting with UE5 and showing how games on this model compare closely with current gen gaming. Nintendo isn’t going to do it.
It really depends on how they want to position it. I'm now leaning more towards it just being a straight up Switch 2 and Nintendo not needing to do a heavy lift to reintroduce a new console with new branding, but an iteration. I know a lot of people feel it's unNintendo but Switch's entire existance is not the Nintendo we knew so everything is fair game especially with newe management.

I imagine they may riff on the original reveal trailer and have the young man show up playing his Switch 2,but now his life has moved one and he's married with kids.
 
Is Nintendo finally going to cave and give us achievements to earn for all their games. Personally, it would make me replay pretty much everything cause I'm insane.
 
I'd also like to point out that, based on the games confirmed to use DLSS, we can determine which 3rd-party engines likely already have the tools necessary to take advantage of the new hardware's best feature:

Baldur's Gate 3 - Divinity Engine (Larian Studios)
Battlefield 2042 - Frostbite Engine (EA)
CoD MW2 - IW Engine (Activision Blizzard)
Cyberpunk 2077 - REDengine 4 (CD Projekt Red)
Judgment - Dragon Engine (Sega/RGG Studio)
MH Rise - RE Engine (Capcom)
RDR2 - RAGE (Rockstar)
Rainbow Six Extraction - AnvilNext (Ubisoft)

No small number, to be sure, and pretty sure I didn't name every engine on Nvidia's list. And then there's Unreal Engine 5, which pulls a lot of other publishers into the frame.
 
tumblr_pvdnk1jXP91rpf3pso1_540.gif
 
I can try to explain it, but no promises that it'll be a good explanation.

For a start, the prospect of a handheld system with console-quality graphics has been the dream for a long time, especially at an affordable pricepoint. At 300 quid, that's a massive boon for a lot of people, especially for office workers or people who travel a lot. Unlike it's competitors at the time, it didn't need to be anchored down to a single TV most of the time and could be taken on the go. At the end of the day, you could simply put it back and continue on your couch. For a lot of people, that's huge. The games for the system were also very impressive for many people, especially consumers. A brand-new open-world Zelda game on the go? That's madness to a lot of people, you'd be insane to not pick that up.

It's worth reminding people that the novelty AND practicality of a hybrid system was huge in 2017 and still is to this day. Time hasn't been the kindest on the Switch's hardware itself, but the value prospect of the Switch itself is still nigh-unbeatable for most people on earth.

Oh I agree with you completely on the reasons why Switch was successful.

My post you quoted was responding to someone who was claiming the Switch success was because of its price point (not true), and that it’s price point was relatively inexpensive to other consoles on the market (not true)

The new model will be successful even at $499 like the other consoles. Because, like you said, its success is all the features it offers that the others can’t. (Basically portability option and Nintendo gaming)

I wrote (an attempt at) a brief explanation of the DLSS version thing here.

DLSS 3.0 is the first version of the tech suite that included frame gen as a feature, so sometimes when people say "DLSS 3" they mean upscaling plus frame generation. DLSS 3.5 is the version that added ray reconstruction. All versions have DLSS itself (the upscaler) as a feature, obviously.

Of these features, frame gen is the only one where the hardware support is not universal. Right now it's only supported on Ada-generation/40-series GPUs. But the rest of the features in the DLSS 3.x suite (the notable ones being the upscaler and the new ray reconstruction) are supported on all RTX GPUs. So that makes talking about "DLSS 3" support confusing.

T239's GPU is not Ada, it's Ampere. So by Nvidia's current definition of support, Drake would not be supported for it. But since it's a custom chip for one customer, and we're not really sure of the technical reality behind Nvidia's support decision, we don't know if Drake can do it.

Not to keep making this more confusing for others, iirc, it’s all about the tensor cores.

The reason Frame Generation is locked to 4000 gpus is because they have 4th gen cores.

All the other features of DLSS 3 and DLSS 3.5 can run on 2nd gen and 3rd gen tensor core gpus.

