• 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!)

There is no such thing as a good enough WiFi chip on Switch 2/3/4/n that will let cloud games be anything more than niche.

DL/UL speeds don't mean shit when the vast majority of populations outside of city hubs do not have access to high-speed internet access. Is Nintendo going to go around installing underground fibre optic cables just so their fanbase that live out in the rural countryside can play licenses of games they don't physically own?

Cloud gaming is a stopgap and should be treated as nothing more than a curio; it should not be relied on seriously except for the most strenuous of games that cannot be downported to Switch. So long as MS maintains feature parity with XSS, cloud gaming on Switch 2 shouldn't rear its head again until 2028
 
"Same types of games with bettererer graphics" hasn't always worked that great for Nintendo. Even with the Super NES, the system initially had slower than expected sales in the US because "it's your NES but bettererr graphics!" wasn't a great sales tool.

We know Nintendo. There is going to be a "new" gameplay gimmick whether some people will stomp their feet about it or not.

Beyond that I think Nintendo has an itch to show things in VR from a creative perspective, imagine 3D gaming never got Mario 64 or Zelda: OoT as a template which popularized things like Z-targeting and a proper camera system to many other devs. Nintendo is needed in the VR space, they can probably show the development community a thing or two just because they approach game design in a different way from almost any other developer.
It would be cool if companies wanted to do a little VR mode or something optional like for Metroid Prime 4 for example. It wouldn’t be mandatory. It’s optional for all devs and everyone can try it out of the box.
 
I mean there's a handful of people who even understand what the T239 is. Everyone assumptions is "because Nintendo".

We have to be acknowledged that the Wii, Wii U, and the handhelds left a strong impression on the core gamer audience (and the analyst) that Nintendo will always cheap out on specs. Do the article needs source? Of course, but with the "because Nintendo" stereotype? Of course people will believe it.
It's not even about understanding T239 or preconceptions about Nintendo. The article once translated just says 'the market expects' so it's not an actual leak or rumor derived from one source or piece of data, it's a piece of speculation that is no more credible than a random post here. So there's no meaningful reason to weigh it over something NateDrake or other credible insiders say. Maybe something got lost in translation with DeepL but the amount of discussion that article generated simply because it was stating hard numbers is a little ridiculous. And boring.
 
The best mobile chip for 2016 was maybe the Apple A9X at that point and that was about par with the Tegra X1 and the Apple A9X was being sold basically only in the $700 iPad Pro model at the time.
Yeah but there was no real 3d games on phones back then, and there’s only a few now.
 
0
Beyond that I think Nintendo has an itch to show things in VR from a creative perspective, imagine 3D gaming never got Mario 64 or Zelda: OoT as a template which popularized things like Z-targeting and a proper camera system to many other devs. Nintendo is needed in the VR space, they can probably show the development community a thing or two just because they approach game design in a different way from almost any other developer.
I think Nintendo has a similar perspective to Valve in this area. VR is it's own medium that has benefits and drawbacks that need to be explored.

Valve's Half Life: Alyx and Boneworks were a good sign of it from a physics perspective, but I do think Nintendo giving a take on the space of their own would also be excellent. I just also think it might not work for everyone...
 
My thoughts on the Storage/Ram thing:

64GB Is laughable, not even worth considering
128GB Is the minimum they can go
256GB Is decent enough and probably what they will go with
512GB Would be ideal but I seriously doubt it unless there's deluxe SKU

8GB Ram would be quite bad and almost certainly is not going to happen, like 90-95% sure
12GB Is pretty good and is the most likely to happen by far
16GB Would be fantastic and has decent chance of happening

I could see 128GB standard + 256/512 MB proprietary high speed Nintendo-made (UFS?) flash carts day 1 for memory expansion.

Which of course Nintendo will control the profits on and take home a very nice amount of additional money.

And/or two hardware SKUs (64-128GB baseline, 256GB or something deluxe SKU).
 
