• Hey everyone, staff have documented a list of banned content and subject matter that we feel are not consistent with site values, and don't make sense to host discussion of on Famiboards. This list (and the relevant reasoning per item) is viewable here.
  • Furukawa Speaks! We discuss the announcement of the Nintendo Switch Successor and our June Direct Predictions on the new episode of the Famiboards Discussion Club! Check it out here!

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

Reader mode
Aether said:
Where I'm still struggling is to understand why the eshop is so sluggish, where the limitation lies. The data? It can stream video. Loading 9-12 thumbnails at a time should really not be a problem. The one core being to little? The games not running, the cores should be available. To little ram to keep stuff in it? That's the only thing I could think of, but then again, if it's enough to store 30 Seconds of video, stream YouTube I can't see it as a problem.
The backend? At least on the phone the pages load pretty fast. To high compression taxing the CPU to reduce data load? Would be Kinda ironic when they expect you to buy games with multiple GB.
That it's implemented as a endless list with wonky reload triggers? Maybe that.

I'm just confused where the limitation lies 🤔
Click to expand...

I'll preface I am not a programmer (Engineering in Construction is more accurate), but my first thought is if the app is slow (forget if it’s web based or not for the sake of argument), then it's likely two possibilities: 1) Bad coding, or 2) Not enough horsepower. And yet, it is also possible for both to be true in this case, which I think is ultimately the case for the Switch here. Their code isn’t sufficient for the available horsepower.

Nintendo wanted to make the eShop the way it was for whatever reason they made, and they’ve stuck with it since it launched. I’m sure they've made some optimizations along the way, so my hunch is Nintendo could’ve made the eShop even more optimized, less laggy, and likely a more user friendly experience, but opted not to because…reasons. I honestly don’t buy the argument that the CPU core isn’t somehow strong enough to run it. It could run it IF AND ONLY IF the eShop was better programmed, and I think it ultimately isn’t. Nintendo ran into the same issues with the Wii U while they had a full 1 GB of Ram available to them, and the whole OS was slower than molasses. For what Nintendo does very well in the gaming software side of things, I think they’re historically rather terrible on the non-gaming software side of things…and that's ok. That's where you hire it out to the right people who do this sort of thing, but like some folks have pointed out to me, this version of the eShop was around prior to the Switch, and Nintendo probably felt it was “good enough.” Not bad, not great, but adequate for their purposes.

And I think the eShop does still function as a storefront. Again, I think there’s some poor engineering behind it, and optimizations.

“Oh, but the CPU is too slow! We can’t make it any faster.”

”Then overhaul the UI, change the format of the eShop to better suit the hardware given to you, and try again.”

“But we've tried, and it’s just impossible! The technology doesn’t exist!“

”TONY STARK WAS ABLE TO BUILD THIS IN A CAVE…WITH A BOX OF SCRAPS!!!!”
 
There aren't too many 3rd party games that I want for the Switch successor off the top of my head, but I do want to see MGS4 for it, assuming it will be part of the Metal Gear Solid Vol. 2 collection
 
Dekuman said:
I agree. I think the real headline if they want to re-create the skyrim moment is GTAVI or some other upcoming 'next-gen' game on the teaser, but let's be honest, there's a difference between showing the new Assassin's Creed, even if its on max settings on Switch 2 reveal and showing GTAVI even if there's some cutbacks and it's only running at 30fps with DLSS.

The latter would be the Skyrim moment.
Click to expand...
GTA VI on Switch 2 would crash the internet. The amount of hyped people there are for this game is gargantuan.

Even if there weren't any big exclusives for Switch 2 at launch, GTA VI being available would guarentee units flying off of the shelves.
 
HyruleanKnight said:
They're on the same piece of silicon. That's the selling point.

Or look at it this way: They now have access to a feature that was otherwise not possible without introducing a second piece of silicon that would increase a) cost b) power consumption c) heat output and so we wouldn't be having an average "PC" anymore.

The point wasn't that they are separate ideas, but rather that Nvidia's silicon comes at a premium in these form factors because they're useless without a CPU. Again, a SoC that combines Nvidia's GPU with the appropriate CPU cores would be the equivalent, which is the topic of discussion, that currently does not exist. You could make an argument for the Tegra Orin lineup but they're not really designed for use in regular laptops and the CPUs on those are nowhere near competitive enough.

I think I understand where you're getting caught up on. "PC" is an umbrella term that we use to describe any kind of personal computer that isn't a Mac; anything from a SoC-powered low power ultra book to a Core i9 + 4090 desktop can be referred to as a "PC." But the topic of discussion here is about the average "PC" that will be in hands of the vast majority of people within the next few years to drive the mass use of AI - this is the context you were missing.

