RennanNT
Bob-omb
You mean the game which has AMD partnership and didn't even support DLSS at launch because of that (not even sure if they already added it)?
-
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)
- Thread starter Dakhil
- Start date
ItWasMeantToBe19
Manakete
Pretty doubtful that BGS decided to not include RTGI as an option (or even say they would ever add it as an option) because of a couple bucks from AMD.
we seen it happened to at least one game already
Foltzie
Uncle Muji
- Pronouns
- he/him
The Xbox has an Nvidia GPU? ;-)
Last edited:
ItWasMeantToBe19
Manakete
Most of Starfield's players are on PC and the ratio will get far more lopsided as mod support comes to PC.
CeramicPigeon
You lost the game
- Pronouns
- He/him
No I agree with you, but there's a lot of people out there who don't. And I don't know about you but I'd rather not go another 7 years listening to people complain about lack of native voice chat or lack of themes every system update because the ram allotted to the OS is so low
THE original one yes.
Angel Whispers
Follow me at @angelpagecdlmhq
Security concerns, questions, and potential breaches.
ShadowFox08
Paratroopa
But does it really even need to match texture quality of current gen? I personally don't think so, considering it's gonna be 3-4 weaker than PS5/X Series X in GPU alone and we're gonna get down ports of them. DLSS will help with some resolution, but running 4k resolution for what might be 1080p to 1440p DLSS'd in docked mode?
The more RAM the merrier, but even I think it would be bizarre if we matched them in RAM amount
. I just don't think we need to. RAM bandwidth is more important after 12GB. Gonna be interesting how much more meaty the OS will be. Lic's proposal of 1.5GB used for OS and video sound about right, work 10.5 for games.
Maybe, but you might as well count bandwidth too, which the series S has Nintendo beat on. Though I think the bigger issue for ports will be CPU.. Here's hoping we get 2Ghz CPU speed wkth A78c and the up to 8mb L3 cache. We need it..
In general, we can say Nintendo has more RAM vs last gen competitors at least.
Interesting. I didn't know AMD GPUs back then were very bandwidth hungry. I just thought Switch's TX1 was more efficient, especially with the tile based rendering that you mentioned. Though having only twice as much bandwidth as Wii U wasn't enough to port some 720p Wii u games to 1080p.
I forgot.. how did you calculate those numbers again?
Yeah switch with 50 GB/a bandwidth or 34GB/s would have been considerable and much needed. We've seen the significant the performance effects of 34GB/s with a hacked switch.
because you need to partition off storage for that to be usable. and even then, it's extremely slow compared to LPDDR5. we're talking magnitudes
- Pronouns
- She/Her
I wouldn't say downports so much as just ports- this isn't a Wii Vs 360 situation, nor a matter of generation. Downport usually means from one gen to the last.
- Pronouns
- He/Him
@oldpuck I have some confusion regarding your T239 calculator. The FLOPS per pixel seems wrong. At 522 MHz handheld with a 1080p screen, it says that handheld would have 0.87 FLOPS per pixel. Yet that would add up to only around 1.8 MFLOPS in total. If it's meant to achieve the purported 1.7 TFLOPS, it'd have to be around 820 kFLOPS per pixel.
KeijiKG
Moblin
Virtual Memory isn't really all that new. Long story short, I'd rather Nintendo have as much RAM as they can instead of passing the buck to storage to cover them.
KeijiKG
Moblin
Samuspet
Octorok
- Pronouns
- She
A downport to me is a game ported to much lower spec hardware so The Witcher 3 or DOOM to the original Switch.
Wii games were usually completely different versions of games using different engines to the few PS360 games it got.
Dekuman
Starman
- Pronouns
- He/Him/His
Do we have hard data on Cortex A78C performance ?
we don't have a public facing product that uses it. best we got is per-core and per cluster performance
Goodtwin
Like Like
Depends on the game. With PS4 and Xbox One hanging around for so long, developers have had to keep CPU load under control. Compared to the Jaguar cores, the A78 cores will be a substantial increase in performance. So while they wont be matching Zen, developers have had years and years of experience working with low performance CPU cores. I'm sure CPU load will gain some bloat once PS4 and Xbox One are removed from the equation, but the A78 cores should split the difference enough so that developers can optimize and make strategic cuts allowing the game to run on SNG without any noticeable difference to the player.
