• 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
rinku said:
...You're not suggesting frame rates higher than 60 right? Don't think I'm ready for 120 Zelda haha
Click to expand...
Probably the fact that not everyone, including many people here, thinks that 4K60 with DLSS would be viable due to the "cost" of DLSS in terms of frame time.

If I might speculate, isn't it at least theoretically possible that a specific, Nvidia designed device, using software engineered alongside Nvidia, could possibly achieve 4K DLSS in less frame time than an equivalent PC?
 
lexony said:
They talk about it 20 minutes in the DF Direct and will also make good points that go in more realistic directions.

Edit: Rich says that the current situation maybe could be like if you‘d hear "the Switch can run Witcher 3" without seeing how the game actually looks like on the console. It sounds impressive, impossible even but when you see the actual result then you get a better idea how and why it works and where the cutbacks were made. Same could be true for that Matrix Demo. I think it‘s a very good point.
Click to expand...
People have said that the demo had graphics comparables to PS5/XSX, which is something that 100% isnt the case for The Witcher 3 on Switch. I think it will be a middle point between TW3 on Switch and 1:1 PS5/XSX version
 
Rhythm Shift said:
temp-Imagev8-FWTx.jpg
Click to expand...
B E S P O K E
 
qwerp said:
Its all very exciting, but it's best to temper expectations
Click to expand...

If the conversation is just about impossible ports, I really don’t think we need to temper any expectations.

Impossible ports are cut down, and in the case of Switch titles, I found most of them too ugly to enjoy. I don’t think the results will be as bad this time around, but they will be compromised. If Nintendo wasn’t trying to stay within arm’s reach of the competition this time around they’d be making a huge mistake.
 
Hey all - let’s not share DF direct content early. Heads up is probably okay, but details aren’t. The DF crew do good work, and we should respect their Patreon program. It’ll all be out in like 12 hours anyway.

The discussion is good, nuanced, and deserves full context.
 
0
rinku said:
...You're not suggesting frame rates higher than 60 right? Don't think I'm ready for 120 Zelda haha
Click to expand...
100fps+ would only be possible if they can make DLSS3 work, frame generation is basically almost a x2 boost in frames compared to DLSS (they are 'fake frames' though so it's only viable if at the start you already have 60fps)
 
Concernt said:
Tensor Cores are for AI tasks like upscaling, and aren't dedicated at all. 😅

RT Cores do RT, and I believe it has 12? I think?
Click to expand...

Yeah, 12 RT cores and 48 tensor cores.

Concernt said:
Probably the fact that not everyone, including many people here, thinks that 4K60 with DLSS would be viable due to the "cost" of DLSS in terms of frame time.

If I might speculate, isn't it at least theoretically possible that a specific, Nvidia designed device, using software engineered alongside Nvidia, could possibly achieve 4K DLSS in less frame time than an equivalent PC?
Click to expand...

This is something I really want to know and see - how DLSS could potentially be improved in a console environment.
 
lexony said:
They talk about it 20 minutes in the DF Direct and will also make good points that go in more realistic directions.

Edit: Rich says that the current situation maybe could be like if you‘d hear "the Switch can run Witcher 3" without seeing how the game actually looks like on the console. It sounds impressive, impossible even but when you see the actual result then you get a better idea how and why it works and where the cutbacks were made. Same could be true for that Matrix Demo. I think it‘s a very good point.
Click to expand...
I was thinking something similar. If the gap is similar to the one between PS4 Witcher 3 and Switch Witcher 3, but this time Swtich 2 has respectable resolution and framerate thanks to DLSS, thats a pretty good result.
 
BreakAtmo said:
Yeah, 12 RT cores and 48 tensor cores.



This is something I really want to know same see - how DLSS could potentially be improved in a console environment.
Click to expand...
Just like FSR2 in many games, it can be finetuned to help the game's art style rather than compromise it. When scrutinized to the bone, it's in the developer's best interest to make it unnoticeable to the 95% of eyes.
 
Blue Monty said:
People have said that the demo had graphics comparables to PS5/XSX, which is something that 100% isnt the case for The Witcher 3 on Switch. I think it will be a middle point between TW3 on Switch and 1:1 PS5/XSX version
Click to expand...
The Witcher 3 was feature complete and visually similar, maybe not comparable but also not a different version to PS4 and co.

