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

[Steve]

wow
that's nuts
I'm assuming the engines are set to LOD some things which would be why it could use more ram if it existed... for example maybe it's using low LOD on some textures because memory constraints but without the constraints it could load higher res textures to memory.

I'm also guessing the CPU has a lot to do with limiting framerates as well- It's not all solved with more GPU power I mean to say.

At the very end it'll depend on optimazation and coding.

Xenoblade X is considered to have a huge mess of a code, that's why we didn't see that game get emulated immediately, because the code is a mess and that's why we'll likely see it have a ground up remake (Like paper mario thousand year door).

But this makes me intrigued how backward compatibility will look like, since i have hope that most first party game, gets an resolution and fps update because of DLSS.

The only thing giving me hope that it will be the case is BOTW was demoed at gamescom at 4k 60fps DLSS.

 

[Hermii]

At the very end it'll depend on optimazation and coding.

Xenoblade X is considered to have a huge mess of a code, that's why we didn't see that game get emulated immediately, because the code is a mess and that's why we'll likely see it have a ground up remake (Like paper mario thousand year door).

But this makes me intrigued how backward compatibility will look like, since i have hope that most first party game, gets an resolution and fps update because of DLSS.

The only thing giving me hope that it will be the case is BOTW was demoed at gamescom at 4k 60fps DLSS.

They're not getting dlss without a dedicated patch. If Nintendo will do that or not, is an open question. The gamescom thing doesn't necessarily mean anything, it was a short demo meant for a dev Audience. Not a qa tested enhancement of the entire game.

 

[oldpuck]

I mean dlss runtime is dlss runtime. As far as I understand there's nothing console specific optimizations can do to mitigate that, unless they're degrading quality.

Sure, but let's take Rich's own words into account here

This is the closest approximation we can get for the t239 GPU but, more accurately, what you're going to be seeing is an ultra low-spec ampere GPU running at low clock speeds starved of memory bandwidth. This is only going to give us a ballpark idea of what a mobile Ampere chip can deliver

How big a ballpark are we talking here? Just spitballing, but he's using different hardware that he's manually underclocked. If he gets with 10% of the real power of the hardware, I'd call that a slam-dunk.

He's measuring DLSS cost inside of a video game, not in a pure test case. He's comparing the average frame time of a native res run to the average frame time of a DLSS run. That's going to have at least a tiny bit of error. Plus Death Stranding's DLSS implementation is a black box, where other settings may change along with enabling DLSS (like post-processing). Getting within 5% would be impressive.

Rich's measurement is 18ms. If we apply that combined 15% fudge factor, we get a range of 15.3-20.8ms. The biggest conclusion is that DLSS 4k is expensive, not "possible" or "impossible." Both of those numbers are certainly within the "viable for 30fps" range, at least.

Whether or not that level of DLSS is worth it is another question, but leave that to game developers. Which brings me to a second Rich quote.

Remember that Switch games typically receive some tweaks to content in order to smooth out performance, or we get stuff like Dynamic resolution scaling added. It's called optimizing for the strengths and the weaknesses of a specific platform, and that's a magic ingredient that none of our testing here is going to be able to highlight

We can't lower DLSS time, but can we find ways to hide it on console? And the answer is yes, Nintendo already has an optimization that it uses on Switch that would be very handy - NVN lets you render one frame while the CPU is busy with a different frame. Instead of having 16.6ms for CPU and GPU total you get 33.3 ms, while staying 60fps. There are some caveats to this, but it's a very common trick for Nintendo first party games.

Looking back at the error bars, 15.3ms seems positively reasonable now! Which brings me to a point that is totally personal. I think Rich has absolutely nailed it, but I don't believe Nintendo would choose to make DLSS 4k just barely impossible.

Nintendo choses the hardware they get. Rich's tests are very good, but T239 wasn't a chip found in a dessert. If DLSS were half as fast as it seems to be, sure, Nintendo probably wouldn't go out of their way to make it work. But if it's close, Nintendo would be crazy to not go out of their way to make it possible.

