• 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.
  • Furukawa Speaks! We discuss the announcement of the Nintendo Switch Successor and our June Direct Predictions on the new episode of the Famiboards Discussion Club! Check it out here!

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

Reader mode
lemonfresh said:
etanPZqa_400x400.jpg
Click to expand...
Sony fanboys in 1889: "Nintendo’s playing cards are of feeble force, they stand in peril of ruin."
 
Guys, do you think Nintendo could get 512 cuda cores and 4 A78 cpu core on a SoC for $2? Honestly if they could, they absolutely should do that, they'd be able to sell $50 Gameboys again but on par with a PS4 lol.
 
Since people are discussing old news, here's an old video that, without much speculation, demonstrates how much power we can expect, at minimum, for the Switch 2.



So, if switch 2 have the same clock speed as Switch 1 (768 MHz GPU and 1 GHz CPU), then Switch 2 will be 2.4 TFlops.

That is stronger than a Ps4.
 
ILikeFeet said:
that's sorta my point. a small studio who threw everything at the wall can't really be a picture of optimization. sometimes, optimization is turning settings, framerate, and/or resolution down
Click to expand...
That's no longer optimizing but outright disabling features, keep in mind... The original targets by Epic for UE5 on PS5 were 1440p and 30 fps. If they didn't try to push for 60 FPS so much Series S could have hit 720-1080p with ease, which is very close to what they suggested. UE5 just isn't meant for high framerates, it seems.
 
ItWasMeantToBe19 said:
Normal dev vs. literally Epic.
Click to expand...
so? they shipped a game with all the features and the performance to boot. yes, they're the makers of the engine, but they dealt with the same constraints as Ascendant. not every dev can be Epic, Nintendo, Coalition, or Naughty Dog, but when you're not you have to make within your means. and that sometimes mean not throwing everything at the wall

Lancelot said:
That's no longer optimizing but outright disabling features... Keep in mind, the original targets by Epic for UE5 on PS5 were 1440p and 30 fps. If they didn't try to push for 60 FPS so much Series could have hit 720-1080p with ease, which is very close to what they recommended. UE5 just isn't meant for high framerates, it seems.
Click to expand...
and disabling features is an optimization tool, I believe. there comes a point where you can't just sprinkle some magic on code and get everything running well. if you could, then you're in the upper echelons of devs, like those I mentioned. and even then, they turned things down from their higher quality souces
 
carbvan said:
People who know more about the T239 I summon thee:



What the fuck is goin on here lmao

Oh whoops I didn't see P4blo posted this. Reddit embeds are broken for me.
Click to expand...

"Hey Nvidia? We know we've been working with you on this new chip for a while and we just showed the fruits of our labor off to devs and the press a few weeks ago. We're at most a year away from launch but we just decided at this very moment that we want to throw everything out and start over with a significantly cheaper chip for the sake of getting chips for $1, because that's a realistic price for SoCs. Also it'll help us keep our reputation for being cheapskates"

What in the fresh hell lmao. This is an even worse fanfic than the 4chan T254 one.
 
JoshuaJSlone said:
I was just trying to respond to your initial goalposts, man.

But in the case of Aveum, the Series S game already seems to be "no longer what you'd call an acceptable state" by your definition. If we're allowed to go unacceptable, and that game can get as low as 768×436@60 before FSR2 apparently, then Switch 2 portable doing something like 640x360@30 before DLSS might be feasible with no worse if not better image quality.
Click to expand...
There's absolutely no way a (PS4-like) Switch 2 portable could hit that resolution internally, it'd have to be at least twice as low plus lower settings. Just saying, but the math doesn't add up in there, and that's without including CPU and memory bandwidth bottlenecks which are absolutely a thing in that game. T239 will be legitimately stronger for this reason.
 
BDGAME said:
Since people are discussing old news, here's an old video that, without much speculation, demonstrates how much power we can expect, at minimum, for the Switch 2.