0
The conclusions and discussions in this thread are almost entirely based on public data. An analyst failing to do the research and publishing nonsense is absolutely condemnable. Moreover, most people are just laughing at and disregarding it, not being mad.
I fully understand. The Nvidia leaks is out there, but that won't stop people not believing in the stereotype.
I can’t speak for anyone else, but I visit this thread frequently, usually daily. I don’t understand half of the technical stuff, and I don’t know what’s going on, but it sure feels good to be part of something. πŸ’β€β™€οΈ
This place is great! Less toxic than gamefaqs. It just most places I go outside of here, just outright denies the leaks. Sometimes I even see it on digital Foundry youtube. The comment section sometimes doubt them.
 
I hope we have reached the point where hall effect sticks can be easily sourced and included in next joy con.

For all its improvements, the Deck OLED still does not have them
Hall effect clickable circle pads would be so cool.

I will say one thing against Hall effect, sensitive electronic gyrometers, accelerometers and especially magnetometers are prone to being interefered with by them, this may be one of the reasons it wasn't chosen for Steam Deck OLED.

Now I know this is crazy and would be completely custom, but personally my pick would be OPTICAL sensor circle pads. Not N64's wheel style sensor, though.
 
I definitely believe Nintendo will bring VR at some point, and I think that's gonna be in 2027.

But flat screen software will - by far - continue to be the core experience IMO.
 
Last year, I performed an analysis of smartphone data from Notebookcheck to show how Switch compared to the smartphone market at the time of its release, and how things have changed (particularly in RAM and storage) since then. As we're now in 2024, I can update the analysis with the full set of 2023 data.

As a quick catch-up, Notebookcheck has a fairly comprehensive database of smartphone reviews going back over a decade, including the ability to search for benchmark results. I'm using the output of this for my analysis. The data isn't necessarily 100% accurate, and I've noticed one or two cases of mis-labelled data (eg UFS 2 where it should be UFS 3), but for the most part it seems to be pretty good. The total dataset includes 1285 reviews, around 100 a year, covering a pretty wide range of phones, from entry-level to flagship. The data I'm looking at includes only android phones, but as I'm mostly concerned about the off-the-shelf parts that Nintendo might use (eg UFS), android phones are more relevant compared to iPhones which use custom storage solutions.

To start, let's look at storage, here's the average storage capacity graphed over time:

temp-Image8756-I6.jpg


In 2016 (the year before the Switch launched) the average phone storage capacity was 26.9GB, and in 2023 (the year before the Switch 2 launch) it was 231.4GB.

As well as the average, we can also look at how the specific capacities used have changed over time:

temp-Imagevd-AJXG.jpg


In 2016, around 90% of phones had 16GB or more storage, and in 2023, around 90% of phones had 128GB or more storage. We can also see the median storage has increased from 16GB to 256GB over that time.

Looking at storage speed, we see a similar increase:

temp-Imagec-Sn2-Rw.jpg


Average sequential read speeds in 2016 were 223MB/s, which has increased to 1,574MB/s in 2023. People with hacked Switches have got around 300MB/s sequential read speeds from the internal storage, although games aren't able to achieve those speeds, due to CPU bottlenecks (which should be largely eliminated with dedicated decompression hardware on Switch 2).

Finally on the storage side we can look at storage types:

temp-Image2rez-YG.jpg


In 2016, eMMC accounted for over 90% of the market. In 2023 it took 16% of the market, with the remainder being 36% UFS 2, 26% UFS 3 and 22% UFS 4.

Next, we'll move onto RAM, where we can look at average RAM capacity over time:

temp-Imagex-QA0-E3.jpg


The average RAM capacity in 2016 was 2.6GB, which has increased to 8.8GB in 2023.

As a final bonus graph, here's the split in screen technology over the years:

temp-Imagec-Xt-Sjz.jpg


In 2016, the 82% of the smartphones reviewed used LCD screens, vs 18% using OLED. In 2023, 65% of the phones used OLED screens, vs 35% with LCD.

If we were to look purely at changes in the smartphone market from 2016 to 2023, we've seen, on average, an 8.6x increase in storage capacity, a 7x increase in storage speed and a 3.4x increase in RAM capacity. If Nintendo's hardware choices for Switch 2 were to scale alongside this, we would expect 275GB of storage, 2.1GB/s storage read speeds and 13.6GB of RAM. Or, if we choose the closest parts which are actually available, it would be 256GB of UFS 3.1 storage and 12GB of RAM.