Perhaps that means a slightly bigger fan and pushed clock speeds. Maybe it means a custom "GPU overdrive" mode, where CPU gets clocked down to nothing, and the GPU gets overclocked. Rich's overall point is that 4k isn't free, and we shouldn't expect it universally, which I think this thread already understood when that video came out. But if it's nothing more than a little bit of tweaking to get there, I think Nintendo would make sure that they had all those tools in their pocket.

 

[oldpuck]

I guess that games that aren’t hard capped at 4GB will use more on Switch 2 then?

Depends on if Switch caps in BC mode.

 

[Brofield]

I remember with Tears of the Kingdom, the game will try and grab as much RAM/VRAM on emulators (Yuzu and RyujiNX), which most games didn't do that. I had suspicions that was less of an emulator quirk and more of the game being designed that way. Guess that confirms it.

Here's a silly thought process, what happens if TOTK has access to more than 16GB of RAM (whether via emulators or soldered RAM slots on a Switch console)? Does it still cap at 16GB of use, or is it just grabbing as much as is available?

More or less I'm wondering if this gives a hint regarding how much RAM the dev team is expecting to have access to on Switch 2 when the cartridge is popped into a new console, or at the very least that this game already had work done at a base level to ensure it has a next-gen patch ready to go on more capable hardware if the game logic knows it'll be able to look for more RAM than is currently provided on the current system it's running on (assuming Nintendo still hasn't yet decided on how much RAM the new system would have at the time of release).

 

[Ojoloco]

I don't know if this video has been posted here yet but someone managed to de-solder the RAM modules on a OLED model switch and solder two 4GB ones for a total of 8GB (at a way higher frequency as well).


Some of the games are able to use more than 4GB of RAM while others are hard capped to 4.

That person is using a mod to force ToTK to render at a higher resolution and even with the additional RAM* the game's struggling at ~12FPS to run it at a higher target resolution.
*and maybe VRAM as well which is shared, although the video doesn't have any vram usage stat to confirm the vram increased with the upgrade.

Which begs the question: assuming that the extra memory installed is also being allocated to vram, what's really making the gpu struggle when rendering at a higher resolution?

What exactly in a game besides textures resolution, poligon count, shaders and maybe shadows and particles that is making the switch gpu struggle?
would the exact same architecture on switch 1 but with say, twice the cuda cores count fix this?

Interesting, the games that are able to use more ram are recent games like Mortal Kombat 1, Kingdom Come or Zelda TotK

 

[MP!]

Here's a silly thought process, what happens if TOTK has access to more than 16GB of RAM (whether via emulators or soldered RAM slots on a Switch console)? Does it still cap at 16GB of use, or is it just grabbing as much as is available?

More or less I'm wondering if this gives a hint regarding how much RAM the dev team is expecting to have access to on Switch 2 when the cartridge is popped into a new console, or at the very least that this game already had work done at a base level to ensure it has a next-gen patch ready to go on more capable hardware if the game logic knows it'll be able to look for more RAM than is currently provided on the current system it's running on (assuming Nintendo still hasn't yet decided on how much RAM the new system would have at the time of release).

I'm doubting so much that this is a hint at future ram pools ... more like the engines are designed that way and when running out of memory they tend to compress/load smaller detailed assets to memory...
When no longer memory bound it could be that the engine now no longer thinks it needs to hold back on assets in memory and loads the full sized texture/model/whatever.
At least that's my thought process...

It just shows the nature of engine scalability that we have now.

 

[JoshuaJSlone]

Yeah. I saw this video. I watched it again. So yeah, the latency is the problem and not rendering in 4K DLSS. Here is the part where I am confuse is it the gap itself the cause of latency, 720p native to 4K DLSS or just 4K DLSS itself?

As far as we can tell, DLSS creating an image of a particular resolution takes a fixed time regardless of what input resolution it is given.

