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

[Arrtyfact]

Thinking back to Links Awakening... that game still suprizes me.
Its dynamic 720-1080 (with predominantly being around 970p semingly),
and the framerate jumps between 30 and 60 fps.
seing stuff like BotW, Nier Automata im comparison made me doubt that those games are running on the same platform.

Will it be possible to run that game at 4k60, or would it be to much?
i asume that it would with dlss... man, im still so confused about that game, especially after LBW felt so smooth on the 3DS.

When I compare the performance/visuals of a game against other games running on the same system, I try to never do that comparison in a vacuum. There's a lot of things that need to be taken into account. The biggest ones for me are how many years did it take to make the game, and is it a port?

A lot of the Switch games (but not all) that are considered to be very impressive looking are either games that took a (very) long time to make, or ports from other platforms (with the original release possibly also taking a very long time to make).

If the game took a while to make, the developers had quite some time to polish and make sure everything is pretty and running smoothly. For ports, the hardest part (making the game) was already done, so the devs could concentrate on porting the game and making sure it looks good and runs well. Now, I know that porting a game to another platform is a very difficult task, but it requires significantly less time than making the full game on the original platform.

• Breath of the Wild took 5 year to make
• Xenoblade Chronicles 3 also 5 years
• Xenoblade Chronicles: Definitive Edition is a port/remaster
• Nier Automata is a port
• Monster Hunter Rise took over 4 years
• Dragon Quest 11 S is also a port (well kinda, at least it released on Switch much later)
• Tears of the Kingdom has been in development for nearly 6 years

This is by no mean a perfect rule that applies to everycases, but it is a rule of thumb I like to use when comparing games.

To come back to Link's Awakening, there's a lot of heavy post-processing that I assume are a part of the explanation for the frame rate dips. I believe it also uses double buffered vsync, making the frame rate basically immediately drop to 30 if it cannot consistently maintain a locked 60 fps. I'm not sure why double buffered vsync is used as opposed to triple buffered vsync, but I'm sure there are some good reasons.

 

[JoshuaJSlone]

Will it be possible to run that game at 4k60, or would it be to much?
i asume that it would with dlss... man, im still so confused about that game, especially after LBW felt so smooth on the 3DS.

Most things on Switch that run better than the original port of Ark should be fairly decent candidates to reach ~4K60 if more frame rate/resolution is the main goal rather than other added effects or improvements. If something on Switch runs 720p30, then we might expect that without any fancy tricks 1080p60 would require at most 2x CPU and 4.5x GPU, which would be below low end Drake estimates and leave plenty of headroom for DLSS to make a pretty decent 4K image. Even if something on Switch runs as bad as 540p20, it might take 3x CPU and 5.3x GPU to reach 720p60 and DLSS could take it from there to a less decent 4K image.

And of course there are the games like Smash Bros. and Mario Kart that are 1080p60, and require 1x CPU and 1x GPU to reach 1080p60.

 

[Concernt]

Most things on Switch that run better than the original port of Ark should be fairly decent candidates to reach ~4K60 if more frame rate/resolution is the main goal rather than other added effects or improvements. If something on Switch runs 720p30, then we might expect that without any fancy tricks 1080p60 would require at most 2x CPU and 4.5x GPU, which would be below low end Drake estimates and leave plenty of headroom for DLSS to make a pretty decent 4K image. Even if something on Switch runs as bad as 540p20, it might take 3x CPU and 5.3x GPU to reach 720p60 and DLSS could take it from there to a less decent 4K image.

And of course there are the games like Smash Bros. and Mario Kart that are 1080p60, and require 1x CPU and 1x GPU to reach 1080p60.

I think Mario Kart 8 Deluxe, Smash Bros. Ultimate and Splatoon 3 are candidates for full 4K rendering.

 

[kueoe]

We found the Nintendo employee!

I cannot confirm nor deny

Why do you care if other people get "disappointed"?

