• Hey everyone, staff have documented a list of banned content and subject matter that we feel are not consistent with site values, and don't make sense to host discussion of on Famiboards. This list (and the relevant reasoning per item) is viewable here.
  • Do you have audio editing experience and want to help out with the Famiboards Discussion Club Podcast? If so, we're looking for help and would love to have you on the team! Just let us know in the Podcast Thread if you are interested!
  • General system instability
    🚧 We apologise for the recent server issues. The site may be unavaliable while we investigate the problem. 🚧

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

Reader mode
P4bl0 said:
Yeah I'm on it, please send me the company names you want me to look for screens



Fake we had notable users confirming NG is not the code name.
Click to expand...

Innolux,Optronics, Sharp,Samsung Display,AUO...

Perhaps other users can make a better insight.
And They may not pass by Nintendo´s factory either



casualreader said:
Back to this. Don't want to be a buzzkiller so I'll say it just once. I see no such records in the - paid - database I consult. Have you given a link to your source that I missed maybe?
Although the HS codes (chapter 85 and 95) seem broadly in line with the product category (electronic components and videogames), I am very surprised the descriptions are that explicit. I mean reporters can use confidentiality even and appear in a special category if they want, with other classified trade (generally at the bottom of the chapter or in chapter 98-99).
Just putting it out there, as I don't want to say it is false information.
Click to expand...
This one
 
Neoxon said:
And now we have another rumor.
www.resetera.com

[Rumor] Switch 2 codenamed "NG", two SKUs, September 2024 release Rumor

The info comes from the same person that the past few months has provided The Snitch with details and screenshots of Rise of the Ronin, which he went on to post on his Discord channel. On top of that, he was also the one to inform The Snitch about the development of a God of War: Ragnarok DLC...
www.resetera.com www.resetera.com
  • September 2024 launch
  • $450 for standard, $400 for digital-only
  • NG is indeed the code name
Click to expand...
Obvious bullshit
 
Vash_the_Stampede said:
Exactly. I think 12SM is enough and Nintendo realized they need to run it at a higher frequency, enabled by a better node.
Click to expand...
So you think Nintendo, Nvidia and Samsung all looked at the 8NM node, saw the power behaviors for products made on that node, looked at their own power requirements, decided to make a chip that was much too big to fit those requirements, and then nobody at any of those three companies said "hey, uh, this probably won't work on this node, why are you doing this?"

It's not realistic that they made such a costly and critical error. There's a lot of people and engineers these things go through before they're physically made, and it would be strange if any of them allowed this product to make it as far as it did if there was such a critical issue.


What's much, much more likely is that T239 was never an 8nm product, since we have no real verifiable data suggesting so.
 
Bonejack said:
That's another thing Nintendo won't ever do.

It's either "full" BC (physical and digital up to ~98% of all Switch games) or simply no BC.
Click to expand...
Why do you say there is no way nintendo would do that when what's being discussed is a digital only SKU? Assuming nintendo has the software side of backwards compatibility figured out why would they make the digital only model be unable to play digital Switch games?
 
Raccoon said:
I know that part of the pricing difference between digital and physical models is the assumption that digital models will yield higher margins, but at point of sale how could cutting a tiny cartridge slot justify a 50 dollar difference?
Click to expand...

I mean, pricing logic isn't the thing that's eyebrow raising here ... or anywhere.

Like ... there's no way that a Pixel 8 Pro with 512GB storage would cost 200$ more than one with 128GB. ^^
It would be just shitty pricing.

But the leak in question is likely fake, so we should save us the energy talking about it. ^^

TomNookYankees said:
Why do you say there is no way nintendo would do that when what's being discussed is a digital only SKU? Assuming nintendo has the software side of backwards compatibility figured out why would they make the digital only model be unable to play digital Switch games?
Click to expand...

Because they simply don't want the shitstorm that starts the moment people learn that the games they bought for a lot of money at Best Buy won't work anymore, but the games they got from the eShop are working.

And Nintendo is a very retail focused company when it comes to their sales.

Nintendo would have to provide a solution for physical game owner to convert to a digital license, but before they do all this work, they will not do any BC at all.
 
Skittzo said:
So you think Nintendo, Nvidia and Samsung all looked at the 8NM node, saw the power behaviors for products made on that node, looked at their own power requirements, decided to make a chip that was much too big to fit those requirements, and then nobody at any of those three companies said "hey, uh, this probably won't work on this node, why are you doing this?"
Click to expand...