 

[darthdiablo]

Interesting, the games that are able to use more ram are recent games like Mortal Kombat 1, Kingdom Come or Zelda TotK

Prepping for usage on Switch 2?

 

[navierStokes]

That person is using a mod to force ToTK to render at a higher resolution and even with the additional RAM* the game's struggling at ~12FPS to run it at a higher target resolution.
*and maybe VRAM as well which is shared, although the video doesn't have any vram usage stat to confirm the vram increased with the upgrade.

I have to say, if that's 4k native, 12fps is quite impressive.
That's such a large leap in resolution, as it is normally 900p for docked mode, but at 4k that little GPU now has to ~5.8 times the amount of pixels per frame. Seems like the user in the video has a lot more experimental videos too, pretty cool .

 

[Pokemaniac]

I remember with Tears of the Kingdom, the game will try and grab as much RAM/VRAM on emulators (Yuzu and RyujiNX), which most games didn't do that. I had suspicions that was less of an emulator quirk and more of the game being designed that way. Guess that confirms it.

That video is using a mod, so it's not necessarily representative of what the actual game code would do.

I don't know if this video has been posted here yet but someone managed to de-solder the RAM modules on a OLED model switch and solder two 4GB ones for a total of 8GB (at a way higher frequency as well).


Some of the games are able to use more than 4GB of RAM while others are hard capped to 4.

That person is using a mod to force ToTK to render at a higher resolution and even with the additional RAM* the game's struggling at ~12FPS to run it at a higher target resolution.
*and maybe VRAM as well which is shared, although the video doesn't have any vram usage stat to confirm the vram increased with the upgrade.

Which begs the question: assuming that the extra memory installed is also being allocated to vram, what's really making the gpu struggle when rendering at a higher resolution?

What exactly in a game besides textures resolution, poligon count, shaders and maybe shadows and particles that is making the switch gpu struggle?
would the exact same architecture on switch 1 but with say, twice the cuda cores count fix this?

RAM is necessary to boost resolutions, but the GPU is more important to the actual performance.

 

[PedroNavajas]

Are those games really using more VRAM other than the one required to boost the resolution?

 

[Ojoloco]

I'm doubting so much that this is a hint at future ram pools ... more like the engines are designed that way and when running out of memory they tend to compress/load smaller detailed assets to memory...
When no longer memory bound it could be that the engine now no longer thinks it needs to hold back on assets in memory and loads the full sized texture/model/whatever.
At least that's my thought process...

It just shows the nature of engine scalability that we have now.

The games shown with that ability share the engine with other Switch games, which don't support more than 4GB of RAM

 

[MP!]

The games shown with that ability share the engine with other Switch games, which don't support more than 4GB of RAM

sure but each game could be configured how they want
meaning not all games need that kind of configuration, it wouldn't be surprising to me that certain games would be coded differently to fit their needs.

Games across multiple platforms that share an engine are configured differently to hit different targets for example.

 

[crazybenjamin]

What’s y’all opinion on Nintendo canning the switch pro.

Like would y’all consider it a smart move to have an higher leap for the switch 2 instead of getting the pro.

There’s also the negative of the pro consoles, in which company still has to port for the vanilla switch.

And wouldn’t it also convince more people to upgrade instead of just keeping the pro version of the console.

I've expressed my distaste for a hypothetical Switch Pro in the past, but it largely boils down to this: I don't see how a Pro wouldn't have come at the expense of first-class support for the base model, people talk about how the current Switch provides an unplayable experience but it would have been worse if devs could use the "just buy a Pro" excuse.

Nintendo wouldn't have limited it by forcing games to support the base hardware. That's a Sony/MS thing.

Well, that just makes me even more glad that we didn't get a Pro, for the same reason that the 3rd of March 2023 was the absolute earliest date that I would have been OK with an actual successor releasing.