I don‘t think that is the point being made here. I believe in the comparable claims in the sense that the devs saw it as impressive. Though as long as we have only the claim "Nintendo NG console runs the Matrix Demo comparable to PS5/XSX" you could interpret in any way the power of that device and while you could might think at first that this confirms that it is a super powerful console, it‘s actually what makes the actual specs more uncertain.

The Witcher 3 was still impressive when we saw it running, it‘s just that it was way clearer why. The same will be true for Switch 2.
 
Last edited:
lexony said:
The Witcher 3 was feature complete and visually similar, maybe not comparable but also not a different version to PS4 and co.

I don‘t think that is the point being made here. I very much believe the comparable claims and I think that the next Switch 2 will be more powerful. Though as long as we have only the claim "Nintendo NG console runs the Matrix Demo comparable to PS5/XSX" you could interpret in any way the power of that device and while you could might think at first that this confirms that it is a super powerful console, it‘s actually what makes the actual specs more uncertain.

The Witcher 3 was still impressive when we saw it running, it‘s just that it was way clearer why. The same will be true for Switch 2.
Click to expand...
That's been the theme to most of the Switch ports, even games you may consider on "the bubble".

No Mans Sky dev considered making a Switch exclusive version on its own branch but ultimately kept it in the same universe.
Even Cities Skylines which sadly did not receive updates past the 2 expansions it came with due to CPU limtations essentially received the PC version.

I don't expect this to change with the successor, and we'll probably get even better conversions if , as assumed, the gap will be smaller especially vis-a-vis multiplats that target several hardware profiles already.
 
GigaUltraMoon said:
We're probably reaching the point where with an explosion of interest driven by legitimate leaks and bad actors spreading as much misinformation as they can both online and through actual outlets, Nintendo may be pressured to take some form of action and address the NG situation before things get out of hand if they don't already have a plan to officially announce it within the next month or so - similar to how they had to very quickly shut down the OLED/Pro rumour once it took off following Bloomberg's reporting in case it affected investor confidence
Click to expand...
I don't know about that. Nintendo shot down those rumors because they were ultimately false. This case, however, bares a lot of legitimacy and if Nintendo were to respond to even the bad actors, it could give away Redrakted NG's existence before they want to reveal it. I expect them to simply ignore it, even if investors/shareholders/interviewers bring it up, until the time is right.
 
Alovon11 said:
Security for the actual showcasing of the demos (Assumingly running through one of them without the technical deep dive) is rumored to have been lax, potentially allowing some members of press in uninvited.
Click to expand...
I hope Agent 47 had a good time.
 
Dekuman said:
That's been the theme to most of the Switch ports, even games you may consider on "the bubble".

No Mans Sky dev considered making a Switch exclusive version on its own branch but ultimately kept it in the same universe.
Even Cities Skylines which sadly did not receive updates past the 2 expansions it came with due to CPU limtations essentially received the PC version.

I don't expect this to change with the successor, and we'll probably get even better conversions if , as assumed, the gap will be smaller especially vis-a-vis multiplats that target several hardware profiles already.
Click to expand...
Yeah I think that‘s why BC could be a Killer Feature for Switch 2. While I imagine there will be some Tegra X1 compatibility mode, I hope that there will be for devs an easy way to "convert" Switch into Switch 2 games to use the full power of the new console.

Playing the even "inferior" Switch Ports of No Man Sky or Witcher 3 in 60fps, better Anti Aliasing and resolution in Handheld mode would be just amazing.
 
D36 said:
I don't know about that. Nintendo shot down those rumors because they were ultimately false. This case, however, bares a lot of legitimacy and if Nintendo were to respond to even the bad actors, it could give away Redrakted NG's existence before they want to reveal it. I expect them to simply ignore it, even if investors/shareholders/interviewers bring it up, until the time is right.
Click to expand...
Just wanna say that the above circumstances preclude an announcement this year.
 
0
Blue Monty said:
100fps+ would only be possible if they can make DLSS3 work, frame generation is basically almost a x2 boost in frames compared to DLSS (they are 'fake frames' though so it's only viable if at the start you already have 60fps)
Click to expand...
Not at 1080p. Let's not forget 1080p dlss frame time cost is something like a third of 4k (something like that check the DDE6000 for more details I forgot the exact numbers).
I think 1080p120fps is doable with only Super Resolution.
 