Of course, Nintendo don't have to increase precisely in line with the smartphone market, and they may have different priorities for Switch 2 than the original Switch. Still, I think it's a useful exercise to ground our expectations with real data on how the market for mobile storage and RAM has changed since the launch of the original Switch.
 
I fully understand. The Nvidia leaks is out there, but that won't stop people not believing in the stereotype.

This place is great! Less toxic than gamefaqs. It just most places I go outside of here, just outright denies the leaks. Sometimes I even see it on digital Foundry youtube. The comment section sometimes doubt them.
Yeah because the Nvidia leaks are hard to understand for most, people not understanding what hardware configurations would make sense to pair with the t239, and moronic, Wii era ideas like β€œNintendo’s gunna Nintendo”, β€œNintendo will never use powerful hardware”, and β€œNintendo is going to make weak hardware because there devs work best under pressure” people just except it to be weak and have no 3rd party support.
 
The thread is moving at a fast pace 1 page/hour. If we continue with that pace we could reach page 3000 by early fabruary. Switch 2 announcement imminent!/s
 
This is a new era of Nintendo

First system without Iwata 100% involvement.

So we can expect anything.

In less than 6 months we will probably have a better picture of Switch 2 capabilities and third party SW support.
Well, first system since Wii without full Iwata involvement (he worked at Hal before 2000, and by then GameCube was already being worked on).
 
Last year, I performed an analysis of smartphone data from Notebookcheck to show how Switch compared to the smartphone market at the time of its release, and how things have changed (particularly in RAM and storage) since then. As we're now in 2024, I can update the analysis with the full set of 2023 data.

As a quick catch-up, Notebookcheck has a fairly comprehensive database of smartphone reviews going back over a decade, including the ability to search for benchmark results. I'm using the output of this for my analysis. The data isn't necessarily 100% accurate, and I've noticed one or two cases of mis-labelled data (eg UFS 2 where it should be UFS 3), but for the most part it seems to be pretty good. The total dataset includes 1285 reviews, around 100 a year, covering a pretty wide range of phones, from entry-level to flagship. The data I'm looking at includes only android phones, but as I'm mostly concerned about the off-the-shelf parts that Nintendo might use (eg UFS), android phones are more relevant compared to iPhones which use custom storage solutions.

To start, let's look at storage, here's the average storage capacity graphed over time:

temp-Image8756-I6.jpg


In 2016 (the year before the Switch launched) the average phone storage capacity was 26.9GB, and in 2023 (the year before the Switch 2 launch) it was 231.4GB.

As well as the average, we can also look at how the specific capacities used have changed over time:

temp-Imagevd-AJXG.jpg


In 2016, around 90% of phones had 16GB or more storage, and in 2023, around 90% of phones had 128GB or more storage. We can also see the median storage has increased from 16GB to 256GB over that time.

Looking at storage speed, we see a similar increase:

temp-Imagec-Sn2-Rw.jpg


Average sequential read speeds in 2016 were 223MB/s, which has increased to 1,574MB/s in 2023. People with hacked Switches have got around 300MB/s sequential read speeds from the internal storage, although games aren't able to achieve those speeds, due to CPU bottlenecks (which should be largely eliminated with dedicated decompression hardware on Switch 2).

Finally on the storage side we can look at storage types:

temp-Image2rez-YG.jpg


In 2016, eMMC accounted for over 90% of the market. In 2023 it took 16% of the market, with the remainder being 36% UFS 2, 26% UFS 3 and 22% UFS 4.

Next, we'll move onto RAM, where we can look at average RAM capacity over time:

temp-Imagex-QA0-E3.jpg


The average RAM capacity in 2016 was 2.6GB, which has increased to 8.8GB in 2023.

As a final bonus graph, here's the split in screen technology over the years:

temp-Imagec-Xt-Sjz.jpg


In 2016, the 82% of the smartphones reviewed used LCD screens, vs 18% using OLED. In 2023, 65% of the phones used OLED screens, vs 35% with LCD.

If we were to look purely at changes in the smartphone market from 2016 to 2023, we've seen, on average, an 8.6x increase in storage capacity, a 7x increase in storage speed and a 3.4x increase in RAM capacity. If Nintendo's hardware choices for Switch 2 were to scale alongside this, we would expect 275GB of storage, 2.1GB/s storage read speeds and 13.6GB of RAM. Or, if we choose the closest parts which are actually available, it would be 256GB of UFS 3.1 storage and 12GB of RAM.

Of course, Nintendo don't have to increase precisely in line with the smartphone market, and they may have different priorities for Switch 2 than the original Switch. Still, I think it's a useful exercise to ground our expectations with real data on how the market for mobile storage and RAM has changed since the launch of the original Switch.

Amazing post!

The most common components are likely to fit the average trend as they will be the cheapest to buy i guess
 
I don't care how much internal storage they give so long as the external option is cheap and fast like m2 or ufs.
Just not micro SD.

If they stick with SD then they better cram it full with 512 internal.

I don't think they'll stick with micro SD though ... the time is right to forge a new path.
 
The Switch's capabilities are constantly downplayed because it doesn't fit into the maximalist mindset of pushing as many pixels per second as possible.

The Nintendo Switch has the best performance per watt of any console ever made.

I don't have my own data to dispute the absolute claim above but the comparisons are valid.

Back in their 2014 keynote, Nvidia stated that their new K1 chip handily outperformed both the PS3 and Xbox 360 while consuming just 5 watts. That's 1/20th the power. The Tegra X1 has double the efficiency and double the GPU power. Yes, Nintendo did downclock and power limit the X1 that is found in the Switch, but even then it still vastly outperforms the PS3, 360 and their last console, the Wii U. When you pair that with Nvidia's excellent NVN API (underrated how great Nvidia did here), you have a lot of performance for something that consumes the same amount of power as your iPhone.

In a sense there is a maximization here - maximizing the performance of the console, but within as few watts as possible.

So this is the kind of advancement I'd be expecting. Less power draw, more modern features, handily outperform last-gen. If you want to "because Nintendo" this, they already did it in 2017. But now they get a more custom chip and AI upscaling that's designed to reduce GPU load by offloading work to tensor cores. The 'lateral thinking' here is that tech that has been deployed in PCs to make 4K RT more viable is now being used in a portable device to maximize power efficiency (though it is proven that DLSS reduces power consumption, it is not as much a priority in PC gaming as it would be in a handheld).
 
Off-topic a bit, but AYANEO NEXT LITE will have SteamOS

Seems like Ayaneo was developing a Linux version for themselves but realised that SteamOS is just very good in many ways. Real.

Nice to see a Linux OS get a lot of attention btw.
 
SteamOS will lierally become handheld windows.
That's a hope. I was running on a System76 laptop after my old gaming rig (which was running Pop!_OS anyway - I moved the motherboard to my server), but then that had two batteries pillow out, so I decided to just use my steam deck as a desktop. Used it for 6 months - fell in love with KDE at the time, and eventually built a new gaming rig and have been running nobara linux there since, and everything just sort of works.

Seems like Ayaneo was developing a Linux version for themselves but realised that SteamOS is just very good in many ways. Real.

Nice to see a Linux OS get a lot of attention btw.
That's the not-so-secret. Valve doesn't want to build hardware. They just have to lead by example sometimes.
 
If Mario is a launch title, could they not chuck a Direct in on 10th March (Mario Day)?
Feels like it wouldn’t be a great idea to overshadow Princess Peach: Showtime with the full 3D Mario announcement just two weeks prior, but I guess it could work.

Usually they don’t do too much for Mario day besides E-Shop sales of Mario universe games though.
 
That's a hope. I was running on a System76 laptop after my old gaming rig (which was running Pop!_OS anyway - I moved the motherboard to my server), but then that had two batteries pillow out, so I decided to just use my steam deck as a desktop. Used it for 6 months - fell in love with KDE at the time, and eventually built a new gaming rig and have been running nobara linux there since, and everything just sort of works.