GPUs are optional, CPUs are not; the average "PC" does not have a dedicated GPU. Rather, by limiting access to AI only on PCs with a dGPU you are essentially throttling mass adoption of the technology. That is why having an NPU built-into the CPU is important, even if GPUs render them useless. Think of this as a iGPU vs dGPU situation - every PC needs an iGPU, whether you choose to use a dGPU or not. Ofcourse dGPUs will always be faster, but that wasn't the point.
Click to expand...
I think you bring up a valid distinction - this very much is about bringing these features "down-market" and "down-formfactor", and Nvidia doesn't have any (announced) products to help with that despite being at the forefront of PC AI as a whole.

Your point on GPUs however is flawed. GPUs have technically never been optional on PC. Home micros survived without them, but the PC platform has quite literally always mandated them. However, not every PC needs an iGPU- my previous tower very much didn't have one, and many today still don't. Especially PCs with dGPUs where the iGPU does little or nothing but suck up energy. If your iGPU has AI acceleration on the same piece of silicon as your CPU, you're getting most of the benefits of an "inside the CPU" NPU. This is the case for T239, of course.
 
For mentioning a banned game despite being made aware of the banned content list from prior feedback, you have been banned for three days. - meatbag, MissingNo, Zellia, Tangerine_Cookie
I'm betting the Skyrim at launch will be Cyberpunk ray reconstructed. The "it ran poopy at launch on last gen" thing will only help make the Switch 2 look better by comparison.

Elden Ring or Red Dead 2 could also be big launches.

GTA 6 may well come. But I wouldn't bet on day and date, good ports of big games take time. But even promising a year after launch, with a trailer, would be more than enough.
 
Concernt said:
I think you bring up a valid distinction - this very much is about bringing these features "down-market" and "down-formfactor", and Nvidia doesn't have any (announced) products to help with that despite being at the forefront of PC AI as a whole.

Your point on GPUs however is flawed. GPUs have technically never been optional on PC. Home micros survived without them, but the PC platform has quite literally always mandated them. However, not every PC needs an iGPU- my previous tower very much didn't have one, and many today still don't. Especially PCs with dGPUs where the iGPU does little or nothing but suck up energy. If your iGPU has AI acceleration on the same piece of silicon as your CPU, you're getting most of the benefits of an "inside the CPU" NPU. This is the case for T239, of course.
Click to expand...
I know not every PC needs an iGPU, because mine sure doesn't XD

But it would be a nice to have. If my GPU stopped working all of a sudden, it'd be a nice fall back option. But you and I are a very niche within a niche, the number of Intel F skus or AM4 PCs out there that isn't on a G series CPU is miniscule compared to the rest of the market. If I was still on my old 3400G system then I could've made a much stronger argument for an NPU without a dGPU.

GPUs have technically never been optional on PC
Click to expand...
This is not true at all. For every PC with a dGPU inside, there are probably hundreds without. That sounds very optional to me. And it is those hundreds of dGPU-less PCs that the market needs to adapt to AI, not the minority with privileged access to a premium like a dGPU. For the record, thick, power hungry form factors can be a privilege too. Not everyone is buying a gaming laptop, however.

This discussion has veered way off topic so I won't be continuing any further. Back to Nintendo shenanigans.
 
Shoulder said:
I'll preface I am not a programmer (Engineering in Construction is more accurate), but my first thought is if the app is slow (forget if it’s web based or not for the sake of argument), then it's likely two possibilities: 1) Bad coding, or 2) Not enough horsepower. And yet, it is also possible for both to be true in this case, which I think is ultimately the case for the Switch here. Their code isn’t sufficient for the available horsepower.

Nintendo wanted to make the eShop the way it was for whatever reason they made, and they’ve stuck with it since it launched. I’m sure they've made some optimizations along the way, so my hunch is Nintendo could’ve made the eShop even more optimized, less laggy, and likely a more user friendly experience, but opted not to because…reasons. I honestly don’t buy the argument that the CPU core isn’t somehow strong enough to run it. It could run it IF AND ONLY IF the eShop was better programmed, and I think it ultimately isn’t. Nintendo ran into the same issues with the Wii U while they had a full 1 GB of Ram available to them, and the whole OS was slower than molasses. For what Nintendo does very well in the gaming software side of things, I think they’re historically rather terrible on the non-gaming software side of things…and that's ok. That's where you hire it out to the right people who do this sort of thing, but like some folks have pointed out to me, this version of the eShop was around prior to the Switch, and Nintendo probably felt it was “good enough.” Not bad, not great, but adequate for their purposes.