Gerald
Bob-omb
- Pronouns
- He/Him
If Switch 2 will have 16GB Ram and it seems now good chance for it, assume then that 2GB will be for OS, Then devs will have 14GB for use what is insane, and 6GB more than they have in Series SBut does it really even need to match texture quality of current gen? I personally don't think so, considering it's gonna be 3-4 weaker than PS5/X Series X in GPU alone and we're gonna get down ports of them. DLSS will help with some resolution, but running 4k resolution for what might be 1080p to 1440p DLSS'd in docked mode?
The more RAM the merrier, but even I think it would be bizarre if we matched them in RAM amount
Gonna be interesting how much more meaty the OS will be. Lic's proposal of 1.5GB used for OS and video sound about right, work 10.5 for games.
Maybe, but you might as well count bandwidth too, which the series S has Nintendo beat on. Though I think the bigger issue for ports will be CPU.. Here's hoping we get 2Ghz CPU speed wkth A78c and the up to 8mb L3 cache. We need it..
In general, we can say Nintendo has more RAM vs last gen competitors at least.
Interesting. I didn't know AMD GPUs back then were very bandwidth hungry. I just thought Switch's TX1 was more efficient, especially with the tile based rendering that you mentioned. Though having only twice as much bandwidth as Wii U wasn't enough to port some 720p Wii u games to 1080p.
I forgot.. how did you calculate those numbers again?
Yeah switch with 50 GB/a bandwidth or 34GB/s would have been considerable and much needed. We've seen the significant the performance effects of 34GB/s with a hacked switch.
D
Deleted member 887
Guest
Which numbers? Bandwidth you calculate: (Bud width) * (Memory clock) * (Transfers per clock)
128 bits * 3200 Megahertz * 2 transfers per cycle = 1638400 Mb/s (Megabits per second) = 102 GB/s (Gigabytes per secon)
It's actually kinda revealing to think about the Switch in the same terms we think about the NG. The Switch has 25.6GB/s of memory bandwidth. Nvidia GPU's on the same architecture were running ~52 GB/s/TFLOP. For the Switch's 384 GFLOPS, that comes out to ~20 GB/s.
So why was 25.6 GB/s so bad? Well, two reasons. The first is the obvious one - there isn't a lot of room for the CPU in here, especially on games that need to decompress a lot of assets during gameplay. That's why I really want to caution folk about Nintendo eating into the extremes of that bandwidth limit. Those extra TFLOPS will do you know good if they're sitting idle waiting on RAM, or worse, actively fighting with the CPU over the bus.
The second is a little more subtle. The Switch has 4 GB of RAM, and is at least attempting to be a 1080p device. Looking at comparable cards from that era, they're 2 GB VRAM, 3 TFLOP devices. Nintendo is pushing physically based rendering in Zelda for glob's sake. They shouldn't be bandwidth limited, because they shouldn't be able to do this without hitting the GPU compute limit. But the mad lads did it anyway, and lots of other developers followed suit.
It's entirely possible that is busted to hell. It's been forever since I fiddled with it. Maybe I'll update it shortly!
Goodtwin
Like Like
Would extra ram offset the need for fast internal storage? We heard that the Zelda BotW demo at Gamescom had nearly instantaneous loading and the assumption of source was this was due to a SSD drive, but what if it was actually because the entire game world can be loaded into memory? I suppose the question is just how much ram would it take to offset the need for a fast SSD drive?
KeijiKG
Moblin
But Switch already uses Solid State Memory.
- Pronouns
- She/Her
I'm not convinced either of those ARE RAM issues, since 3DS with far less RAM had themes, and DS with EXTREMELY LITTLE RAM had VC in some games. To me I think they're probably a matter of priority. Prioritising the mobile app over built in social features, and prioritising consistency and speed over themes.
Goodtwin
Like Like
Very slow compared to the SSD's used in PS5/Series consoles. I know emmc memory is solid state, but its not what people are thinking of when talking about SSD drives.
Mr Swine
Like Like
- Pronouns
- He
is still very fast, just handicapped by the switch absurdly slow CPU
you're gonna have to define fast, because Drake isn't getting anywhere near other sytems
Ghostsonplanets
Ghost in the Sales
- Pronouns
- He/Him
To a certain extent, yes. But it's a waste of resources because you're dumping content in RAM that will be used for the next, let's say, 30s - 1m of gameplay, while fetching from the disk the assets for the after portion. Fast Storage let you change content in and out of RAM much faster and thus allow the developers the better utilize the RAM amount.
16GB of RAM would be an extreme amount of RAM for a Switch 2. Nintendo could let devs reserve some amount of RAM (Let's say up to 4GB) as a preemptive instant cache of sorts to hold assets. It would offset a decision to pair Switch 2 with a slower type of Storage, for example.