Skittzo said:
It's not realistic that they made such a costly and critical error. There's a lot of people and engineers these things go through before they're physically made, and it would be strange if any of them allowed this product to make it as far as it did if there was such a critical issue.
Click to expand...


No, I’m pretty sure I never said that.

I said 8N was good enough for everyone when the project was initially scope in 2018-ish.

The Nintendo changed the requirements for Switch 2 as the concept evolved vs. that initial vision.


No one “made a mistake” picking 8N. But the new, more powerful Switch 2 requires a different node.
 
Skittzo said:
People, that leak is fake. We know for a fact NG is not the code name, it's obvious bullshit. Just ignore it.
Click to expand...
I will personally note that I wasn't completely sure what to make of the rumour.

Unlike the Ronin and God of War Ragnarok DLC leaks (which, for what it's worth, I am infinitely more confident in), this leak is something I had to tag as a rumour because it was something I've heard. If it's false or fake or misguided, then it's a shame. That being said I posted it into the discord with the appropriate tags denoting I wasn't as sure in it.

Idk, take it as you will.
 
Truno said:
"Intended release in September 2024, however there's also a placeholder for Early November"

Sounds like hedging to me
Click to expand...
Intended release in September 2024, however there's also a placeholder for Early November, but also plans to move earlier to a June or May or March release should the circumstances change
 
ziggyrivers said:
Not two SKUs again đź« 


It wouldnt surprise me that they skipped on DLC because:
• TOTK was originally DLC for BOTW, and since they extrapolated that into a whole game, they may feel satisfied and what to work on something new;

• Nintendo NEEDS a next gen Zelda game ASAP. It’s possible there’s a small team working on additional content and the next gen patch


Word. Also, if digital PS5 sales are anything to go at, they’re not that stelar and a digital only Switch alongside a physical one feels redundant.


Good points. Maybe they’ll reveal soon, juat to reveal before leaks, the people will seemingly forget about it for a couple of months and then blowout in January.
Click to expand...
Yeah, Switch reveal preceded one of the biggest holidays for 3DS. I doubt Nintendo is worried. There's also the everpresent nugget - people buying Switch Gen 1 now are not the people who will hold out and buy NG. Revealing this side of Christmas has numerous benefits, like people not feeling jilted if they buy a new console then it gets replaced a few weeks later, allowing "hardcore" fans like us to plan or put in a pre-order while the normal people get Gen 1, giving them a second stream of revenue, or at least, a good certainty of a solid launch.
 
P4bl0 said:
I'm not done yet, this is the nail in the coffin! Imma go off then say H1 to the ninjas (my inbox is open):

Goertek, a heavy hitter in high-end hardware like AR, VR (behind PSVR2, supplying parts to Apple Vision Pro, etc) just shipped millions of "speakers for mobile phones" to Nintendo this past summer. The intriguing part? These are being sent to China and cost only $0.25 each. This low cost is a clear sign of mass production.


ZCTCGcj.png


Even more fascinating is that given Goertek's expertise, these speakers could possibly have voice recognition features, similar to Siri.

Oh, and their speakers are waterproof! Imagine a NG that you can safely bring into the bath. Gaming while relaxing in a tub could soon be a reality

This points to a mass-production, with some potentially cool new audio features, and possibly even waterproof capabilities.
Looks like an exciting year ahead for Nintendo!





HSLUJa7.png






vDxOdo4.png
Click to expand...
Now this is what I'm talking about! I hope this means we're in the home stretch!
 
monkeygotyou said:
Intended release in September 2024, however there's also a placeholder for Early November, but also plans to move earlier to a June or May or March release should the circumstances change
Click to expand...
also they may cancel the digital model, or the physical one. the pricing may also change for one or both models, if both come to market. it may also not be called "switch 2"
 
The Digital Only model, I presume, is to drive sales to the more expensive one. Is like ladder pricing: for one more step, you get the better model. Which is why the iPhone Pro is only $100 more expensive than the Plus model.

It’s also a psychological price. If you present a sole $449 SKU, it can look expensive, especially after the $299, 199 and 349 SKUs. We’re talking $100 more expensive than the latest model. So if you present a cheaper SKU, the $449 goes from bad to not so bsd.

That said, I don’t expect Nintendo to present two SKUs. I personally think it’d be redundant, but, it could also work to phase out the older models faster

It wouldn’t surprise me if the digital only SKU is temporary and then phased out.

Even Sony is releasing a modular PS5
 
Vash_the_Stampede said:
No, I’m pretty sure I never said that.