 

[kingman]

Do you guys think Nintendo will release the next Mario game exclusively for Switch 2? I hope they do. My dream is to have Mario Galaxy 3 as a launch title utilizing the full power of the Switch 2. and that won't happen if they do a dual release with Switch 1

 

[Darknut85]

Do you guys think Nintendo will release the next Mario game exclusively for Switch 2? I hope they do. My dream is to have Mario Galaxy 3 as a launch title utilizing the full power of the Switch 2. and that won't happen if they do a dual release with Switch 1

I‘m 100% sure it‘s gonna be exclusive, even though the likelihood for a new Super Mario Galaxy is unfortunately lower, I‘m afraid.

 

[Ojoloco]

sure but each game could be configured how they want
meaning not all games need that kind of configuration, it wouldn't be surprising to me that certain games would be coded differently to fit their needs.

Games across multiple platforms that share an engine are configured differently to hit different targets for example.

But then we return again to the fact that it is not a matter of the engine, but rather that they have put that option in those games.

So it's not something about scalability of the engines, if a few games have them implemented while others with which they share an engine do not have that implemented.

 

[NineTailSage]

That video is using a mod, so it's not necessarily representative of what the actual game code would do.

RAM is necessary to boost resolutions, but the GPU is more important to the actual performance.

Also the RAM amount still doesn't correct the fact that Switch is memory bandwidth starved to run games at 1080p for a game like TotK.

It would be interesting to find out in the R&D stages of Switch 2, if they used BotW and maybe a demanding 3dr party game or (the UE5 Matrix Awakens demo) to stress test dev-kits to the upper limit of what they could achieve on this new hardware. Not only by maxing out the resolution and to achieve (double the performance w/BotW 4k demo) from the sheer uplift in T239 over Mariko.

In porting their most demanding/expensive Switch game versus the pinnacle of what's possible in the latest game engine currently available (in getting the Matrix Awakens to run acceptable enough) in comparison to current gen consoles would be a massive balancing act...

 

[omniryu]

I have to say, if that's 4k native, 12fps is quite impressive.
That's such a large leap in resolution, as it is normally 900p for docked mode, but at 4k that little GPU now has to ~5.8 times the amount of pixels per frame. Seems like the user in the video has a lot more experimental videos too, pretty cool .

It took me now to watch the video and fully process what just happened. I skipped it because simply this is the original Switch with that Tegra X1 running tears of the kingdom in 4K.

Heck, when he went into the shrine it jump to 22 frame per second, I had subscribed.

 

[Hermii]

Do you guys think Nintendo will release the next Mario game exclusively for Switch 2? I hope they do. My dream is to have Mario Galaxy 3 as a launch title utilizing the full power of the Switch 2. and that won't happen if they do a dual release with Switch 1

I would give it 80-20 in favor of exclusivity.

Taken out of my ass.

 

[Danny]

Do you guys think Nintendo will release the next Mario game exclusively for Switch 2? I hope they do. My dream is to have Mario Galaxy 3 as a launch title utilizing the full power of the Switch 2. and that won't happen if they do a dual release with Switch 1

If Nintendo releases all their games both for Switch 2 and Switch 1 that would just mean that the only people caring about upgrading to Switch 2 would be the most dedicated gamers that care most about FPS and resolution upgrades, none of the more casual crowd would bother getting a Switch 2 if they could still play all new games on Switch 1.

And for Nintendo that would be a problem because they have a user base that is less power obsessed than the user base Xbox and PS have for example. My thinking is that due to the fact a lot of players on Xbox and PS care about power those companies can release new consoles that is mostly about upgrading to get more power, that is why they can continue to release cross gen releases for years with minimal problem. If Nintendo did cross gen releases for years i think it would lead to much less gamers upgrading to Switch 2 than what happened for PS5.

 

[Samuspet]

I don't think this is an accurate statement to make right now.
We don't know the final clocks just yet, but there's a real chance of Switch 2 CPU being 60-70% of Series S performance and by mathematical standards that's pretty close...