Pretty much. We don't even have any semblance of clarity with regards to GameCards speeds or external storage solution. Thraktor post about Single Gate 3D NAND showed it with performances around 133MB/s, back in 2017. That's basically MicroSD territory. We can't speculate Switch 2 having 500+MB/s or 1GB/s, 2GB/s of internal storage read speed without any clarity on the others solutions.
I would be fine with MicroSD level of speeds anyway. It's cheap, mass available and fast-ish enough. But the Gamescom demo rumors said instant loading for BoTW...So who knows.
Last edited:
Goodtwin
Like Like
What type of speed are we to expect?
snoota
Rattata
- Pronouns
- He/Him
Unless I'm wrong in thinking that CPU bandwidth requirements wouldn't change much between handheld vs docked, wouldn't current max LPDDR5X speeds keep the GPU better feed in docked vs handheld? So lets say that some abritary figure like 30GB/s is subtracted from the total pool for one particular title (obviously can't say for sure, CPU bandwidth demands are a PiTA to narrow down especially with SoCs/APUs), giving us the figures of 30GB/s per TFLOP when docked vs 28GB/s per TFLOP in portable mode. 6.4gbps docked however would result in just under 21GB/s per TFLOP, which isn't particularly pretty looking compared to most of Desktop Ampere.
Last edited:
ShadowFox08
Paratroopa
Sorry, I should have been careful with my wording. I know it's not a Wii vs 360 situation, and I don't think assets will have to be rebuilt.
I just meant that it's going to be ported with obvious downgrades, like Xbone/PS4 to switch ports. That's what I meant when I said down porting.
Yeah hopefully the CPU gap is narrower than switch vs PS4.
switch vs PS4.
Nah I meant how you get the 30 GB/s per TFLOP.
Last edited:
- Pronouns
- She/Her
300MB/s-1000MB/s would be my expectation. 300 is stretching it, but if the FDE is effective and fast, it could mean an effective (completely hardware accelerated, CPU independent) 1GB/s after decompression.
Gerald
Bob-omb
- Pronouns
- He/Him
Still it should have UFS 3.1 so it will be fast and much faster than EMMC
personally, I'm thinking 400MB/s to 500MB/s. even emmc can get into the 300MB/s
- Pronouns
- She/Her
Given what we know, and some of the rumours, I expect the situation to be a LOT more generous than the Switch Vs PS4 situation. Switch got miracle ports from PS4 from time to time; for Switch 2 I'd expect them to be both more common and more likely to be day and date. We've already had one rumour that 12 months from now, we'll see a lot of games announced to come to Switch 2 at the same time as other platforms.
- Pronouns
- he / him
Not every game for sure. But what PS5 doesn't do with its mega computational power in a brute force manner and what will be done on a machine that has hardware specifically for high quality upscaling seem pretty unrelated.
Perfect example, since it's a new feature that can work even on cards that were starting to release 5 years ago. And not an all-new feature, but the quality of DLSS upscaling has improved over time, with fewer artifacts.
D
Deleted member 887
Guest
You would be correct!
More bandwidth = GPU better fed, pretty much always, so yes.
The first LPDDR5X RAM was made in November of 2021. T239's design was finalized by March of 2022. I'm not saying 5X is impossible, but it pushes the timeline considerably. And memory bandwidth eats power and generates heat like crazy. I'm not saying its impossible, it just feels incredibly unlikely to me.
Yeah, that looks awful. But whether or not that's a realistic scenario is another question. The Switch itself only has 25.6 GB/s of bandwidth, allocating an entire 30 GB/s for the CPU cluster alone seems like overkill.
Goodtwin
Like Like
Its basically impossible for it not to be. Switch only has three cores available to games where PS4 has 6-7 cores available. While we wont see parity with performance per core, we will see parity with how many cores there are. Whatever work was being down on cores 4-7 on PS4 had to be squeezed onto those three cores on Switch. Its pretty normal for games to load the first few cores pretty heavy and then the rest hum along at 30-50%, and this does lend developers some ability to optimize CPU performance on SNG through improvements to their multi threading. Developers aren't going to do unnecessary work on PS5 and Series consoles, so long as their CPU code is within frame budget, they wont care if 3-4 cores are doing 90% of the work and the rest are nearly idle. However, when moving that game to SNG, if the CPU code is not within the frame time budget, they will look at what task can be moved from the first 3-4 heavily loaded cores onto the additional cores.
- Pronouns
- She/Her
Even games that hit the CPU limit for NG Switch have more options this time around. More GPU power, tensor cores if they can make it work, they have more RAM (relative to GPU power) and can, say, generate and store tables for common calculations rather than do them on the fly.