The Switch 2 will be a powerful hybrid mobile device but fall short in raw power of the current-gen 'cutting-edge' stationary consoles cause that's just how physics works, considering the expected price bracket and power consumption. It's just a fundamentally unfair comparison. I think most people understand this so the constant 'will not match raw power of big machines' feels like it's addressing a claim very few people are making. I think folks are more interested in the end result, after all why do we care about power, GPU features, CPU cores, etc. in the first place? To get good looking and running games and acceptable ports. We know Nintendo games will look stunning here, and we are in a better place than the Switch impossible ports thanks to DLSS.

The end result will have 'comparable' looking games similar to how Ratchet & Clank on Steam Deck looks comparable to the PS5 version, Nier Automata on Switch is comparable to the PS4 version, and so on. 'Comparable' here just means 'worthy of comparison', where the Switch 2 version will good enough that seriously impacts your decision regarding which port you'd purchase. Some current Switch ports (Bloodstained...*) are so bad they're almost not worth considering at all, while some are so good (13 Sentinels) they're a no-brainer if you have an interest in portable play.

Switch 2 feels like a miniaturized current-gen console considering its estimated power and featureset (what the Matrix demo is essentially communicating), I think Nintendo designed it to get a fair share of good looking multi-platform ports to last another 7+ years. I anticipate some developers like Capcom to make it the 'minimum' target for some of their current gen games, aiming for a solid framerate and resolution and scaling up on the stationary consoles.

* I bought Bloodstained anyway.
 
I wonder if we will get release or reveal info. Considering Nintendo want it out sooner than Late 2024 according to Eurogamer. If they know that, other people know that and other people might expand on that.

0.0
 
Thraktor said:
The discussion about expandable storage is definitely more interesting in light of the Matrix demo, as there's no way that's going to run off a 100MB/s MicroSD card. Of course for the demo it would have been running off internal storage, but when you're telling developers that your console is going to be able to pull off the fast asset streaming your competitors can do, they'd be pretty pissed off to later find out it only applies to built-in storage.

The more I think about it, the more sense CFexpress Type A makes. The spec was just updated to support PCIe 4.0, meaning up to 2GB/s read speeds for Type A, with new cards expected next year. The cost to implement from Nintendo is near zero, with it being a straight-forward single-lane PCIe setup. T239 already has PCIe 4.0 lanes to spare, so just wire one up to the card slot and you're done. The cards themselves are just M.2 NVMe drives in a plastic case, so they can rely on existing R&D to drive increased sizes and reduced costs over the generation. It's also, importantly, the only card format faster than 300MB/s that has actually achieved any meaningful market share.

SD Express is dead in the water, with no indication that it will ever see widespread support, given the camera industry has committed strongly to CFe. It's also technically worse than CFe in almost every way. Devices need to support both the old SD modes and SD Express's PCIe interface, which means Nintendo would need to add an extra I/O chip which would add cost and complexity and take up motherboard space. On the card side, this means the SD Express cards need custom controllers, they can't use off-the-shelf NVMe controllers like CFe cards do. This means they're manufactured at far lower volumes, therefore being more expensive, and are made on older manufacturing processes, so they'll consume more power. The only SD Express controller I'm aware of on the market is manufactured on 28nm, while most NVMe controllers are on TSMC's 12nm process, and Samsung's newest entry-level OEM SSD uses a controller manufactured on their 5nm process.

SD Express doesn't even win on backwards compatibility. It breaks compatibility with UHS-II cards, which have been reasonably common in the camera market. This is part of the reason there's no interest in adopting them in that industry. Meanwhile, Sony is shipping cameras with combo CFe Type A & UHS-II SD slots, which have better backwards compatibility with SD cards than an SD Express slot would.

UFS cards would be nice, but I feel like the time has passed. They have many of the benefits of CFe, being an existing standard in a plastic case, but there's no movement on the standard, and CFe Type A now has a decent performance advantage on the (unreleased) v3.0 cards, with 2GB/s vs 1.2GB/s. It would require a bigger push than I can imagine from Nintendo, particularly as the only thing they'd need to do with CFe is get a manufacturing partner on board to have reasonably-priced branded cards available at launch.

Speaking of which, one thing I've noticed is that Sandisk, who have traditionally been Nintendo's partner on these cards, don't currently sell CFe Type A cards, despite being probably the biggest manufacturers of Type B cards. This means there wouldn't be any conflict of selling low-margin cards to Nintendo customers while trying to keep selling high margin cards to pro photographers. They could enter the Type A market at much lower margins with the guaranteed sales volume to justify it, while still charging crazy mark-up on their Type B line to pros who are willing to pay that much.