Also Switch 1 had many bottlenecks plaguing the hardware and I fully expect we will see many games look pretty similar between Switch 2 and Series S.

Sorry for the late reply...

I personally think expecting 60-70% performance for Switch 2's CPU of an 8 core/16 thread 3.5GHz very good desktop CPU in a hybrid device (4 years later or not) is setting crazy expectations. Switch was able to hit around 60% the performance of PS4/Xbone CPU performance because they were absolutely atrocious CPU's even at those consoles launch in 2013... PS5/Series CPU's were (and still are) very good CPU's providing 60fps performance modes in 99% of games released and 100+fps in many cross gen / multiplayer focused games aswell as decent RT in select AAA games at 30fps when RT is very CPU intensive.

 

[BreakAtmo]

Alex is estimating from a large machine and I think considering that he’s remarkably consistent with Rich’s measurement.

But I think the key is that measuring the capabilities of the hardware is a far cry from knowing what devs can do with those capabilities. Rich says so himself in this video - even if Rich is right on the money with DLSS timings, it totally leaves console specific optimizations out of the question.

There's also the concurrent DLSS thing, though that could be considered one of those very optimisations.

 

[GPKs3]

Do you guys think Nintendo will release the next Mario game exclusively for Switch 2?

They certainly should. A new Mario adventure that takes advantage of the new hardware and wows people is a sure fire way to get them to buy your new console.

 

[Andre3333456]

Do you guys think Nintendo will release the next Mario game exclusively for Switch 2?

100% yes, it will likely be a Switch 2 launch title.

 

[eye0h]

whoever said every day is a day closer to the announcement could not have forseen where we are now

 

[Hermii]

whoever said every day is a day closer to the announcement could not have forseen where we are now

I mean its technically true, no matter when the announcement is.

 

[NineTailSage]

Sorry for the late reply...

I personally think expecting 60-70% performance for Switch 2's CPU of an 8 core/16 thread 3.5GHz very good desktop CPU in a hybrid device (4 years later or not) is setting crazy expectations. Switch was able to hit around 60% the performance of PS4/Xbone CPU performance because they were absolutely atrocious CPU's even at those consoles launch in 2013... PS5/Series CPU's were (and still are) very good CPU's providing 60fps performance modes in 99% of games released and 100+fps in many cross gen / multiplayer focused games aswell as decent RT in select AAA games at 30fps when RT is very CPU intensive.

It's not that farfetched though, Switch 1 achieved about 50% of PS4 cpu with only three cores dedicated for gaming.
The same uplift that Zen 2 achieved over the Jaguar cores is about equivalent to what A78 achieved over A57, but this time Switch 2 will have more core parity with PS5/Series X and S.

Zen 2 was a major step up over Jaguar for sure, but these CPU's were never going to look great overtime in the face of not only Zen 3 but Zen 4 as well on the desktop.

Probably why there are early rumors of Microsoft's next-gen console possibly having an ARM CPU set-up. For the die space and wattage they dedicated for Zen 2, in a next-gen console they could easily have a 16-24 core CPU(or more). That could also be the base for a handheld gaming device but with a cut down GPU and they probably wouldn't miss x86 at all. The future of the industry is to get away from the x86 architecture eventually, so it's not a if but when all of this will happen by...

 

[Darknut85]

I mean its technically true, no matter when the announcement is.

Except if there’s no announcement at all, and we’re doomed./s

 

[MP!]

But then we return again to the fact that it is not a matter of the engine, but rather that they have put that option in those games.

So it's not something about scalability of the engines, if a few games have them implemented while others with which they share an engine do not have that implemented.

My point is that it’s not a hint at new hardware, but a method of optimizing for limited hardware. Its not looking for “more ram” it’s looking for “available ram”

 

[MP!]

Do you guys think Nintendo will release the next Mario game exclusively for Switch 2? I hope they do. My dream is to have Mario Galaxy 3 as a launch title utilizing the full power of the Switch 2. and that won't happen if they do a dual release with Switch 1

I know this isn’t the same because Wii was in the ballpark as GameCube and switch was in the ballpark as Wii U
But both twilight princess AND Breath of the Wild launched on old hardware and it didn’t hurt the sales of the new thing at all.

Now we have a different situation, a good selling machine with a huge install base releasing a newer more powerful machine. I don’t think it would hurt new console sales to release cross gen games. But it is a different scenario… so maybe they decide against it. But with how games scale I don’t see why they wouldn’t put it on both. I just don’t see them ignoring their huge ACTIVE install base.

I guess I can see them not releasing a game if it literally can’t be played on old switch, and I’m not talking graphics.

 

[Danny]

I know this isn’t the same because Wii was in the ballpark as GameCube and switch was in the ballpark as Wii U
But both twilight princess AND Breath of the Wild launched on old hardware and it didn’t hurt the sales of the new thing at all.

Now we have a different situation, a good selling machine with a huge install base releasing a newer more powerful machine. I don’t think it would hurt new console sales to release cross gen games. But it is a different scenario… so maybe they decide against it. But with how games scale I don’t see why they wouldn’t put it on both. I just don’t see them ignoring their huge ACTIVE install base.

I guess I can see them not releasing a game if it literally can’t be played on old switch, and I’m not talking graphics.

I think the situation is very different. The Wii U was a pretty much dead system. So it was natural that everyone would jump over to Switch. That is why BOTW sold so few copies on the Wii U compared to the switch version

With the Switch 2 transition the challenge is not to move on from a dead console to a new console but about making the Switch user base want to transition from a very much living system to the Switch 2. I don't think offering the same games but with better fps and resolution on the Switch 2 is enough to make the bulk of the switch user base upgrade to the Switch 2. That can only happen with exclusive switch 2 games.

 

[NineTailSage]

I know this isn’t the same because Wii was in the ballpark as GameCube and switch was in the ballpark as Wii U
But both twilight princess AND Breath of the Wild launched on old hardware and it didn’t hurt the sales of the new thing at all.

Now we have a different situation, a good selling machine with a huge install base releasing a newer more powerful machine. I don’t think it would hurt new console sales to release cross gen games. But it is a different scenario… so maybe they decide against it. But with how games scale I don’t see why they wouldn’t put it on both. I just don’t see them ignoring their huge ACTIVE install base.

I guess I can see them not releasing a game if it literally can’t be played on old switch, and I’m not talking graphics.

I think in both situations the GC to Wii and then from WiiU to Switch, there wasn't a significant enough uplift in performance to outright leave those previous specific generations behind. In this manner though, not since going from the N64 to GC has Nintendo had such a balanced performance increase to where it will have to fundamentally change how they make their games or (does Nintendo run the risk of falling into the dreaded bloated game budget trap)...

 

[MP!]

I think the situation is very different. The Wii U was a pretty much dead system. So it was natural that everyone would jump over to Switch. That is why BOTW sold so few copies on the Wii U compared to the switch version

With the Switch 2 transition the challenge is not to move on from a dead console to a new console but about making the Switch user base want to transition from a very much living system to the Switch 2. I don't think offering the same games but with better fps and resolution on the Switch 2 is enough to make the bulk of the switch user base upgrade to the Switch 2. That can only happen with exclusive switch 2 games.

Yeah it’s true
I just don’t think Mario needs to be that game. Could be…

I think mario kart could be that game a year-ish later.