The new Switch being based on the Orin chip would presumably have 3rd gen cores like the 3000 series of Nvidia RTX gpus (ampere). But maybe it’s just semantics defining by Ampere vs Ada instead of tensor core gen :p

Also to throw a wrench into the already confusing mess is the rumor that t239 is an ampere/Ada hybrid…so who knows!
 
NVIDIA distinguishes between DLSS2 and DLSS3 (with FG).
Why do people think there is no DLSS FG with all the talk of using DLSS3.1?
Without the FG feature, I don't think they would appeal to DLSS3.
O9oTJej.jpg
 
So mind blowing with peoples who downplay the DLSS technology benefits (saying thats it's cheating). Switch 2 & DLSS (expecially 3.5 version minus Frame Generation) together likes matches made in heaven. Because of the power limitations of portable aka hybrid system unlikes consoles plug to the socket, this DLSS is so awesomely good for next gen Switch 👍
 
Last edited:
NVIDIA distinguishes between DLSS2 and DLSS3 (with FG).
Why do people think there is no DLSS FG with all the talk of using DLSS3.1?
Without the FG feature, I don't think they would appeal to DLSS3.
O9oTJej.jpg
Because Drake is inherently Ampere, and Nvidia doesn't support FG on Ampere.

That, and it probably wouldn't be to useful on a low power device anyway.
 
So, with DLSS, could a dev focus the time and GPU/console features on things like graphical effects, in game systems, number of things on screen etc… and aim for a lower resolution like 480p or something and then enable DLSS to bring that up to 720/1080p? So use more of the console power on in game stuff rather than the image itself if you get what I mean?
 
So mind blowing with peoples who downplay the DLSS technology benefits (saying thats it's cheating). Switch 2 & DLSS (expecially 3.5 version minus Frame Generation) together likes matches made in heaven. Because of the power limitations of portable aka hybrid system unlikes consoles plug to the socket, this DLSS is so awesomely good for next gen Switch 👍
I haven't seen anyone say that, but I trust you.

Game development is all about "cheating" and getting the most out of the hardware, since like Doom or before that. So really bad argument.
 
So, with DLSS, could a dev focus the time and GPU/console features on things like graphical effects, in game systems, number of things on screen etc… and aim for a lower resolution like 480p or something and then enable DLSS to bring that up to 720/1080p? So use more of the console power on in game stuff rather than the image itself if you get what I mean?
It might depend on what the developer wants to achieve, but "in theory" yes.

I do want to warn y'all right now, DLSS/FSR is being used as a crutch to excuse very bad optimisation. This is primarily a problem on PC (see Jedi Survivor and Forspoken) but this could apply to the Switch 2 if developers get lazy. Just because you have a lot of graphical effects and can bandaid it with DLSS, doesn't mean it'll excuse inconsistent framerates and (if Dynamic Upscaling with DLSS becomes a thing) image quality. Just keep this in mind for the future. It's happening with PC ports and
342.gif
 
I haven't seen anyone say that, but I trust you.

Game development is all about "cheating" and getting the most out of the hardware, since like Doom or before that. So really bad argument.
I think I read posts in several pages before that saying DLSS is some kind of cheating compare to the pure grunt likes PS5 & Xbox SX. Yup true, it's not cheating, it's optimising to the max every single pixel
 
The reveal will be Nintendo basically showing how current Switch games like BotW look and run better. That’s all they have to do.
Absolutely not, actually that's the opposite of what they have to do. That'd be just repeating the awful Wii U presentation where they showed Wii games running on a tablet. Nintendo has to reveal it by showing a new first-party game running on it and a handful of third-party games that can't run on Switch (a bit like Skyrim in the original Switch trailer). Marketing the system as some kind of iteration would create some confusion among consumers ("oh, it's just to run Switch games, but better, I don't need it, I can delay my purchase").

The reveal will have to convey four facts to the consumers:
  1. It's a new system, the sequel to the Switch
  2. Most games on it will be exclusives
  3. It can run much more demanding games than the Switch
  4. It can run your old Switch games (if it's BC, of course)
That's why the Super Nintendo Switch would be a good name, you could start the reveal trailer with a parallel with the NES>SNES situation.
 