This isn't true. They are a "General Member" of the SD Association, which entitles them to use SD cards, but doesn't give them voting rights on specifications.
Click to expand...
Nice. The nvme dream is alive!

But I think it was @Skittzo who told me they consume a lot more power. Wouldn't that also be the same for CFe?
 
Thraktor said:
The discussion about expandable storage is definitely more interesting in light of the Matrix demo, as there's no way that's going to run off a 100MB/s MicroSD card. Of course for the demo it would have been running off internal storage, but when you're telling developers that your console is going to be able to pull off the fast asset streaming your competitors can do, they'd be pretty pissed off to later find out it only applies to built-in storage.

The more I think about it, the more sense CFexpress Type A makes. The spec was just updated to support PCIe 4.0, meaning up to 2GB/s read speeds for Type A, with new cards expected next year. The cost to implement from Nintendo is near zero, with it being a straight-forward single-lane PCIe setup. T239 already has PCIe 4.0 lanes to spare, so just wire one up to the card slot and you're done. The cards themselves are just M.2 NVMe drives in a plastic case, so they can rely on existing R&D to drive increased sizes and reduced costs over the generation. It's also, importantly, the only card format faster than 300MB/s that has actually achieved any meaningful market share.

SD Express is dead in the water, with no indication that it will ever see widespread support, given the camera industry has committed strongly to CFe. It's also technically worse than CFe in almost every way. Devices need to support both the old SD modes and SD Express's PCIe interface, which means Nintendo would need to add an extra I/O chip which would add cost and complexity and take up motherboard space. On the card side, this means the SD Express cards need custom controllers, they can't use off-the-shelf NVMe controllers like CFe cards do. This means they're manufactured at far lower volumes, therefore being more expensive, and are made on older manufacturing processes, so they'll consume more power. The only SD Express controller I'm aware of on the market is manufactured on 28nm, while most NVMe controllers are on TSMC's 12nm process, and Samsung's newest entry-level OEM SSD uses a controller manufactured on their 5nm process.

SD Express doesn't even win on backwards compatibility. It breaks compatibility with UHS-II cards, which have been reasonably common in the camera market. This is part of the reason there's no interest in adopting them in that industry. Meanwhile, Sony is shipping cameras with combo CFe Type A & UHS-II SD slots, which have better backwards compatibility with SD cards than an SD Express slot would.

UFS cards would be nice, but I feel like the time has passed. They have many of the benefits of CFe, being an existing standard in a plastic case, but there's no movement on the standard, and CFe Type A now has a decent performance advantage on the (unreleased) v3.0 cards, with 2GB/s vs 1.2GB/s. It would require a bigger push than I can imagine from Nintendo, particularly as the only thing they'd need to do with CFe is get a manufacturing partner on board to have reasonably-priced branded cards available at launch.

Speaking of which, one thing I've noticed is that Sandisk, who have traditionally been Nintendo's partner on these cards, don't currently sell CFe Type A cards, despite being probably the biggest manufacturers of Type B cards. This means there wouldn't be any conflict of selling low-margin cards to Nintendo customers while trying to keep selling high margin cards to pro photographers. They could enter the Type A market at much lower margins with the guaranteed sales volume to justify it, while still charging crazy mark-up on their Type B line to pros who are willing to pay that much.



This isn't true. They are a "General Member" of the SD Association, which entitles them to use SD cards, but doesn't give them voting rights on specifications.
Click to expand...

I made a post about CF Express type A a couple months ago, and if my memory serves, I was feeling fairly confident, but then not so if it would be a viable storage solution for Nintendo.

One thing I do wonder though is could Nintendo subsidize those cards to keep costs down in exchange for more digital sales, which do benefit them greatly? Would potentially be a great incentive to get people into the eShop on top of what they already do with digital sales, plus their voucher program.

As others said, CF Express type A are expensive, but given their primary market is high end photography, and cinematography, that is to be expected. Nintendo entering that storage medium may cut those prices down considerably. As someone said, a rock and a hard place problem, which is a perfect example I think.

SD cards are too slow, SD express does not really exist, and 2230 m.2 nvme is too big. The only other option I could see is non-expandable storage of 512-1024GB, which ultimately wouldn’t surprise me if CF Express type A isn't feasible. Could be wrong, but those are the two solutions I see happening.
 