 

[Goodtwin]

whoever said every day is a day closer to the announcement could not have forseen where we are now

LOL, no questions about it. Its funny, because in late 2022 I felt more confident that an announcement was imminent because I expected it to launch with Zelda TotK. Now roughly 18 months later we are still waiting on an announcement. I do still believe we will hear something at or before the upcoming investors meeting. Unfortunately I would give it a 50% chance of being simple PR statement that new hardware is coming in 2025 and more details will be revealed at a later date. There is no question in my mind that Nintendo has dragged their feet a bit with new hardware because the Switch has maintained excellent sales. If sales had slumped hard in 2022, I suspect Nintendo would have dropped hammer and focused on launch prep for the new generation. Even now after seven years on the market, Nintendo is still reluctant to announce the damn thing because the Switch is still selling.

 

[Brofield]

I'm doubting so much that this is a hint at future ram pools ... more like the engines are designed that way and when running out of memory they tend to compress/load smaller detailed assets to memory...
When no longer memory bound it could be that the engine now no longer thinks it needs to hold back on assets in memory and loads the full sized texture/model/whatever.
At least that's my thought process...

It just shows the nature of engine scalability that we have now.

The games shown with that ability share the engine with other Switch games, which don't support more than 4GB of RAM

sure but each game could be configured how they want
meaning not all games need that kind of configuration, it wouldn't be surprising to me that certain games would be coded differently to fit their needs.

Games across multiple platforms that share an engine are configured differently to hit different targets for example.

But then we return again to the fact that it is not a matter of the engine, but rather that they have put that option in those games.

So it's not something about scalability of the engines, if a few games have them implemented while others with which they share an engine do not have that implemented.

My point is that it’s not a hint at new hardware, but a method of optimizing for limited hardware. Its not looking for “more ram” it’s looking for “available ram”

First, I do wanna give thanks to both of you for offering the countering viewpoints beyond the limited scope of my tech understanding.

So, to jump off MP!'s last post about the game looking for "available RAM" as opposed to "more RAM", it's not quite the hint we take it as for new hardware capabilities, not unless a deep dive is taken into the source code by someone with the technical know-how who can parse what they're supposed to be looking for, correct?

TOTK was built on Nintendo's internal LunchPack game engine toolkit, just like Splatoon 3, Ring Fit Adventure, ARMS, Super Mario Maker, Nintendo Switch Sports, and probably more that I can't yet identify through Google.

I think where I'm being lost in the conversation is that the engine has versatility and scalability, but they might not be as relevant as the options are being implemented on a case by case basis, right? But if these options are being implemented deliberately especially in the latter releases, is there a pattern between the games released as early as 2016 on Wii U (2GB DDR3 RAM) compared to those released in 2023 on Switch (4GB LPDDR4) before an imminent console successor launch?

If I'm being honest I'm wondering if I'm even using half these terms correctly, so if anyone here knows what I'm trying to say by all means please translate my post

 

[omniryu]

So I will be honest, as far as it comes to power draw. I always felt lost. But in the Totk 4K video the guy never really went past 2 watts and he raise the GPU to 1.4 ghz and the CPU to 1.5 to 2.5 ghz and this on what 20 nm or 16 nm? What am I not getting about the core clock speed for next-gen switch? I see a lot of people say it can be around 500 mhz portable and 1 ghz docked. To me, it seems like it should be higher than that right?

Is the draw too high, and I misinterpreting the info on screen?

 

[ILikeFeet]

First, I do wanna give thanks to both of you for offering the countering viewpoints beyond the limited scope of my tech understanding.

So, to jump off MP!'s last post about the game looking for "available RAM" as opposed to "more RAM", it's not quite the hint we take it as for new hardware capabilities, not unless a deep dive is taken into the source code by someone with the technical know-how who can parse what they're supposed to be looking for, correct?

TOTK was built on Nintendo's internal LunchPack game engine toolkit, just like Splatoon 3, Ring Fit Adventure, ARMS, Super Mario Maker, Nintendo Switch Sports, and probably more that I can't yet identify through Google.

I think where I'm being lost in the conversation is that the engine has versatility and scalability, but they might not be as relevant as the options are being implemented on a case by case basis, right? But if these options are being implemented deliberately especially in the latter releases, is there a pattern between the games released as early as 2016 on Wii U (2GB DDR3 RAM) compared to those released in 2023 on Switch (4GB LPDDR4) before an imminent console successor launch?