Because I want us all to have fun

 

[Hermii]

I cannot confirm nor deny

Because I want us all to have fun

Disapointment is part of the fun. No risk, no reward.

 

[kueoe]

i jest. I suppose we have different ideas of fun then. Maybe I'm not cut out for speculation, I'm not enough of a dreamer :'(

 

[Layalseif]

I also like the idea of offline viewing being an option much like it is on tablets and other mobile devices. Arguably nothing over 720p to cut down on storage space utilized especially when it's all the tablet screen offers, but it would be such a nice feature to have.


I feel for you; Netflix is just a catch-all term of course.

RIP Inside Job/Final Space/Warrior Nun. Some hot bullshit that the only reason I'm not more incensed is most of my rage is currently directed at Zaslav for his tax write off cuts

I'm not even that attached to Wednesday and Stranger Things only has one more season. Once Big Mouth kicks the bucket, I'm out. Netflix has been decreasing in quality of service and content for a long time now.

Read this interesting Twitter thread on why shows are being cancelled. It boils down to residuals.

 

[Deleted member 887]

Why do you care if other people get "disappointed"?

Because they're a good community member who wants us all to have fun?

 

[Deleted member 887]

Read this interesting Twitter thread on why shows are being cancelled. It boils down to residuals.

To slightly clarify, just because I know some WGA writers who might bristle a bit, it comes down to Studios trying to screw folks out of theirs. The WGAw deal was a good one, but this is just proof that the studios will take any loophole and drive right through it. There are always people willing to come to Hollywood and risk bankruptcy to get to make their art, and as long as that wave of young and passionate doesn't abate, the studios don't need to actually provide creatives with enough money to live off of.

The parallels to the game industry are obvious

 

[Brofield]

Read this interesting Twitter thread on why shows are being cancelled. It boils down to residuals.

Thank you, actually a very fascinating read!

And honestly, fuck Hollywood. They'll reap what they sow and I have no further interest in subbing to any streaming service when they can't commit in good faith to a story. Piracy will inevitably soar to astronomical heights as people figure out VPNs if they haven't already and I will not shed a single tear of sympathy for those executive assholes. Can't wait to watch multiples of these services crash and burn when the bubble bursts and they realize they're no longer immortal.

But this is tangent is going incredibly off topic haha

 

[Krikeno]

Do you think Hogwarts Legacy has been delayed to July 25 because of a new model? It seems reasonable to me.

 

[Dakhil]

Like how it reserves the USB 3.0 lanes despite a gigabit ethernet port that could have used them.

The USB 3.0 signals are probably used for the USB Type-C port on the dock, especially with "4kdp_preferred_over_usb30" added on system update 15.0.0.

The USB 3.0 ports on the Nintendo Switch's dock were running at USB 2.0 speeds, probably because the USB (Type-A) 3.0 ports were known to cause wireless interference.

And the OLED model's dock features the RTL8154B chip for the LAN port, with Realtek mentioning using USB 2.0, which I presume means supporting up to USB 2.0 data transfer rates (480 Mbps). So having USB 3.0 signals available probably wouldn't bring any improvements.

 

[NintenDuvo]

Do you think Hogwarts Legacy has been delayed to July 25 because of a new model? It seems reasonable to me.

No i personally think its because the Switch version being less of a priority to them so they had put the manpower elsewhere otherwise it would be releasing the same time as the last gen versions

 

[Concernt]

The USB 3.0 signals are probably used for the USB Type-C port on the dock, especially with "4kdp_preferred_over_usb30" added on system update 15.0.0.

The USB 3.0 ports on the Nintendo Switch's dock were running at USB 2.0 speeds, probably because the USB (Type-A) 3.0 ports were known to cause wireless interference.

And the OLED model's dock features the RTL8154B chip for the LAN port, with Realtek mentioning using USB 2.0, which I presume means supporting up to USB 2.0 data transfer rates (480 Mbps). So having USB 3.0 signals available probably wouldn't bring any improvements.

None of that really contradicts what I said.