It appears NG Switch is in an extremely favourable position as regards optimisation, it just has more wiggle room than Switch, and assuming it's 12 or 16GB, more RAM/FLOP, which will surely help.
Goodtwin
Like Like
I think so too, but it is important to remember that these games do ultimately still need to scale down to portable mode. We tend to focus on the performance gap between the PS5/Series consoles and the docked performance of SNG, but ultimately these games do need to scale down to PS4 levels of performance. We are approaching the time when PS4/X1 support will be dropped for multi platform games, but developers will still be tasked with supporting a very similar performance profile with SNG portable mode.
A big advantage there is that portable mode has a ceiling of 1080p, which in practice will likely often be 540p before dlss.
- Pronouns
- She/Her
But the added constraints of portable mode EXCLUDE RAM and CPU, just GPU power reduces (though, also likely RAM speed, but to a lesser extent). Meanwhile the render resolution could take a gigantic dip, and is meant to. On Nintendo Switch, that dip was sort of meant to be about 60%, about the difference in pixel count between 1080p and 720p, and about as much as the GPU downclocked.
For NG Switch, we are likely looking at target render resolutions for TV mode being 720, 1080, and/or 1440p depending on the game.
In off-TV modes, those can be 360p, 540p, and 720p.
This is 1/4 of the number of pixels- which makes sense, since the new screen is a quarter of the target output resolution of TV mode.
If anything, handheld mode may see an even bigger advantage on NG Switch. With the GPU downclocking by about 50% and resolution going down 75%!
So the GPU budget per pixel IS probably going to be higher in handheld mode.
It's still a limitation, sure, but it's a pretty rosy looking picture from where I stand.
YugamiSekai
T239 vs. Picross 4K
- Pronouns
- He/Him
I'm expecting them to (finally) ditch eMMC and go straight to UFS, about 1GB/s.
We have mostly focused on DLSS in docked, but has anyone done the math for how long 1080p DLSS would take in portable mode given around 500 mhz?
@oldpuck @Paul_Subsonic
@oldpuck @Paul_Subsonic
Last edited:
Angel Whispers
Follow me at @angelpagecdlmhq
Shhh!! Silence!! They don’t like spending on RAM and other things because they’re cheap and “Because Nintendo”. Oh, and “Playing With Power” is so 80s, they don’t do that shit anymore. Stop being optimistic, damnit, or you’ll awaken the expectation officers!!
#SassyAngelSuperBitch (It goes without saying that this is some users, but of course this post is sarcastic…)
Angel Whispers
Follow me at @angelpagecdlmhq
It’s the strong possibility, primarily because UFS storage has been paired with LPDDR5 RAM in some phone bills of materials, and there are obvious opportunities. Once more, the case for 16GB… It’s also well-understood tech, which wasn’t the case in 2017.
lemonfresh
#Team2024
- Pronouns
- He/Him
OP
OP
As far as I know, 12 GB of RAM is still the consensus based on what necrolipe said.
Ghostsonplanets
Ghost in the Sales
- Pronouns
- He/Him
Expecting 16GB (Or even more) is more than fine and welcome even. There's strong possibility Nintendo goes with 16GB given RAM prices were dirt cheap not too long ago and others handhelds also use the same amount. What needed to be reigned in is using unrelated tweets for another product or people saying that going with less than 16GB means Switch 2 is doomed. Unrelated tweets are just unrelated tweets and going with 12GB would also be fine. Whatever happens, it will be great.Shhh!! Silence!! They don’t like spending on RAM and other things because they’re cheap and “Because Nintendo”. Oh, and “Playing With Power” is so 80s, they don’t do that shit anymore. Stop being optimistic, damnit, or you’ll awaken the expectation officers!!
#SassyAngelSuperBitch (It goes without saying that this is some users, but of course this post is sarcastic…)
12GB RAM consumer and 16GB Devkit was what Necrolipe shared, yes. What people speculate is if Nintendo will bump the RAM amount for consumer Switch 2, not too dissimilar to what they did with 3DS.
We don't know. Nintendo greatly benefit from economy of scale, so their prices are way discounted compared to others.
One key thing to consider is that iPhone 15 is using 6GB/48Gb 64-bit LPDDR5 module and iPhone is the most massive consumer product every year and makes whatever components they use a commodity. So Nintendo would benefit greatly from using 6GB modules dues to iPhone increasing manufacturing and cheapening prices of said modules from key manufacturers in the industry.
Last edited by a moderator:
