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

Reader mode
Keep in mind that it's feasible to increase these clock speeds as the time goes by.

We've seen it with Switch 1 for games such as Mortal Kombat 11. If it's needed, especially in dock mode, we'll have it.
 
Dayummm so we know the clock speeds? It's good to confirm those are strong specs. Now, to see how the CPU performance fares, but it looks like it's better positioned to receive current gen games than the OG Switch was at launch, especially with the Series S and with every developer wanting to support Steam Deck and the like (This will be quite a bit stronger anyway)
 
0
1.7TF on handheld is good for me as it’s basically as much in flops as PS4 but with far more advanced feature set

I hope the CPU is clocked closer to 1.65Ghz so it’sa tad easier to port games over
 
kingman said:
Huh. That's still a pretty nice number but lower than double the handheld speed?
Click to expand...
Just seems kind of odd to me when we take into account the average amount of bandwidth used by Ampere per Tflop. Like, at 1007.3, pushing around 3.095 TFlops, which would saturate at around 77.38 GB/s. With LPDDR5X-7500, that leave about 42.62GB/s remaining. Seems like a lot left over. If it were using LPDDR5-6400, it would instead be 25.02GB/s left over.
 
SignorCornetto said:
What if Switch 2 uses DLSS only in dock play for now? And in handled mode will be unlocked down the line in a couple of years?
Click to expand...
Then they'll be unnecessarily wasting power for the first few years. DLSS is more efficient for creating an image of a given resolution than not, otherwise it wouldn't be very useful.
 
the steam deck produces 1.6teraflops of raw power at 1-1.6ghz is that correct? if that’s the case the switch 2 doing that at half/less than half the clock speed is incredible no?
 
I'd naturally want slightly better clock speeds for docked mode as a primarily docked player but this should still be good if the other aspects of the console help prop it up close to Series S territory right?
 
Would be a bit strange for nintendo to have such a big gap between handheld and docked performance. Would've been cool though.
 
korok said:
I'll take it. It's not the optimistic 3,4 Tflops but isn't that far away What I find curious is that the docked is below double of the handheld speed. Could the 560MHz be a higher portable clock like the 460MHz on Switch?
Click to expand...

Yep. I suspect they probably can increase docked mode to 1.2 GHz or something (3.7 teraflops approx?) if they really want to, maybe they are holding back a little to start with.

If the clocks are legit, then really the only missing piece of the puzzle now becomes what exactly is the battery life of this thing. Right now I'm thinking maybe 2 hours or there's something else going on (Joycons have a larger battery and can share power with the main unit?).
 
Wait, so these really are the clock speeds that we were waiting for the last ~4000 pages? Feels a bit anticlimactic - I thought the Cat was messing with us :D

Actually the difference in ratio of pixels in 1440p to 1080p, (1440/1080)^2=1.77 aligns rather well with the ratio 1007.3/561=1.79 🤔
 
theguy said:
the steam deck produces 1.6teraflops of raw power at 1-1.6ghz is that correct? if that’s the case the switch 2 doing that at half/less than half the clock speed is incredible no?
Click to expand...
Switch 2 has 3 as many shading units as Steam Deck. It's expected for it to hit such a number with a third or so of the clock.
 
I would say these specs are more in line with my expectations. DLSS will theoretically mean games could look and run better then anything on PS4 Pro (at least that's my guess) which in turn is a solid upgrade to the original Switch.
 
TomNookYankees said:
Ok if that's pre-DLSS, 1.7TF is definitely good enough for a handheld.
Click to expand...
DLSS isn't a TFLOPS multiplier

kingman said:
Wait, this is even more confusing.

Why would you have a pretty high handheld clock, but then go conservative for docked? You'd think they'd have more wiggle room since they don't have to worry about battery/
Click to expand...
because we've seen that Switch's handheld mode was too deficient, so Nintendo wants to avoid that again
 
Concernt said:
~1.76TF portable, ~3TF docked sounds very. Interesting. However, I do think it makes a lot of sense. A raised floor.

Even at double the speed outright, the system is still doing a 4X pixel output jump from one mode to the other. This device was always going to have to lean on upscaling - if these numbers are true, and importantly, if they are final*, then indeed, TV Mode is going to lean on upscaling a lot. I think this is reasonable, as the device is already designed around upscaling. DLSS Performance Mode targeting 4K, with internal dynamic resolution would have an input of 1080p or less, which sounds like a reasonable render target for a modern game at 3TF. Games that push beyond that can use Ultra Performance Mode (which I think we will see a lot of), or lower their output resolution (perhaps especially in titles that prioritise high, stable performance).

I would say that it would be reasonable for games to be 560p in Handheld Mode and 720p in TV Mode, using Performance Mode in portable modes and Ultra Performance Mode in TV Mode, for 1080p and 4K output respectively.

Games that push the system will be able to do something as drastic as a dynamic internal resolution Ultra Performance Mode targeting 1080p for portable modes, with an internal resolution cap of 360p. I'm sure games will even have the option of 720p target Ultra Performance Mode for portable mode, an internal resolution of 240p, if that's the only way to get the game running. 360p to 1080p in TV Mode.

I do not think we will see any games dip below a 720p output target, a huge improvement over the sub-HD and even sub-SD resolutions some Nintendo Switch titles have at output.

There's also the consideration that developers will have access to more than just DLSS, and can pick and choose to get their desired performance, or when stack a spacial and temporal upscaler if they choose to do so, for instance if 1440p with DLSS then to 4K with FSR(1) provides good image quality at a lower performance cost than 4K DLSS, it may be used.