So, if switch 2 have the same clock speed as Switch 1 (768 MHz GPU and 1 GHz CPU), then Switch 2 will be 2.4 TFlops.

That is stronger than a Ps4.
Click to expand...

this is an awesome video. i cannot keep up with all this tech stuff so to get a breakdown is awesome.
 
Turns out there's plenty of info buried in the attachments of that PDF, including hardware info -- for Microsoft/Xbox. I do not care about those, so I won't be passing it along. But if anyone's interested, download PX7011 and look at the attachments (which are mostly more PDFs).
 
D36 said:
I may be the last person to speak with regards to fidelity, but while Xenoblade 3's performance can suffer here and there, I genuinely believe that it's a competently polished experience. I understand waiting for a patch, but I say give it a go, it's one of the best looking games on the Switch.

Edit: Typo
Click to expand...

Look I supported the game at launch, I’m just not keen on playing it twice, so I’m waiting. Worst case I play it on Switch 2 with no boost of any kind, but despite what people say, the resolution jump will be worth the wait for me. There’s a very large difference between 4K or 1440p and what that game is doing. Even a solid 1080p in handheld would be wonderful.
 
ILikeFeet said:
so? they shipped a game with all the features and the performance to boot. yes, they're the makers of the engine, but they dealt with the same constraints as Ascendant. not every dev can be Epic, Nintendo, Coalition, or Naughty Dog, but when you're not you have to make within your means. and that sometimes mean not throwing everything at the wall


and disabling features is an optimization tool, I believe. there comes a point where you can't just sprinkle some magic on code and get everything running well. if you could, then you're in the upper echelons of devs, like those I mentioned. and even then, they turned things down from their higher quality souces
Click to expand...
That's understandable, but that's also no longer UE5 which is what the whole issue is about. You'll essentially have UE4 all over again, which kind of defeats the point of this new version (which they wanted to use). Remember the game also runs at 60s and Epic themselves don't recommend doing that, Ascendant really prioritized graphics and performance for the sake of resolution... It's what it is, but they definitely put in work to have their fancy graphics and smooth frames, two things Unreal AAA developers would like to have in their future games.
 
0
carbvan said:
Ghostsonplanets keeps posting. Why isn't he talking here???
image.png
image.png
Click to expand...
Maybe people who genuinely believe the T232 thing shouldn't talk about it here. It's so painfully fake.
Think about it. Nintendo just showed off what they're considering to be "final specs" at Gamescon. You're telling me they are this late into the R&D process and decided to ditch T239 for a significantly less powerful one, even though dev kits have been sent out to major studios already and Nintendo's own development teams have been developing for T239 as a target for quite a while now? If this genuinely happened, it'd essentially mean they're starting over from scratch. It'd be a terrible option for both Nintendo and Nvidia.
 
T232 is Atlan. Nvidia cancelled Atlan and replaced it with Thor, which was announced last September.

It's not suddenly going to be the chip for Switch 2 releasing next year.

A 'lower number' on the SoC model name does not indicate a 'lesser version' of a chip. We've brought up other model numbers like T236, the leaked files have little to no context about these and there's nothing related to Nintendo.
 
TechnicalTip6578 said:
how's it fake when it's literally coming from activision themselves though? not distrusting you nate but i'm just asking
Click to expand...
The ABK stuff is old & has been discussed to the point of exhaustion months ago & wasn't the content I was referring to.

The Reddit post citing a Korean translation is obvious bullshit.
 