If I'm being honest I'm wondering if I'm even using half these terms correctly, so if anyone here knows what I'm trying to say by all means please translate my post

this isn't a clue to anything, just how things are programmed these days. not everything needs to be in memory so when spare space is made, some other processes can use that space to speed up tasks or do higher quality tasks

also, TotK isn't on lunchpack, but modulesystem, as is some other recent games. lunchpack seems to have been sunsetted

 

[Aufhebung RPG]

So I will be honest, as far as it comes to power draw. I always felt lost. But in the Totk 4K video the guy never really went past 2 watts and he raise the GPU to 1.4 ghz and the CPU to 1.5 to 2.5 ghz and this on what 20 nm or 16 nm? What am I not getting about the core clock speed for next-gen switch? I see a lot of people say it can be around 500 mhz portable and 1 ghz docked. To me, it seems like it should be higher than that right?

Is the draw too high, and I misinterpreting the info on screen?

550mhz and 1.1ghz are the theoretical peak clock frequencies for the t239, all discussions are based on the "theoretical peak", no one can confirm which clock frequency Nintendo will use.

 

[omniryu]

TOTK was built on Nintendo's internal LunchPack game engine toolkit, just like Splatoon 3, Ring Fit Adventure, ARMS, Super Mario Maker, Nintendo Switch Sports, and probably more that I can't yet identify through Google.

Man, me and Steve are going to need your skills when we raid Nintendo's headquarters.

 

[omniryu]

550mhz and 1.1ghz are the theoretical peak clock frequencies for the t239, all discussions are based on the "theoretical peak", no one can confirm which clock frequency Nintendo will use.

Hmm, I see. I guess we won't know until some indie devs get their hands on it.

 

[Aufhebung RPG]

Hmm, I see. I guess we won't know until some indie devs get their hands on it.

And most importantly, we can't confirm the t239 process, the theoretical peaks of 550mhz and 1.1ghz are conclusions drawn assuming that Nintendo will use a 4N process, if not 4N, this data will need to be added or subtracted

 

[LiC]

 

[Brofield]

this isn't a clue to anything, just how things are programmed these days. not everything needs to be in memory so when spare space is made, some other processes can use that space to speed up tasks or do higher quality tasks

also, TotK isn't on lunchpack, but modulesystem, as is some other recent games. lunchpack seems to have been sunsetted

Ah, I see. Thank you for the clarification! Hopefully someone else also learns from this before they go down the same weird rabbithole I did haha

Good to know too, from what I was seeing I thought LunchPack was still in active use, but then again I also briefly misread Havok as being used for TOTK when it was for BOTW

Man, me and Steve are going to need your skills when we raid Nintendo's headquarters.

I wouldn't be so sure about that, not if I'm getting stuff wrong in the first place like above

 

[Darknut85]

* Hidden text: cannot be quoted. *

 

[MP!]

but they might not be as relevant as the options are being implemented on a case by case basis, right?

Sure
Ilikefeet answered it pretty good

I’d like to add that the customization of features and how games load stuff to memory is more due to the needs of each individual game…
BOTW isn’t Mario party
And TOTK isn’t switch sports
They may not need to be so heavily managed…
Different games have different needs even if the engine has the same tools

 

[Leinad]

Do you guys think Nintendo will release the next Mario game exclusively for Switch 2? I hope they do. My dream is to have Mario Galaxy 3 as a launch title utilizing the full power of the Switch 2. and that won't happen if they do a dual release with Switch 1

100%, I think

 

[Leinad]

I‘m 100% sure it‘s gonna be exclusive, even though the likelihood for a new Super Mario Galaxy is unfortunately lower, I‘m afraid.

It's a personal dream for me, but a witch full thinking in real world, I suppose.

 

[Brofield]

* Hidden text: cannot be quoted. *