I said 8N was good enough for everyone when the project was initially scope in 2018-ish.

The Nintendo changed the requirements for Switch 2 as the concept evolved vs. that initial vision.


No one “made a mistake” picking 8N. But the new, more powerful Switch 2 requires a different node.
Click to expand...
So then I'm confused.

Do you think "T239" as we know it is a chip made on a different node?

Or do you think "T239" is an 8nm chip, and they somehow changed power requirements after making it?


I feel like we're not understanding each other on some aspect here. The hard facts we have right now- T239 is a chip with 12SMs, vs the 2SMs the original Switch chip (T210) and Mariko (T214) have. T239 has always had 12SMs, changing the layout of the chip would result in a new, different chip.

So in 2018, you believe they decided a 12SM chip on 8nm made sense? Then later they changed the power requirements, and then started on a new chip?

If so- the issue is again, why make a 12SM chip on that node when a 6SM chip would have likely resulted in better performance at a lower cost, since it can be clocked much higher?
 
Vash_the_Stampede said:
I have a theory.

The Dev kits are Samsung 8N. The final will not be.
Click to expand...
I can agree with theory that initial dev kits were running on a SoC fabricated using Samsung's 8N process node, in the sense that Nintendo was using Orin, which was fabricated using Samsung's 8N process node, for the initial dev kits, as LiC said.
Vash_the_Stampede said:
Why do you believe we would have seen evidence by now? There is SO much we don’t know about Switch 2, we just have informed guesses.
Click to expand...
Vash_the_Stampede said:
I know. I just don’t understand why you think it’s unbelievable.
Click to expand...
As Skittzo mentioned, if T239's designed with Samsung's 8N process node in mind, Nvidia probably would've used a different codename for Drake designed with TSMC's 4N process node in mind, similar to how T210 was used for the Tegra X1 designed with TSMC's 20 nm* process node in mind, and T214 was used for the Tegra X1+ designed with TSMC's 16FF process node in mind.
* → a marketing nomenclature used by all foundry companies

And I want to add that I don't think Nvidia would've asked Linux to add support for T239 on 5 September 2022, and I think Nvidia would've stopped updating the files associated with T239 much earlier than 8 April 2022 for L4T on GitHub, if T239's designed with Samsung's 8N process node in mind initially before Nintendo and Nvidia decided to switch to TSMC's 4N process node. (I could be remembering wrong, but I believe Nvidia did continue to update the files associated with T239 for L4T on GitHub beyond 8 April 2022. Please do correct me if I'm wrong, @oldpuck.)
 
Bonejack said:
Because they simply don't want the shitstorm that starts the moment people learn that the games they bought for a lot of money at Best Buy won't work anymore, but the games they got from the eShop are working.

And Nintendo is a very retail focused company when it comes to their sales.

Nintendo would have to provide a solution for physical game owner to convert to a digital license, but before they do all this work, they will not do any BC at all.
Click to expand...
So retail focused that they've been pushing for consumers to buy their games digital with both the Voucher system and their recent trend of releasing physical versions of games weeks later (MPR, Pikmin 1+2)?

As for the bolded: Sony released a digital only SKU for PS5 and it didn't cause a shitstorm, I see no reason to think NIntendo wouldn't try the same thing. Those that want a Switch 2 that can play physical Switch 1 games would have the same option that PS5 gave. The idea is that the more expensive SKU would be the one that has BC with both physical and digital switch 1 games while the digital only SKU would understandably not have any way to play Switch 1 carts because it's digital only.
 
Neoxon said:
And now we have another rumor.
www.resetera.com

[Rumor] Switch 2 codenamed "NG", two SKUs, September 2024 release Rumor

The info comes from the same person that the past few months has provided The Snitch with details and screenshots of Rise of the Ronin, which he went on to post on his Discord channel. On top of that, he was also the one to inform The Snitch about the development of a God of War: Ragnarok DLC...
www.resetera.com www.resetera.com
  • September 2024 launch
  • $450 for standard, $400 for digital-only
  • NG is indeed the code name
Click to expand...
I suppose the shipment news had to be counteracted with some bullshit lol
 
Vash_the_Stampede said:
I think at this point you understand my perspective and I understand yours. I also think we did a good job clarifying the interim points. So before we start going in circles, here is one last pitch