And I think the eShop does still function as a storefront. Again, I think there’s some poor engineering behind it, and optimizations.

“Oh, but the CPU is too slow! We can’t make it any faster.”

”Then overhaul the UI, change the format of the eShop to better suit the hardware given to you, and try again.”

“But we've tried, and it’s just impossible! The technology doesn’t exist!“

”TONY STARK WAS ABLE TO BUILD THIS IN A CAVE…WITH A BOX OF SCRAPS!!!!”
Click to expand...
I'll act confident here but this is purely from what I've heard in RGD:

The eShop runs through the switch's web browser applet which does not use JIT for JavaScript compilation like most browsers do, and this is like turning off hardware acceleration in Chrome. The only game to use JIT so far has been SM3DAS, which used it for SM64's emulator and its not a permission that developers are allowed to use. That's something that Nintendo really has strayed away from using because it bypasses a whole layer of exploits, being able to run code without having to inject it into memory that the app doesn't have write access to.
 
HyruleanKnight said:
This is not true at all
Click to expand...
iGPUs are GPUs. The PC standard going back to 1981 requires a "graphics adapter" be that integrated or not.


HyruleanKnight said:
This discussion has veered way off topic so I won't be continuing any further. Back to Nintendo shenanigans.
Click to expand...
I explicitly mentioned T239, the SOC for the Nintendo Switch successor to keep us ON topic. The point is the same, though, because T239 DOES have this all on silicon, this is pretty much irrelevant to our immediate interests in this thread.
 
Dakhil said:
I believe I said this before, but if T239's to be used in Windows 11 Arm based laptops, I think entry level Windows 11 Arm based laptops are a safe bet, which I think are only going to use lower binned T239s (i.e. T239s with a couple of CPU cores disabled, a small group of CUDA cores disabled, etc.).
Click to expand...
That would be a pretty smart way of repurposing reject silicon. Though it begs the question how high the defect rate of these SoCs would be for a sufficient run of a single laptop sku, for example. Considering the approximate size of the each chip, I expect defect rates to be pretty low.

Maybe they might have a few hundred thousand after making tens of millions of T239s for the Switch 2, but that's going to take a while I think. Could coincide with the "come back next year" comment from Michael Dell, though I still believe Nvidia is making their own high-end SoC for Windows laptops and tablets.
 
0
Concernt said:
But you said as much? I'm guessing you meant "at least", but even that's flawed. Some dGPUs are worse than some iGPUs.
Click to expand...
Need =/= has

Do I have an iGPU? No. Do I need one? Yes.

The pain of disassembling my whole PC after I just put it together because I forgot to set PCIe3.0 as default in the bios because my card is 4.0 and I was too cheap/lazy to buy a 4.0 riser is known only to me. Having an iGPU would've prevented all that, all three times.
 
Dakhil said:
I believe I said this before, but if T239's to be used in Windows 11 Arm based laptops, I think entry level Windows 11 Arm based laptops are a safe bet, which I think are only going to use lower binned T239s (i.e. T239s with a couple of CPU cores disabled, a small group of CUDA cores disabled, etc.).
Click to expand...
Would binning even be necessary on a chip so small? I imagine that yields would be >95% on 4N, so any chips that are defective could probably just be written off.
 
HyruleanKnight said:
Need =/= has

Do I have an iGPU? No. Do I need one? Yes.

The pain of disassembling my whole PC after I just put it together because I forgot to set PCIe3.0 as default in the bios because my card is 4.0 and I was too cheap/lazy to buy a 4.0 riser is known only to me. Having an iGPU would've prevented all that, all three times.
Click to expand...
Well that's a want not a need, but I see what you mean now. They're not necessary for a PC to function is what I meant.
 
Last edited:
I miss Ninspider. I hope they are out there living their best life. Hanging with Skulltulas, playing with magnets….


Shareholder Chad said:
But what if....

Stick with me here. This is gonna be crazy.

But what if....

The sales profit they make on extra copies sold that otherwise wouldn't have been sold is MORE than what they would lose on people who would've bought the Switch 2 or Switch 3 but didnt because they made ports on PC.