That's the not-so-secret. Valve doesn't want to build hardware. They just have to lead by example sometimes.
We're finally seeing their old Steam Machine initiative take root!
 
Amazing post!

The most common components are likely to fit the average trend as they will be the cheapest to buy i guess

Well, the lowest capacity components will probably be the cheapest! However I do think long-term availability will be important for Nintendo. They'll want to continue manufacturing this for perhaps 7-8 years, so they'll need parts which they can actually buy 7 or 8 years from now. Very low capacities and old tech (eg eMMC) will be difficult or impossible to buy within a few years, so they're out.

One thing I'm curious about is how long UFS 2 will stick around. Entry level SoCs have started supporting UFS 3, so it might displace UFS 2 over the next few years in the low end of the market.

Another question is the availability of LPDDR5 modules at the right capacity. Switch 2's T239 SoC has a 128-bit memory interface, which means it will need a pair of 64-bit memory modules, compared to the pair of 32-bit modules used by Switch on its 64-bit memory interface. This is going to be pretty relevant going forward, as 64-bit modules are typically only used in high-end phones, with 32-bit modules used in entry level and mid-range phones. This means low-capacity 32-bit modules tend to have a longer shelf life, whereas demand for 64-bit modules is usually for higher capacity parts. A 12GB Switch 2 with two 6GB 64-bit modules would actually be on the lower end of the available capacities, so it will be interesting to see if they feel the parts will be manufactured at scale for long enough to be worth using.
 
We're finally seeing their old Steam Machine initiative take root!
Right. My only wish from them at this point is that they'd put out their own clone of an xbox controller. Make it premium. They don't even have to design it themselves. They can work with a company like Gulikit and license through them and do whatever custom they need to do to the firmware and control software in steam.

Here's a review of the Gulikit King Kong 3 Max that's just coming out:



It looks phenomenal. If Valve were to license that as the steam controller and have them continue to contract manufacture it, then we may finally have a controller that's not quite subject to the whims of Microsoft, Sony, or Nintendo.
 
The Switch's capabilities are constantly downplayed because it doesn't fit into the maximalist mindset of pushing as many pixels per second as possible.

The Nintendo Switch has the best performance per watt of any console ever made.

I don't have my own data to dispute the absolute claim above but the comparisons are valid.



In a sense there is a maximization here - maximizing the performance of the console, but within as few watts as possible.

So this is the kind of advancement I'd be expecting. Less power draw, more modern features, handily outperform last-gen. If you want to "because Nintendo" this, they already did it in 2017. But now they get a more custom chip and AI upscaling that's designed to reduce GPU load by offloading work to tensor cores. The 'lateral thinking' here is that tech that has been deployed in PCs to make 4K RT more viable is now being used in a portable device to maximize power efficiency (though it is proven that DLSS reduces power consumption, it is not as much a priority in PC gaming as it would be in a handheld).
A comment about dlss reducing power consumption:

I assume much of the reason for this is that the gpu is idling while waiting for the tensor cores to upscale the frame.

So going by this logic, if DLSS concurrency will be utilized, it should actually increase power consumption since the whole gpu would be working simultaneously.
 
So when this topic title says technology does that mean OS feature as well?
Yes! And engine, etc.

Is there a way we can break the cost down of the parts?
After the thing comes out, someone will do a teardown and a Bill of Materials estimate. Some folks have done guesswork here (including myself) but it gets tricky when you don't have an inside data on the cost of bulk purchases of component X.

Could Nintendo do a reverse Wii U with the Switch 2? Like a Wireless HDMI.
Yes, we've talked a bit about it before. I think it would be neat!

Buti in order to get really high quality performance you'd need to put some extra hardware in the dock. And with the Wii U you had the more powerful part of the hardware streaming to the smaller screen, hiding compression artifacts. Streaming from the Switch to TV would reverse that situation, with the handheld running in a lower-clocked, battery saving mode and streaming to a giant screen. So it might not be worth it.