Maxrunner said:
Activision released switch 2 specs?
Click to expand...
No. Some news sources recently posted clickbait articles about information that has already been public for quite a while. One of these was a quote from Activision saying they expected Switch NG to match PS4 and Xbox One in terms of power. I think this was said before they had even seen NG.
 
bossmeran said:
Isn't that a good thing, then people will be surprised when it's more powerful than they think. Y'all care too much what randoms on the internet think.
Click to expand...
No, It isn’t a good thing. Remember, a big part of the Wii U’s failure was the irreparable two years of negative momentum that preceded it. That’s a situation they’ll want to avoid, and one that fans won’t want to relive. Saying it was “on par with PS360” didn’t help it at all. It was considerably more powerful than that, and while games such as Bayonetta 2, BOTW, XCX, Mario Kart 8, and Super Mario 3D World proved that, it wasn’t able to recover from the terrible perceptions created around it. This is part of the reason why Directs existed at all - to reclaim control of their narrative, rather than leave it to industry politicians, parasites, and other bad faith operators, or trust them to tell the truth.

A new Super Mario flagship title is an industry EVENT, but “Super Mario in HD” wasn’t enough, not even the follow-up to a 30m-selling game, because many saw NSMBWii HD, not meaningful advancement. Going with LOZ: Wind Waker HD (a GameCube title) did nothing for it, or the series - It didn’t say “more gameplay possibilities” at a time it needed to, so, by the time we had a first look of BOTW in 2014, they had already realised they need to move on from the Wii U because it was DONE. Similarly, Saying the Switch is a “portable X360” is wild because X360 could never have UE4, for one, and we’ve just seen how RDR1 (a game built for that system) performs so much better in portable mode alone… But pitching it as “a portable XB1/PS4 at a tenth of the power consumption”, THEN showing the Elemental Demo (as Nvidia did when showing Nintendo) made worlds of difference - It’s the difference between support from some developers and none at all. It gives you an insight into what kind of games you can expect to play on it. Switch had a lot of XB1/PS4 ports, rather than PS360 ones, as well as games which couldn’t be done on PS360. The successor aspires to PS5/XS titles, therefore it’s a portable PS5/XS. Elemental Demo in 4K wouldn’t have cut it - There’s a reason why Nintendo made a statement to developers with the Matrix Awakens Demo on targeted successor specs.

If they had showed RDR2, for example, the response from developers would’ve been “Oh, whoop-Dee-freakin’-doo, you can now run a game which exists on 2013 hardware”, and you would’ve been lucky to get one golf clap for it. Maybe a half-one in the face, on a good day. I made a point of choosing that game as my example, because its visual presentation was highly lauded, even now… but it was still a title for decade-old hardware. This is why I’m forever saying that any talk about a prospective 202X successor in relation to “PS4(Pro)” performance is garbage, unimpressive and so sub-par industry standards it’s unreal. That isn’t at all hyperbolic, it’s the stone cold truth, and pretending that this is going to be great or remotely exciting “for Nintendo” just stinks of the kind of Wii era condescension one expects from precious hellsites that think Nintendo employees deliver crack-in-donuts to other studios. “More PS4 ports” isn’t going to grow their success - RDR3 should be the aspiration. Better than last-gen performance CP2077 (with RT) should be the aspiration. The next Witcher title should be an expectation. Anybody telling you to curb this much of an expectation is in denial of the reality of where Nintendo actually are, and where they’ll need to be, as well as ignorant of what’s been happening in the mobile tech scene since the beginning of the pandemic.

BTW, As far as portables are concerned, we have actual RT-capable systems and SoCs in the S22 Ultra (Exynos 2200), Steam Deck, ROGA, and the iPhone 15 Series (A17) to look at. For home consoles, we have the XSS, and thanks to DLSS, architecture, and a concept called “tech disruption”, we can even look at the PS5/XSX, too. The industry has moved on from the PS4, while Nintendo themselves have already made games which hold their own against and surpass it. It’s an outgoing system. It doesn’t hold up anymore in the mobile space, even. Thankfully, Nintendo understands that perception matters, and that’s why they’re not talking about a backwards-thinking, unambitious, pathetic “PS4(Pro) performance and more of its ports”.
 
This thread somehow manages to recognize when something is bait but still latch on and discuss it for pages on end, it makes this thread unbearable to read sometimes
 
Reader mode
You must log in or register to reply here.
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