Hypothetical scenario. Impossible to gauge one way or the other for sure but these are the questions big companies pay a lot of money to be answered. Opportunity cost friends.
Click to expand...
At the present, and after the astronomical success of Switch, I don’t see how they’d think they’d find more success selling a PC port here and there. When you buy a system for hundreds of dollars, odds are fairly likely you’re going to buy more software for it in the future. Beyond that, Nintendo gets more chances to get their products in front of your eyes (for example: the Switch News Feed or if you sign up for a Nintendo Account/opt in to communications.)

In the future, if consoles are dying and Nintendo is struggling…sure, I could see it. After the most successful period in the company’s history, where their integrated software-hardware approach delivered what will be the best selling game system of all time? Not a chance.


Wockio said:
Elden Ring has got to be the Skyrim of Switch 2
Click to expand...
Dekuman said:
GTAVI
Click to expand...
^This is your ‘boom roasted’ game right here. Be a truly mind-melting moment for sure.

(Though I hope and think E Ring/Elden R (any other GoNintendo pod fans here?), BG3, and the entire KH series should all come to Switch Successor, too.)
 
Last edited:
omniryu said:
Question. I am playing Senua's saga. If anyone with the technical knowledge can answer. Remember in Super Mario 64 where Mario has two models a low polygon model and a high one? Does Senua's Saga do the same thing?
Click to expand...
the vast majority of 3D games do this; it's called level of detail, or LOD.
 
omniryu said:
Question. I am playing Senua's saga. If anyone with the technical knowledge can answer. Remember in Super Mario 64 where Mario has two models a low polygon model and a high one? Does Senua's Saga do the same thing?
Click to expand...
Pretty much any game made since Mario 64 and Quake have different levels of detail for most models.
 
omniryu said:
Question. I am playing Senua's saga. If anyone with the technical knowledge can answer. Remember in Super Mario 64 where Mario has two models a low polygon model and a high one? Does Senua's Saga do the same thing?
Click to expand...
pretty much all games do this and the environment is using nanite assets so there's no lods for them
 
Famicrono said:
Nah I don’t FF15 is coming. Too old already. Maybe Sony will secure the 7s…
DQXII and KH4 should come tho
Click to expand...
too old isn't a problem for catalog sales. we already have 1-12 on Switch, so age isn't an issue.

the exclusivity period for FF7R1 is already over and there's been no sign of console exclusivity, especially with the exclusivity period getting shorter with each game. so I don't see why not. xbox could get it at the same time as a consolation prize
 
ILikeFeet said:
Square Enix will have a wild time trying to dole out old games. FF15, FF16, FF7R1, FF7R2, Visions of Mana, and more in one year?
Click to expand...
15 should be easy to port right? I know the game CPU bound and it had a difficult performance on Xbox one and PS4. Since we have a superior CPU. It should be a lot better.
 
Do we expect the HD rumble (or the haptics in general) to match or exceed whats in the PS5 controller? Or would it just be just slightly better than the current gen Joy-Cons?
 
CalmMind said:
That was terrible to watch. No break between topics to digest what was said. He's just straight up repeating everything like a newsticker.
Click to expand...
GN is the gold standard for independent PC parts review, their news round-up is just sort of an off the cuff thing, a lot of items to hit.
 
0
SwitchEmUp said:
I really hope they port FFXVI, it really is an amazing experience
Click to expand...
tenor.gif
 
BabyDontHurtMe said:
Do we expect the HD rumble (or the haptics in general) to match or exceed whats in the PS5 controller? Or would it just be just slightly better than the current gen Joy-Cons?
Click to expand...
I think most of the reason it's better in the PS5 controller is that the haptic motors are bigger, so the joycons would need to be larger for the haptics to improve.
 
Adulfzen said:
people mention Elden Ring, GTA or Assassin's Creed but what if they showcase instead games like Genshin Impact or Honkai Star Rails or Zenloss whatever whatever :sneaky:
Click to expand...

HyruleanKnight said:
That would be extremely cringe. This is coming from a Genshin player with 1300+ login day activity.
Click to expand...
I do not believe that Hoyoverse F2P such as Genshin will be released on Switch 2.
They probably have an console exclusive deal with Sony and these games are not even released on the Xbox.
 
Smash Kirby said:
I believe Switch is still listed as a platform Genshin is still coming to.
Click to expand...
Nah they removed that recently iirc. It's probably just a hardware power issue tbh. Genshin and whatever else they made would get millions and millions of downloads on the Switch 2 imo so they're likely to pursue it.
 
Reader mode
You must log in or register to reply here.
Please read this new, consolidated staff post before posting.

Furthermore, according to this follow-up post, all off-topic chat will be moderated.
Last edited by a moderator:


Back
Top Bottom