  • Nintendo chooses Orin on 8N as the base for next Switch. This decision is likely made in 2018.
  • At that point they know what 8N will cost, it’s power/performance/etc… as you say.
  • Fast forward 3-4 years to the leak and T239 is still the only item on the roadmap
  • But the console gaming market has changed a lot between 2018 and 2022-ish!
  • One of Nintendo’s observations is the strong demand of its own hardware selling at $300 5-years after launch - no price cut! This never happened before. And the OLED at $350 is outselling the $300 Mariko.
  • Sony and Xbox are also selling better than expect despite their $500 price (for top model)
  • Also, in the 2018-2022 Nintendo has realized/admitted that Switch is underpowered
  • So in 2022-ish, they realized that the momentum of the Switch gives them time to move to a better node.
  • Maybe Nvidia pays for a portion of the cost too since they can sell a new version of Orin. Maybe not - but I think Nintendo can absorb the $100m-$200m in redesign cost through higher unit costs ($1-$2m), a lower cost per SOC through yield, etc…
  • Better node also helps with performance which will help with 3rd party development and unit sales, and Nintendo makes money through the royalty income
Click to expand...

The reason I believe T239 is made on TSMC 4N is the same reason I believe it was always intended to be made on 4N: it's simply too big a chip to work in a Switch-sized device on Samsung's 8nm process, drawing somewhere around double the Switch's GPU power draw at the lowest possible clocks. If I, a random internet person with no specialised knowledge in the area, could have said years ago that 12 SMs would be way too big for 8nm, I can't see Nvidia getting the whole way to taping out the chip before scrapping it and replacing it with an otherwise identical TSMC 4N version.
 
Can’t some journalist just knock on Nintendo’s door and say ”the game’s up, we know they’re in here.” I don’t see what could go wrong.
 
Chaotic Neutral said:
That would be cool, too, but somehow it doesn't seem logical to launch that kind of a (then still unannounced) product months before a new console. I'd have thought that such a product, if it existed, would launch alongside or after a new console.
Click to expand...

Yeah agreed. I'm mostly just saying, we've been down the "what else would this be for!" road before with the OLED screen article. Can't be entirely ruled out at the moment with so little to go by.
 
There being two models, one with full BC and one with digital only BC would also explain why there seemed to be contradictions between devs on whether or not the Switch 2 would have BC or not.

I get why the use of the debunked codename makes the rumor less credible but the main part about Nintendo essentially copying Sony's SKU plan doesn't seem that far fetched.
 
TomNookYankees said:
There being two models, one with full BC and one with digital only BC would also explain why there seemed to be contradictions between devs on whether or not the Switch 2 would have BC or not.
Click to expand...
could also be explained by earlier units not having BC due to implmentation time/costs. that rumor is so fake
 
0
TomNookYankees said:
So retail focused that they've been pushing for consumers to buy their games digital with both the Voucher system and their recent trend of releasing physical versions of games weeks later (MPR, Pikmin 1+2)?

As for the bolded: Sony released a digital only SKU for PS5 and it didn't cause a shitstorm, I see no reason to think NIntendo wouldn't try the same thing. Those that want a Switch 2 that can play physical Switch 1 games would have the same option that PS5 gave. The idea is that the more expensive SKU would be the one that has BC with both physical and digital switch 1 games while the digital only SKU would understandably not have any way to play Switch 1 carts because it's digital only.
Click to expand...

You should take a look at the sales of the digital PS5 compared to the disc one.

Also, i believe to remember that this digital PS5 was/is produced in low numbers because Sony actually has a higher profit margin for the disc based ones.

And Sony is a company that has a much higher digital margin than Nintendo is.

lemonfresh said:
The clickbait youtubers and sites gonna be eating good today
Click to expand...

No ... not that media. The other, legit media! ^^
 
Neoxon said:
And now we have another rumor.
www.resetera.com

[Rumor] Switch 2 codenamed "NG", two SKUs, September 2024 release Rumor

The info comes from the same person that the past few months has provided The Snitch with details and screenshots of Rise of the Ronin, which he went on to post on his Discord channel. On top of that, he was also the one to inform The Snitch about the development of a God of War: Ragnarok DLC...
www.resetera.com www.resetera.com
  • September 2024 launch
  • $450 for standard, $400 for digital-only
  • NG is indeed the code name
Click to expand...
It’s funny, but the way you can tell someone doesn’t know the codename or that they aren’t reliable is if they use “NG”.
 
RailWays said:
Doubt the "leaker" even knew about the shipment news or else they likely would have changed their story.
Click to expand...
I'd still advise caution about this "shipment news". Goertek supplies speakers for the OLED model too, and with the way shipments work shipping IDs do not always match up, and do not match up to product IDs usually, so it's hard to say if this is a new part or not.