Also, more (and fast storage) allows us for more resuspended games at once. This is one underrated feature that I want. Even juggling with only two games at once would be great.
I never wanted this, until recently. But my partner has been on a Mario Kart kick, and I've been playing RPGs without autosave. Suddenly I get the appeal
 
PS4 and Xbox don't have insufficient RAM for being more than a decade old, but the new system isn't part of that generation and will need to run newer games. And tech has evolved and games now simply need more. It's well documented that developers are frustrated and having a hard time working with the 8GB of RAM available with the Series S, to the point that Microsoft sent out an update that allows them to use a bit of the extra RAM that's reserved for the OS. If Switch 2 ships with only 8, then OS reserves eat into that, it'll literally have less RAM available to devs than even the lowest-spec offering from the competition. The three-year-old competition. I don't think it's inaccurate to call that "insufficient."
that's fair and all but that still doesn't mean games (not all games, let alone 50% of cross/current gen games) can't run with downgrading in mind, something Switch literally had for its lifetime
 
Right. My only wish from them at this point is that they'd put out their own clone of an xbox controller. Make it premium. They don't even have to design it themselves. They can work with a company like Gulikit and license through them and do whatever custom they need to do to the firmware and control software in steam.

Here's a review of the Gulikit King Kong 3 Max that's just coming out:



It looks phenomenal. If Valve were to license that as the steam controller and have them continue to contract manufacture it, then we may finally have a controller that's not quite subject to the whims of Microsoft, Sony, or Nintendo.

You mean GameCube Controller. The Xbox controller is a low quality ripoff (the face buttons are copied from NES, but they swapped A and B buttons) of the original GameCube controller./s
 
0
"Same types of games with bettererer graphics" hasn't always worked that great for Nintendo. Even with the Super NES, the system initially had slower than expected sales in the US because "it's your NES but bettererr graphics!" wasn't a great sales tool.

I think you would absolutely have to attribute this to the fact the Sega beat Nintendo to market with the Genesis by about two years and was able to establish a foothold in the market prior to the SNES launching. Without the stiff competition from the Genesis, Nintendo would have likely matched or exceeded the sales success of the NES.
 
And that's what I was trying to say last time. If the INDY was a weaker system them the NX or the Switch we have now. It shows Nintendo doesn't take the cheapest route.
It should shows that Nintendo is done with their outdated philosophy.
Not to say it was/wasnt the cheapest route or cut corners, I’m sure they could have made it far worse if they wanted to, but did Nintendo not get some level on a deal on the switch hardware given that it was a lot of reuse with the shield tech?
 
The issue is that this hardware is only really impressive for people in the context of "Oh wow, LA Noire in my hands!!" So not everyone considers Nintendo to be a graphical or technological powerhouse. The lack of real upgrade is raw power from GC to Wii and then Wii U to Switch really did harm perception for a lot of "hardcore" gamers. Hence why "because Nintendo" came to be.
Pretty much what I was trying to say
Yes! And engine, etc.
So would see system level achievement? I also thinking we might see system voice chat as well.
 
"Same types of games with bettererer graphics" hasn't always worked that great for Nintendo. Even with the Super NES, the system initially had slower than expected sales in the US because "it's your NES but bettererr graphics!" wasn't a great sales tool.

We know Nintendo. There is going to be a "new" gameplay gimmick whether some people will stomp their feet about it or not.

Beyond that I think Nintendo has an itch to show things in VR from a creative perspective, imagine 3D gaming never got Mario 64 or Zelda: OoT as a template which popularized things like Z-targeting and a proper camera system to many other devs. Nintendo is needed in the VR space, they can probably show the development community a thing or two just because they approach game design in a different way from almost any other developer. It's a new frontier in gaming and still very raw and under developed.
I mean I just don’t get this. At all. There is nothing stopping Nintendo launching a VR device. The question is why marry it with Switch 2. Nintendo also has bad luck launching new peripherals with their games console. Very bad luck. And just slightly bad luck launching consoles with new technology like 3D for example.

I don’t buy they will have a new gameplay gimmick. New Nintendo. The Switch still has the benefit of being able to β€˜Switch’ - that’s it’s selling point, and I never said anything about β€˜bettererer graphics’ - there are games right now the Switch can’t run or runs very poorly.