In fact the 3.0 lanes being used for 4K via the USB-C port in the next console is exactly what I was saying.

 

[mariodk18]

I cannot confirm nor deny

Because I want us all to have fun

Speculating alone is fun in and of itself. Disappointment and hype are just the highs and lows that come with riding that roller coaster.

 

[Pokemaniac]

Do you think Hogwarts Legacy has been delayed to July 25 because of a new model? It seems reasonable to me.

No, the game has a staggered release even beyond the Switch. It's probably just coming in hot.

 

[C_Ali]

Disapointment is part of the fun. No risk, no reward.

These people (anybody not team January) are too scared. The thrill is in the risk!

 

[ccff]

I had previously thought that the Switch 2's display resolution would be 720p, but reading the discussion here, 1080p seems to be the logical conclusion. On hardware capable of making 1080p games at 4k, even if the clock is less than half, there's no way you can't make 720p games at 1080p.
It is a hybrid game console that not only advertises that 4k gaming is possible when connected to the dock, but also advertises improved performance as a portable game device. 1080p gaming is great for advertising the increased performance of handheld game consoles.

 

[slsk]

The Netflix "app" on all devices is actually a web app running inside a web browser. This makes it far easier for Netflix to support a broad range of devices with a single codebase. Switch apps are not allowed to access a web browser to render web content for security reasons.

Don't expect this to change as there are good reasons for both Nintendo and Netflix's positions.

 

[ArchedThunder]

I had previously thought that the Switch 2's display resolution would be 720p, but reading the discussion here, 1080p seems to be the logical conclusion. On hardware capable of making 1080p games at 4k, even if the clock is less than half, there's no way you can't make 720p games at 1080p.
It is a hybrid game console that not only advertises that 4k gaming is possible when connected to the dock, but also advertises improved performance as a portable game device. 1080p gaming is great for advertising the increased performance of handheld game consoles.

Obviously the hardware could do it, the worry is the battery.

 

[kalosmani]

I had previously thought that the Switch 2's display resolution would be 720p, but reading the discussion here, 1080p seems to be the logical conclusion. On hardware capable of making 1080p games at 4k, even if the clock is less than half, there's no way you can't make 720p games at 1080p.
It is a hybrid game console that not only advertises that 4k gaming is possible when connected to the dock, but also advertises improved performance as a portable game device. 1080p gaming is great for advertising the increased performance of handheld game consoles.

1080p is not logical due to battery life and if you want to run games with high graphic fidelity. Even Steam Deck doesn't have 1080p and that for the better. As for 4K I believe it's 4K due to Nintendo making a ton of cartoony games that can easily scale to 4K and many likely being cross gen for years. E.g 2D Mario etc. But things like the latest Call of Duty would be 720p handheld and 1080p docked. Same with Street Fighter 6, Diablo 4 etc. 4K is not happening for 3rd party games and that's for the better. Indie games and Nintendo games however can manage 4K. Even with DLSS it's not doable for next gen ports.

 

[ArchedThunder]

1080p is not logical due to battery life and if you want to run games with high graphic fidelity. Even Steam Deck doesn't have 1080p and that for the better. As for 4K I believe it's 4K due to Nintendo making a ton of cartoony games that can easily scale to 4K and many likely being cross gen for years. E.g 2D Mario etc. But things like the latest Call of Duty would be 720p handheld and 1080p docked. Same with Street Fighter 6, Diablo 4 etc. 4K is not happening for 3rd party games and that's for the better. Indie games and Nintendo games however can manage 4K. Even with DLSS it's not doable for next gen ports.

With DLSS we’re likely to see many ports be 1440p.
Also Nintendo’s “Cartoony games” aren’t exactly slouches in their graphical quality. Being cartoony doesn’t mean it’s pushing the hardware less.
Another thing that will help with ports is how scaleable games are these days combined with the fact that the VAST majority of PCs that people play on are much weaker than current gen consoles and high end GPUs aren’t exactly selling big numbers currently. Games like CoD are made to be playable on rather low spec hardware because that’s where the largest PC market is.

 

[ezidro3]

The Netflix "app" on all devices is actually a web app running inside a web browser. This makes it far easier for Netflix to support a broad range of devices with a single codebase. Switch apps are not allowed to access a web browser to render web content for security reasons.

Don't expect this to change as there are good reasons for both Nintendo and Netflix's positions.

Isn’t YouTube’s app just accessing youtube.com/tv

 

[Pokemaniac]

The Netflix "app" on all devices is actually a web app running inside a web browser. This makes it far easier for Netflix to support a broad range of devices with a single codebase. Switch apps are not allowed to access a web browser to render web content for security reasons.

Don't expect this to change as there are good reasons for both Nintendo and Netflix's positions.

This isn't true. Switch apps can and do open web browser applets for things, especially some of the streaming apps. There just isn't a (easily) user accessible web browser app.

 

[Kingpin722]

As long as Nintendo's exclusives are 4k or near 4k they'll be good. If it can run current gen ports at 1080p ill be super cool with that lol no need for 4k there.

 

[kueoe]

I had previously thought that the Switch 2's display resolution would be 720p, but reading the discussion here, 1080p seems to be the logical conclusion. On hardware capable of making 1080p games at 4k, even if the clock is less than half, there's no way you can't make 720p games at 1080p.
It is a hybrid game console that not only advertises that 4k gaming is possible when connected to the dock, but also advertises improved performance as a portable game device. 1080p gaming is great for advertising the increased performance of handheld game consoles.

Expect battery life and power to take a decent hit as a result then, since more pixels will need to be pushed to a larger display (assuming they keep the 7 in. smaller bezel display). Battery life is one of the biggest limiting factors that Nintendo will need to keep in mind as it really hasn't made much progress and is one of the biggest problems in tech as a whole atm with no solution in sight.

EDIT: nvm sorry saw 2 people already said this lol. ignore

 

[ArchedThunder]

As long as Nintendo's exclusives are 4k or near 4k they'll be good. If it can run current gen ports at 1080p ill be super cool with that lol no need for 4k there.

Most ports of PS5/XS games will likely be lower than 4K after DLSS, but I think 1080p as the only resolution option is mostly going to be seen in the most extreme “impossible ports.” 1440p via DLSS is probably going to be the most common resolution for ports of current gen games, but with graphical quality lower than Series S. Lots of games will probably have graphical presets to pick from like many current gen games though.
Ports of older stuff and exclusives will probably be around 1800p-4k, with some 1440p titles.

 

[kalosmani]

Most ports of PS5/XS games will likely be lower than 4K after DLSS, but I think 1080p as the only resolution option is mostly going to be seen in the most extreme “impossible ports.” 1440p via DLSS is probably going to be the most common resolution for ports of current gen games, but with graphical quality lower than Series S. Lots of games will probably have graphical presets to pick from like many current gen games though.
Ports of older stuff and exclusives will probably be around 1800p-4k, with some 1440p titles.

The Series S has many games that are 1080p so I doubt if 3rd party developers who port next gen games to Switch 2 will bother with above 1080p.

 

[ArchedThunder]

The Series S has many games that are 1080p so I doubt if 3rd party developers who port next gen games to Switch 2 will bother with above 1080p.

A game running at 1080p on Series S is not the same as on a system with DLSS. I imagine many current gen ports will have an internal resolution of 360p or 480p, but be brought up to 1440p via DLSS.

 

[ccff]

Expect battery life and power to take a decent hit as a result then, since more pixels will need to be pushed to a larger display (assuming they keep the 7 in. smaller bezel display). Battery life is one of the biggest limiting factors that Nintendo will need to keep in mind as it really hasn't made much progress and is one of the biggest problems in tech as a whole atm with no solution in sight.

EDIT: nvm sorry saw 2 people already said this lol. ignore

I know the battery is the problem too. However, as a Switch user I bought in 2017, I think Nintendo might try a battery life of around 2 hours. They've already done that once. They may think that they can then come up with a battery improvement model.

 

[kalosmani]

With DLSS we’re likely to see many ports be 1440p.
Also Nintendo’s “Cartoony games” aren’t exactly slouches in their graphical quality. Being cartoony doesn’t mean it’s pushing the hardware less.
Another thing that will help with ports is how scaleable games are these days combined with the fact that the VAST majority of PCs that people play on are much weaker than current gen consoles and high end GPUs aren’t exactly selling big numbers currently. Games like CoD are made to be playable on rather low spec hardware because that’s where the largest PC market is.

I just don't believe Nintendo will chase graphics, it's not good for development costs and development time. You now have sequels taking more than 6 years to come out. I think Nintendo will stick to the current level of graphic fidelity but add things like higher frame rate and resolution. They will also target Switch 1 too. Also Nintendo primarily target family, kids etc. They don't really care about graphics much. You don't see kids complaining about the graphics in Fortnite and Minecraft. These games are extremely scalable running on toasters to running on high end systems with better frame rate, resolution or added graphical ourishesike RT. We getting into diminishing returns when it comes to graphics and I think Nintendo will stick to this level of graphics and scope before development costs spiral out of control even more. If you played some Switch games like 3D Kirby game in 4K it looks great, you don't need Kirby to have RT, hyper detailed textures, open world scope with 100000 enemies on screen etc.

I think Switch will be a family of systems supported for years, maybe Switch 1 will be dropped when Switch 3 releases. Indie games and Nintendo games will continue to release on Switch 1, and the notable exclusives for Switch 2 will be mainly from 3rd parties.

 

[hologram]

I don't see the benefit of a 1080p screen at 7in. In fact, I think there's a pretty decent chance they use the same display as the OLED model

A game running at 1080p on Series S is not the same as on a system with DLSS. I imagine many current gen ports will have an internal resolution of 360p or 480p, but be brought up to 1440p via DLSS.

That feels too low, no? If your rendering resolution is too low, the upscaling will look ugly; DLSS isn't a magic bullet. I think 1080p to 4K or 720p to 1440p is more likely

 

[ertaboy356b]

Please, please, please I'm begging Nintendo and the games industry as a whole, enough remakes (that are usually deficient in one way or another which make it basically a sidestep compared to the original and thus redundant), enough remasters (with the bright bloom lighting that every Japanese developer is obsessed with shoving into every remake/remaster of a 3D game, I'm looking at you Bandai Namco, Sega and co.), enough rehashing as a whole.

Why can't we just have some new games or new ideas instead of retreads? Even Nintendo is doing it A LOT nowadays. I understand why some people say gaming has now become just like Hollywood in many ways, what with the multi-million dollar AAA games, constant retreads, lack of creativity.

Luckily for us, this is why indie and smaller scale games will always be king for the foreseeable future. Creatives are free to experiment to their hearts content.

What? I actually like remakes. A lot of those games are games I missed because I'm too poor to have a console back when I was a kid.

 

[JoshuaJSlone]

That feels too low, no? If your rendering resolution is too low, the upscaling will look ugly; DLSS isn't a magic bullet. I think 1080p to 4K or 720p to 1440p is more likely

360->1080 isn't ideal, but I'd still probably rather look at that than 360->720 and then further scaled the old fashioned way. A few images I took a few months back comparing 360->720, 360->1080, 540->1080.

 

[ArchedThunder]

I just don't believe Nintendo will chase graphics, it's not good for development costs and development time. You now have sequels taking more than 6 years to come out. I think Nintendo will stick to the current level of graphic fidelity but add things like higher frame rate and resolution. They will also target Switch 1 too. Also Nintendo primarily target family, kids etc. They don't really care about graphics much. You don't see kids complaining about the graphics in Fortnite and Minecraft. These games are extremely scalable running on toasters to running on high end systems with better frame rate, resolution or added graphical ourishesike RT. We getting into diminishing returns when it comes to graphics and I think Nintendo will stick to this level of graphics and scope before development costs spiral out of control even more. If you played some Switch games like 3D Kirby game in 4K it looks great, you don't need Kirby to have RT, hyper detailed textures, open world scope with 100000 enemies on screen etc.

I think Switch will be a family of systems supported for years, maybe Switch 1 will be dropped when Switch 3 releases. Indie games and Nintendo games will continue to release on Switch 1, and the notable exclusives for Switch 2 will be mainly from 3rd parties.

Nintendo’s games ALWAYS make the hardware sing better than third parties. The idea that Nintendo doesn’t care about graphics has never been true, they just don’t always go for for the highest end hardware. Nintendo always wants their games to look as good as the hardware allows and Drake’s specs are really beefy. They’re not going to just keep putting out Switch visuals on a next gen system with a custom GPU that they spent tons of R&D money on. And do not conflate scope with graphics, Nintendo pushing the hardware does not mean everything will be open world.
Also, kids do complain about graphics, not sure where the idea that they don’t comes from.

Nintendo is not going to keep releasing games for the original Switch for another 7~ years. You’ll get a mix of cross gen and exclusives for next gen in the first year or two before the majority of titles are exclusive to the next gen.

Also not sure what any of this has to do with third party ports

I don't see the benefit of a 1080p screen at 7in. In fact, I think there's a pretty decent chance they use the same display as the OLED model

That feels too low, no? If your rendering resolution is too low, the upscaling will look ugly; DLSS isn't a magic bullet. I think 1080p to 4K or 720p to 1440p is more likely

360p can be a bit rough if there’s lots of high frequency detail, but DLSS doesn’t really start falling apart until you go lower, it’d also look much cleaner than the low res third party games on Switch. 480p scales up rather well with DLSS. Using lower internal resolutions looks decent and allows for higher quality graphics, meaning they don’t have to gut a game’s visuals as much.

 

[kvetcha]

I think 1080p to 4K or 720p to 1440p is more likely

These are the factors for Performance mode, but Ultra Performance scales even further.

 

[ArchedThunder]

Whoops, forgot the actual resolution scales for DLSS, for 1440p the base resolutions for current gen ports will probably typically be 480p and 720p, 360p would be for extreme 1080p impossible ports.
Devs might also be able to have different scaling options, who knows. We could also see arbitrary resolutions, like 1350p scaled from 540p.

 

[kalosmani]

Nintendo’s games ALWAYS make the hardware sing better than third parties. The idea that Nintendo doesn’t care about graphics has never been true, they just don’t always go for for the highest end hardware. Nintendo always wants their games to look as good as the hardware allows and Drake’s specs are really beefy. They’re not going to just keep putting out Switch visuals on a next gen system with a custom GPU that they spent tons of R&D money on. And do not conflate scope with graphics, Nintendo pushing the hardware does not mean everything will be open world.
Also, kids do complain about graphics, not sure where the idea that they don’t comes from.

Nintendo is not going to keep releasing games for the original Switch for another 7~ years. You’ll get a mix of cross gen and exclusives for next gen in the first year or two before the majority of titles are exclusive to the next gen.

Also not sure what any of this has to do with third party ports

360p can be a bit rough if there’s lots of high frequency detail, but DLSS doesn’t really start falling apart until you go lower, it’d also look much cleaner than the low res third party games on Switch. 480p scales up rather well with DLSS. Using lower internal resolutions looks decent and allows for higher quality graphics, meaning they don’t have to gut a game’s visuals as much.

I'm not saying every Switch game will be cross gen. Your future Metroid Primes, Zelda's, Xenoblades and etc can be next gen exclusive. But a 2D Mario, 2D Metroid, Yoshi game, Animal Crossing and etc I see no reason for these games not to come out on Switch 1 even years from now. Same with indie games, a game like Hollow Knight can come out on Switch 1 no problem. I don't think we will have a traditional console successor where it will fully replace the old console, especially now that Nintendo don't have both a console and a handheld to fall back on. I also don't see a Lite form factor happening in a while so they would need to release games on Switch 1 so the Lite form factor continues to keep getting games. It will be a good idea to keep Switch 1 and Lite around for budget gamers especially in these economic times. This will also be one of the first times the successor shares the same architecture to a high selling predecessor console, games are more scalable than ever.

 

[ArchedThunder]

I'm not saying every Switch game will be cross gen. Your future Metroid Primes, Zelda's, Xenoblades and etc can be next gen exclusive. But a 2D Mario, 2D Metroid, Yoshi game, Animal Crossing and etc I see no reason for these games not to come out on Switch 1 even years from now. Same with indie games, a game like Hollow Knight can come out on Switch 1 no problem. I don't think we will have a traditional console successor where it will fully replace the old console, especially now that Nintendo don't have both a console and a handheld to fall back on. I also don't see a Lite form factor happening in a while so they would need to release games on Switch 1 so the Lite form factor continues to keep getting games. It will be a good idea to keep Switch 1 and Lite around for budget gamers especially in these economic times. This will also be one of the first times the successor shares the same architecture to a high selling predecessor console, games are more scalable than ever.

Switch 1 sales (hardware and software) will slow after Switch 2 launches, it won’t be viable from a business perspective to release cross gen titles for years and years. The lite won’t really be much of a factor in their plans since it doesn’t even push huge numbers. There’s no reason for Nintendo to keep supporting Switch 1 after a 2-3 year cross gen period.
Also it’s not exactly the same architecture, the GPU is a much newer architecture, they’re just from the same company.

 

[Serif]

Is there dynamic DLSS that can switch modes on the fly e.g. target 60 FPS with a 1080p -> 2160p upscale but drop to 720p -> 2160p if needed?

 

[Cuzizkool]

Regarding a 1080p screen and battery life, can’t DLSS be used to output the power equivalent of, say, a 480p/540p resolution and upscale it to a 1080p on the handheld, thereby saving battery life/power consumption?

 

[ArchedThunder]

Is there dynamic DLSS that can switch modes on the fly e.g. target 60 FPS with a 1080p -> 2160p upscale but drop to 720p -> 2160p if needed?

As far as I’m aware, not currently.

Regarding a 1080p screen and battery life, can’t DLSS be used to output the power equivalent of, say, a 480p/540p resolution and upscale it to a 1080p on the handheld, thereby saving battery life/power consumption?

The screen still has to be fed power.

 

[kalosmani]

Switch 1 sales (hardware and software) will slow after Switch 2 launches, it won’t be viable from a business perspective to release cross gen titles for years and years. The lite won’t really be much of a factor in their plans since it doesn’t even push huge numbers. There’s no reason for Nintendo to keep supporting Switch 1 after a 2-3 year cross gen period.
Also it’s not exactly the same architecture, the GPU is a much newer architecture, they’re just from the same company.

Hardware sales will slow but there is no evidence that software sales will slowdown drastically. As long as software sales are high there would be no reason to stop supporting Switch 1. Even on PS4 where software sales have slowed down, indie games will continue to release on it, simply because it's easy for these games to run on that system. We are near end of year 2 for PS4 and even Sony are still releasing cross gen games on it, of course Sony like to push graphics so they will eventually transition but I can't see indie developers stopping in releasing PS4 versions. The same concept will apply to Switch, as long as a game can easily run on Switch 1 it will continue to release on Switch 1, but unlike Sony, Nintendo has a ton of 2D games like Yoshi, 2D Mario, 2D Zelda, Animal Crossing, 2D Metroid, Donkey Kong and etc, these games will be able to run on Switch 1, and I doubt Nintendo suddenly will stop producing 2D games.

 

[Deleted member 887]

100% of games on Drake could be 4K. I'm not saying they will be, but it's possible, easily.