0
I dunno if Nintendo revealed the release date at the event. That's probably something kept very close to the chest
 
0
D36 said:
Three pages behind. What'd I miss while I was asleep?
Click to expand...
You missed me trying to speak Snooker Sonic into existence :whistle:

---


Right, I should probably say something a bit more on topic...
Ah, external storage again. Well, pickings are slim. If it ends up being NVMe based, so be it. I'm just glad that we've settled on the internal storage most likely being eUFS, because every time NVMe is suggested for internal storage, I have an aneurysm.
 
TLZ said:
Nice. The nvme dream is alive!

But I think it was @Skittzo who told me they consume a lot more power. Wouldn't that also be the same for CFe?
Click to expand...
I don't recall doing that but it sounds like something I'd say. As far as I understand it yeah most nvme drives are fairly power hungry. A lot more so than emmc.
 
About the Nintendo Switch 2 (NG? New Switch? I'm not sure what to use for this one, lol) - I don't think it will have raw, or maybe not even near Series S raw power, or TFlops, or anything of the sorts. That's where Nintendo is lucky though - they don't need to. With DLSS and other robust upscaling techniques that are easily deployable on the Switch 2 (FSR 2/3 which i don't think works on this gen's Switch?), they can reach similar fidelity that of a Series S console without needing all the power it has and with less cutbacks than it takes to port games from current gen to the Switch (like the fabled Hogwarts Legacy port...)

I think the biggest problems of the Switch 2 might not be raw CPU/GPU power but the likes of bandwidth and RAM capacity. With games making better use of quicker SSDs and heavy assets a lot of times being allocated to RAM (with the need for these increasingly expedentiously in the last years), these might be key things Nintendo has to focus to ensure a better experience for developers on the platform. Regardless, i'm sure they're fully aware of this, and i'm betting they've seen to mitigate these issues in the best of manners. Excited to see what they have on their sleeves.
 
Simbinha said:
About the Nintendo Switch 2 (NG? New Switch? I'm not sure what to use for this one, lol) - I don't think it will have raw, or maybe not even near Series S raw power, or TFlops, or anything of the sorts. That's where Nintendo is lucky though - they don't need to. With DLSS and other robust upscaling techniques that are easily deployable on the Switch 2 (FSR 2/3 which i don't think works on this gen's Switch?), they can reach similar fidelity that of a Series S console without needing all the power it has and with less cutbacks than it takes to port games from current gen to the Switch (like the fabled Hogwarts Legacy port...)

I think the biggest problems of the Switch 2 might not be raw CPU/GPU power but the likes of bandwidth and RAM capacity. With games making better use of quicker SSDs and heavy assets a lot of times being allocated to RAM (with the need for these increasingly expedentiously in the last years), these might be key things Nintendo has to focus to ensure a better experience for developers on the platform. Regardless, i'm sure they're fully aware of this, and i'm betting they've seen to mitigate these issues in the best of manners. Excited to see what they have on their sleeves.
Click to expand...
The bandwidth issue is going to be very interesting to see how it affects texture and effect quality, the series S is already half that of the bigger consoles and the Switch 2 is half the Series S.
 
0
TLZ said:
Nice. The nvme dream is alive!

But I think it was @Skittzo who told me they consume a lot more power. Wouldn't that also be the same for CFe?
Click to expand...
That was me, although I wasn't specifically talking about CFexpress Cards.
Dakhil said:
Keep in mind that M.2 2230 SSDs can consume a non-trivial amount of power when active. And that's important if loading/running video games from the expandable external flash storage. One example is the Toshiba BG3 series, which can consume up to 3.3 W when active.
Click to expand...
Edit: Angelbird's CFexpress Type A Cards can consume a max of 2.4 W. (I don't know if that's representative of all the CFexpress Type A Cards currently on the market.)
 
Last edited:
Lancelot said:
It's a fat PS4 with a modern CPU and dedicated hardware for image upscaling and raytracing, as well as the bonuses being modern offers. All while handheld, that's it I think.
Click to expand...
So essentially expect something along the lines of a Steam Deck but with further capabilities for tech like RT, hopefully the battery life fares better than the Deck and ESPECIALLY the ROG Ally. (What even happened to that thing? Feels like it vanished after a week.)
 
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