Software has always been their primary selling point.
It would be cool if companies wanted to do a little VR mode or something optional like for Metroid Prime 4 for example. It wouldn’t be mandatory. It’s optional for all devs and everyone can try it out of the box.
Capcom do this but I feel it only works for horror and they seem to be subsidised by Sony. Other games are VR only and the experience is arguably more mobile game than AAA game.
Last year, I performed an analysis of smartphone data from Notebookcheck to show how Switch compared to the smartphone market at the time of its release, and how things have changed (particularly in RAM and storage) since then. As we're now in 2024, I can update the analysis with the full set of 2023 data.

As a quick catch-up, Notebookcheck has a fairly comprehensive database of smartphone reviews going back over a decade, including the ability to search for benchmark results. I'm using the output of this for my analysis. The data isn't necessarily 100% accurate, and I've noticed one or two cases of mis-labelled data (eg UFS 2 where it should be UFS 3), but for the most part it seems to be pretty good. The total dataset includes 1285 reviews, around 100 a year, covering a pretty wide range of phones, from entry-level to flagship. The data I'm looking at includes only android phones, but as I'm mostly concerned about the off-the-shelf parts that Nintendo might use (eg UFS), android phones are more relevant compared to iPhones which use custom storage solutions.

To start, let's look at storage, here's the average storage capacity graphed over time:

temp-Image8756-I6.jpg


In 2016 (the year before the Switch launched) the average phone storage capacity was 26.9GB, and in 2023 (the year before the Switch 2 launch) it was 231.4GB.

As well as the average, we can also look at how the specific capacities used have changed over time:

temp-Imagevd-AJXG.jpg


In 2016, around 90% of phones had 16GB or more storage, and in 2023, around 90% of phones had 128GB or more storage. We can also see the median storage has increased from 16GB to 256GB over that time.

Looking at storage speed, we see a similar increase:

temp-Imagec-Sn2-Rw.jpg


Average sequential read speeds in 2016 were 223MB/s, which has increased to 1,574MB/s in 2023. People with hacked Switches have got around 300MB/s sequential read speeds from the internal storage, although games aren't able to achieve those speeds, due to CPU bottlenecks (which should be largely eliminated with dedicated decompression hardware on Switch 2).

Finally on the storage side we can look at storage types:

temp-Image2rez-YG.jpg


In 2016, eMMC accounted for over 90% of the market. In 2023 it took 16% of the market, with the remainder being 36% UFS 2, 26% UFS 3 and 22% UFS 4.

Next, we'll move onto RAM, where we can look at average RAM capacity over time:

temp-Imagex-QA0-E3.jpg


The average RAM capacity in 2016 was 2.6GB, which has increased to 8.8GB in 2023.

As a final bonus graph, here's the split in screen technology over the years:

temp-Imagec-Xt-Sjz.jpg


In 2016, the 82% of the smartphones reviewed used LCD screens, vs 18% using OLED. In 2023, 65% of the phones used OLED screens, vs 35% with LCD.

If we were to look purely at changes in the smartphone market from 2016 to 2023, we've seen, on average, an 8.6x increase in storage capacity, a 7x increase in storage speed and a 3.4x increase in RAM capacity. If Nintendo's hardware choices for Switch 2 were to scale alongside this, we would expect 275GB of storage, 2.1GB/s storage read speeds and 13.6GB of RAM. Or, if we choose the closest parts which are actually available, it would be 256GB of UFS 3.1 storage and 12GB of RAM.

Of course, Nintendo don't have to increase precisely in line with the smartphone market, and they may have different priorities for Switch 2 than the original Switch. Still, I think it's a useful exercise to ground our expectations with real data on how the market for mobile storage and RAM has changed since the launch of the original Switch.
Thanks this is really interesting data.
Off-topic a bit, but AYANEO NEXT LITE will have SteamOS

This is fairly exciting. MS again missing a trick not seeing what was going on and doing the basic to help OEMs. Steam can also just focus on their current pricing structure and allow others to drive its new market/range.