Others still, as I've said before, I think will likely settle for a sub-UHD output resolution, and trust in the built-in upscaler which I hope is greatly improved.
Click to expand...
Given all that I think it's feasible to expect to be mainly "1440p" machine
wikem1 said:
Wait, so these really are the clock speeds that we were waiting for the last ~4000 pages? Feels a bit anticlimactic - I thought the Cat was messing with us :D

Actually the difference in ratio of pixels in 1440p to 1080p, (1440/1080)^2=1.77 aligns rather well with the ratio 1007.3/561=1.79 🤔
Click to expand...
As before, 1440p seems to be the intended target resolution for the console as 900p was for OG Switch.
 
Concernt said:
I hope miniaturisation is at the forefront of the next generation Lite, I'd welcome the return of a clamshell design, too, though with touch I understand why they might not want to do that.

Do you think people would be willing to accept a Lite that's actually THICKER than the standard console in order to achieve adequate battery life in an overall smaller footprint? Say the size of the screen alone on the new device?
Click to expand...
I would absolutely be okay with a thicker but overall smaller device.
 
Eric_S said:
Just some quotients:

Switch 1: 768 / 393 = 1.954
Switch 2: (allegedly) 1007.3 / 561 = 1.796

(I was hoping for something closer to 2.25 or 2.5, but if that how it is then that's how it is)
Click to expand...
I think you mistook that 393 for a clock frequency when that number is GFlops for Switch at 768Mhz.
 
theguy said:
what does that mean for portable efficiency if we were to compare the two? because the steam deck chugs the battery
Click to expand...
Significantly higher efficiency. More cores at lower clocks like the Switch 2 is more efficient than fewer cores at higher clocks like the Steam Deck.
 
theguy said:
what does that mean for portable efficiency if we were to compare the two? because the steam deck chugs the battery
Click to expand...
Nobody really knows. It will likely achieve this with a combination of being more efficient than Orin (how much? don't know), a bigger battery and possibly better node.
 
AbsoluteTerror said:
I will ABSOLUTELY take 1.7TFLOPs and 3.1 docked.
Click to expand...

After that motherboard leak ...



These aren't my dream specs but they're arguably better than anything Nintendo has given us relative to expectations since the GameCube probably.

This should be good enough for a bunch of decent PS5 era ports and not just like a few impossi-ports absoultely stripped to the bone if that Nintendo variant of DLSS is as good as the patent makes it out to be.

I still remember how initially crushing it was to hear the Revolution (Wii) was basically just an upclocked GameCube, those mediocre Wii U specs, etc.
 
Sander RX said:
OK now I want these numbers confirmed

I’m a complete ignoramus, but based on how everyone is interpreting these, this is good enough.
Click to expand...
OIP.VFAjy1PKgTpPqWS-HYX4bQHaEK
 
kingman said:
Wait, this is even more confusing.

Why would you have a pretty high handheld clock, but then go conservative for docked? You'd think they'd have more wiggle room since they don't have to worry about battery/
Click to expand...
I can see the initial model having atrocious battery life if the portable mode performance is that high, so perhaps Nintendo wanted to counteract that by making it easier to charge while docked while also not wanting one mode to outshine the other
 
Sander RX said:
I’m a complete ignoramus, but based on how everyone is interpreting these, this is good enough.
Click to expand...
It seems to be pretty damn good, 1.7 / 3.1 TFLOPs of raw GPU compute from a thin portable machine before DLSS is in the picture.
I would be very curious to see what possible DLSS info may leak.
 
I don't understand the logic behind the 1007.3 MHz when in portable is more than half of that and in docked you don't have to worry about battery constraints. I expected closer to 1200Mhz based on the alleged handheld number. Genuinely confused as to why that's the case as I doubt the cooling itself would be the problem.
 
I am going to say it, ZachyCatGames > Euro gamer.

I said clock speeds were the last piece of the puzzle, but I was wrong, still lots to think about, but how exciting! For me this has to be a Samsung 5nm node.

Now I am wondering what kind of battery life we will see. Imagine if we get something between the V1 and V2 battery life. The switch 2 in this instance would make the PC handhelds look like such inelegent, brutish things.

Nintendos GBA vs the Game gear almost.
 
ComradeKoopa said:
That's a nice perspective for people who give a damn about handheld mode.
Click to expand...
Unless Nintendo starts allowing docked only games, I think one should really care about handheld mode performance, since it will determine the system’s baseline and what may or may not come to the system.

As far as I understand
 
Handheld performance will matter more in the long run for the overall performance of the system as it’s an important floor/baseline compared to the ceiling of docked mode. There is room for Nintendo to overclock the system in docked if needed, not as much room in handheld mode.
 
wikem1 said:
Wait, so these really are the clock speeds that we were waiting for the last ~4000 pages? Feels a bit anticlimactic - I thought the Cat was messing with us :D

Actually the difference in ratio of pixels in 1440p to 1080p, (1440/1080)^2=1.77 aligns rather well with the ratio 1007.3/561=1.79 🤔
Click to expand...
Very good point. Could be a coincidence. Aiming for 1080p on the handheld and aiming for 1440p docked upscaled to 4k would be great.

Although I suspect many of the handheld profiles will do 540p to 1080p or 720p to 1080p.
 
If these are the clocks (561MHz > 1007.3MHz), then it's a clock increase of 1.79x when docked, which is extremely close to the ratio I was expecting as you can see below

Kise Ryota said:
I believe 1440p will be the target for most first party titles (after DLSS), and for that we'll need a pixel increase of 1.77x (if you keep the same DLSS profile between handheld and docked, which is the best decision IMO)

So I'm expecting the docked clock to be at least 77% higher than handheld.
Click to expand...
 
I don't pop in here often but I know this is significant news (if confirmed) for the performance on the system. Can someone translate into general terms what this means for handheld/dock performance?
 
Reader mode
You must log in or register to reply here.
Please read this new, consolidated staff post before posting.
Last edited:


Back
Top Bottom