Hmm I feel like they will come up with at least some marketing explanation why certain games have higher performance or better resolution than others. Especially if BC is a thing and not every game (likely most BC games, maybe even some new releases) would be using DLSS or other possible hardware features.

It could be a label with something as simple as "optimised / improved for Switch NG". Power will likely be not the focus overall but I can see them using comparison videos and such if they made games like for example BOTW look and run way better because it is a strong selling point.

Optimised versions of BC Games maybe even could be tied to a NSO subscription.
Native games will probably be somehow distinguishable, if not through the system UI, than via the eShop pages and box art, but that's orthogonal to any use of reconstruction. Any marketing of differences between platforms will just focus on the new hardware letting the game look better and not really get into the specifics of how it's doing that. It's also worth remembering that using DLSS will not be universal, probably especially among Switch games getting upgrades.

I don't see any reason upgrade patches would be tied to NSO, that just seems like a losing proposition. The smart move is to not charge directly for upgrade patches. Makes more sense to either fund them via DLC or just treat it as a marketing expense.
 
They take the Apple approach where they don't really market it.

Actually, that's not the Apple approach. Apple would build its own in-house solution and call it something like "Apple Magic."

So Nintendo doesn't really have to sell it because generally people won't care and will respond to all the awesome they see on screen.
They're partnered with NVIDIA, not Apple. Someone's gonna talk about it.
 
It might depend on what the developer wants to achieve, but "in theory" yes.

I do want to warn y'all right now, DLSS/FSR is being used as a crutch to excuse very bad optimisation. This is primarily a problem on PC (see Jedi Survivor and Forspoken) but this could apply to the Switch 2 if developers get lazy. Just because you have a lot of graphical effects and can bandaid it with DLSS, doesn't mean it'll excuse inconsistent framerates and (if Dynamic Upscaling with DLSS becomes a thing) image quality. Just keep this in mind for the future. It's happening with PC ports and
342.gif
LMAO this is exactly what's gonna happen isn't it.
 
All they have to do is say « This is the next generation of Nintendo Switch. It will be able to run those games (3rd party reel of impressive PS5/XSS games that couldn’t run on Switch). »

Throw in their own exclusive games + BC and it’s done.
 
Can someone explain DLSS to me and how it impacts Nintendo's next system as someone who knows nothing about that kinda stuff?
Imagine a 2 year old who knows nothing about game development.

The second they utter the word “Mario” Shigeru Miyamoto appears from the GPU (generating people unit) and creates a game right in front of their eyes.

That’s DLSS
 
Last edited:
All they have to do is say « This is the next generation of Nintendo Switch. It will be able to run those games (3rd party reel of impressive PS5/XSS games that couldn’t run on Switch). »

Throw in their own exclusive games + BC and it’s done.
I'm thankful that there's less concerns about the games when compared to the build-up to the launch of the Switch 1. There was genuine concern at the time that the third parties would still avoid it like the plague.

I'm curious as to how much other third parties will jump on board now. Hell, I want to know if Nintendo will do more second-party projects.

Regardless, we're gonna be eating good.
 
I thought UP was for 8K dick waving. even if it's for nintendo, it's pretty damn aggressive. though being an integer scale of 4k might help
General consensus seems to be that UP is still of acceptable quality at 4K but gets pretty ugly at lower output resolution targets.

I'm sure that won't stop some devs from attempting UP 1440p or even beyond that (540p to 4K omega performance mode, anyone?).
 
0
they never said this


Nvidia, AMD, Intel, and Epic only refers to one axis for some reason. it does get confusing
  • Quality - 68%
  • Balance - 58%
  • Performance - 50%
  • Ultra Performance - 33.33%
That's because those are the "scale" resolution. That's how scale is measured by convention, per axis. Eg. a map drawn at 1:10,000 scale will represent lines and distances (eg roads or the gap between two points) at 1/10,000 their true length but the area of the map will only be 1/100,000,000 of the land area it covers.
 
0
Please read this new, consolidated staff post before posting.

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


Back
Top Bottom