This is future thought but we know TV manufacturers have been cooling on 8K for improved 4K technologies. At some point I think a lot in the console space could end up supporting handheld modes. This feels less of a technology being pushed and more one that’s naturally forming due to technological development.
 
Yeah because the Nvidia leaks are hard to understand for most, people not understanding what hardware configurations would make sense to pair with the t239, and moronic, Wii era ideas like β€œNintendo’s gunna Nintendo”, β€œNintendo will never use powerful hardware”, and β€œNintendo is going to make weak hardware because there devs work best under pressure” people just except it to be weak and have no 3rd party support.
if the publication can put out an article about how much ram, storage, and the screen refresh rate (!?), they have enough knowledge to understand the basics of the leaks. if they don't, then that makes their article even less reputable
 
Not to say it was/wasnt the cheapest route or cut corners, I’m sure they could have made it far worse if they wanted to, but did Nintendo not get some level on a deal on the switch hardware given that it was a lot of reuse with the shield tech?
I don't think so. There was a big myth that Nvidia
if the publication can put out an article about how much ram, storage, and the screen refresh rate (!?), they have enough knowledge to understand the basics of the leaks. if they don't, then that makes their article even less reputable
Ram, storage, and screen refresh rate is easy to understand. FDE, the architecture, DLSS, etc aren't as easy to understand. I am not saying they are reputable. Chances are they are not. But let's not be surprise if they don't understand.
 
The Switch's capabilities are constantly downplayed because it doesn't fit into the maximalist mindset of pushing as many pixels per second as possible.

The Nintendo Switch has the best performance per watt of any console ever made.

I don't have my own data to dispute the absolute claim above but the comparisons are valid.



In a sense there is a maximization here - maximizing the performance of the console, but within as few watts as possible.

So this is the kind of advancement I'd be expecting. Less power draw, more modern features, handily outperform last-gen. If you want to "because Nintendo" this, they already did it in 2017. But now they get a more custom chip and AI upscaling that's designed to reduce GPU load by offloading work to tensor cores. The 'lateral thinking' here is that tech that has been deployed in PCs to make 4K RT more viable is now being used in a portable device to maximize power efficiency (though it is proven that DLSS reduces power consumption, it is not as much a priority in PC gaming as it would be in a handheld).
nrbq1ooz9u2c1.png


This slide is crazy, the Tegra was such a great chip then.

I remember all the talk of tablets killing consoles during 360/PS3 gen when mobile tech was making massive leaps.

Little did we know a tablet just become one of the console options.

With massive success at that lol.
 
Not to say it was/wasnt the cheapest route or cut corners, I’m sure they could have made it far worse if they wanted to, but did Nintendo not get some level on a deal on the switch hardware given that it was a lot of reuse with the shield tech?
Nvidia was desperate for customers for their tegra lineup. I think the part that sweetened the deal was that they offered NVN/ software support. Not sure if they actually got a discount for the soc.
 
0
But how can these claims be believed?

0dVNyc0.jpeg

This is a wild fake leak lmao. They threw EVERYTHING at the wall to try and make it sound so ridiculous it might be true, but it's just so silly. Cloud gaming won't be here 2 generations from now, at least not in a way that replaces current consoles. That alone debunks this.
 
that's fair and all but that still doesn't mean games (not all games, let alone 50% of cross/current gen games) can't run with downgrading in mind, something Switch literally had for its lifetime
The problem with this idea is believing that Nintendo just wants another repeat of the Switch. The vast, vast majority of current generation games over the past 7 years skipped the Switch. The biggest games like CoD, RE Remakes, Monster Hunter World, FromSoft's outings, most Ubisoft games (which you might shit on but don't forget Ass Creed moves 10s of millions of units), etc etc etc all skipped the Switch because it wasn't powerful enough. A repeat of the Switch 1 means we get only the most optimized/smaller games and the biggest heavy hitters skip the system. The biggest complaint about the Switch was the lack of major 3rd party games, so to upgrade the ram to be more than 8gigs when ram is one of the cheapest parts in a system seens like a no-brainer, even for the Nintendo you believe is completely inept.
 
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