The idea that they're shipping so many at the end of July could just be part of a slightly earlier holiday ramp up period for OLED models. It would be better if we could compare this type of shipment data to what we've seen in previous years before coming to the conclusion that it has to be for Switch 2.
 
casualreader said:
Back to this. Don't want to be a buzzkiller so I'll say it just once. I see no such records in the - paid - database I consult. Have you given a link to your source that I missed maybe?
Although the HS codes (chapter 85 and 95) seem broadly in line with the product category (electronic components and videogames), I am very surprised the descriptions are that explicit. I mean reporters can use confidentiality even and appear in a special category if they want, with other classified trade (generally at the bottom of the chapter or in chapter 98-99).
Just putting it out there, as I don't want to say it is false information.
Click to expand...

Your paid database likely have only the recent data, there is this website which has outdated data where we can pull it from.
 
TomNookYankees said:
There being two models, one with full BC and one with digital only BC would also explain why there seemed to be contradictions between devs on whether or not the Switch 2 would have BC or not.

I get why the use of the debunked codename makes the rumor less credible but the main part about Nintendo essentially copying Sony's SKU plan doesn't seem that far fetched
Click to expand...
I may as well give my take on the information. Again, I'm not even fully sure on the information but I felt like it was worth posting (albeit to not as official of a capacity as Ronin or GoW:R but that didn't solve anything thanks to ResetERA, whoops).
Imo, the BC rumours are a huge mess. The only explanation would be if there was a big contradiction. The SKUs being different, in addition to the market standard for Digital and Physical editions with the PS5 and Series X, made this a bit more believeable for me.

As for the shipment date contradiction (something I didn't fully hear about until after I posted the rumour), I want to ask people more knowledgable on the subject about the information. Can it 100% be trusted and, if it can, what release dates does it invalidate?
 
Hosermess said:
There are 6 listings for the 31st, 3 for the 13th, and probably multiple for the 3rd as well. If you're producing a massive amount of products you're not going to wait to ship them all at once, or even wait for a nice round number to ship them. You'd probably make steady shipments of whatever you could manufacture within a certain time frame.
Click to expand...
But these aren’t steady shipments, there’s several in the high tens of thousands to hundred thousands and then a few hundred. That’s bizarre. Steady would be a consistent amount here or approximately close. I just find it weird.
 
We are not in the era anymore where games consoles are highly individualised. Instead they use off the shelf parts to some degree and so it’s completely sensible to think that hardware development will change over time dependent on when they chose to go forward with a release.

Waterproof sound speakers just eliminates a possible failure point, am not sure I buy the Switch will be waterproof. Just adds an unnecessary quality control for a console.

Speculated dates am not sure of. Either way I don’t see them announcing in November rather than January as it might hurt Switch sales over the holiday.
 
YolkFolk said:
Was Switch NG used on the PDF file name from the leaked emails?
Click to expand...

No, it was used by Activision executives during their testimony in the MS-ABK merger trial. Importantly it wasn't something Nintendo requested to be reacted from the published version of the court proceedings, meaning it's not confidential, and therefore not the codename.
 
Neoxon said:
And now we have another rumor.
www.resetera.com

[Rumor] Switch 2 codenamed "NG", two SKUs, September 2024 release Rumor

The info comes from the same person that the past few months has provided The Snitch with details and screenshots of Rise of the Ronin, which he went on to post on his Discord channel. On top of that, he was also the one to inform The Snitch about the development of a God of War: Ragnarok DLC...
www.resetera.com www.resetera.com
  • September 2024 launch
  • $450 for standard, $400 for digital-only
  • NG is indeed the code name
Click to expand...
Should probably just ignore this, but I can't help but give my 2c. The card reader module does not cost 50 bucks, who thinks it's worth that?! It's probably less than a couple bucks for Nintendo. Does the "standard" come with something more? More storage? Well that would be the reverse of what you'd want, more storage in the digital model... Not saying this logic discredits the rumor, but it doesn't seem to add up to me. IE they sell digital at-cost and make ~$50 profit on the standard? I mean... maybe. But I don't think that translates well to the consumer.

If I was in charge I would do 399 for both (can't bring myself to go above!) and have the digital have larger storage. Presents the consumer with options that make sense. Get the regular so I can play physical games or sacrifice that ability for a bigger drive to go digital only? I suppose the same question is above "buy the regular or save 50 bucks and go digital only" but I dunno that just doesn't feel right to me. Feels bad man.

/Ramble over
 
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