If you have a 4K TV there will always be 4K upscaling. It'll either be done by the console, or it'll be done by the TV, but it will be done.

DLSS scaling will always have more detail than the TV. I'm not saying that DLSS scaling is a slam dunk, as ghosting will probably never entirely go away. But super sampling will always be less "fuzzy" than the TV scaling the same image up.

DLSS 2's performance scales with the output resolution, not the scaling factor, and it doesn't scale by much. DF testing shows DLSS 2.0 halves the output resolution at 2/3rs of the cost. (FSR 2 is even flatter, but at a higher base cost).

Drake's 4K output cost is probably about 2.9ms based on the benchmarks we've got. Drake's 2K output is 1.75ms a 1.14ms win. That's the difference between 60FPS and 64FPS

Because of all this if you're going to DLSS at all, you should almost always just DLSS all the way to 4K or the native resolution of the TV. Once you've bitten at that apple, you might as well maximize DLSS's ability to reconstruct/hallucinate detail, rather than take the possible ghosting of DLSS plus the TV's upscaling artifacts.

Some games with really tricky frame budgets might prefer to get the 1.14ms back, and instead scale DLSS to 1440p, which at least would be a clean upscale by the TV. But those games are often going to be extremely CPU limited, and Drake is so far beyond the last generation on the CPU that cross-gen games shouldn't have a problem, and so far behind the current gen that 1ms of frame time ain't gonna fix the problem.

edit: Does the bold make it seem like I'm yelling? I was just trying to single out my highlights.

 

[ArchedThunder]

Hardware sales will slow but there is no evidence that software sales will slowdown drastically. As long as software sales are high there would be no reason to stop supporting Switch 1. Even on PS4 where software sales have slowed down, indie games will continue to release on it, simply because it's easy for these games to run on that system. We are near end of year 2 for PS4 and even Sony are still releasing cross gen games on it, of course Sony like to push graphics so they will eventually transition but I can't see indie developers stopping in releasing PS4 versions. The same concept will apply to Switch, as long as a game can easily run on Switch 1 it will continue to release on Switch 1, but unlike Sony, Nintendo has a ton of 2D games like Yoshi, 2D Mario, 2D Zelda, Animal Crossing, 2D Metroid, Donkey Kong and etc, these games will be able to run on Switch 1, and I doubt Nintendo suddenly will stop producing 2D games.

Last gen sales slowing is a normal thing in a generation transition. As for Sony and MS, their cross gen periods are ending now after 2 years.

 

[Deleted member 887]

Is there dynamic DLSS that can switch modes on the fly e.g. target 60 FPS with a 1080p -> 2160p upscale but drop to 720p -> 2160p if needed?

As far as I’m aware, not currently.

DLSS does support upscaling from a dynamic internal resolution, yes. It obviously affects the quality of the output, potentially persistent past the window of DRS, and you have to pay for the memory usage of the higher internal resolution at all times, but it does work

 

[Serif]

Because of all this if you're going to DLSS at all, you should almost always just DLSS all the way to 4K or the native resolution of the TV. Once you've bitten at that apple, you might as well maximize DLSS's ability to reconstruct/hallucinate detail, rather than take the possible ghosting of DLSS plus the TV's upscaling artifacts.

If Switch 2 is always sending a 2160p signal through HDMI, regardless of the content, is there any actual upscaling being done by the TV? Since it's receiving a signal equal to its native resolution.

I assume if a game is being DLSS'd to 1080p/1440p, there's additional spatial upscaling being performed by the console (bilinear/nearest neighbor) to get it to 4K and the TV just displays that raw image. In which case the console handles the entirety of the upscaling chain, as long as the output is set to 2160p.

I agree they should aim for 4K as much as possible though. I also think Ampere GPUs have integer upscaling built in, so fingers crossed for native 4K pixel art where feasible.

 

[kalosmani]

Last gen sales slowing is a normal thing in a generation transition. As for Sony and MS, their cross gen periods are ending now after 2 years.

That's because they make large expansive games that push the hardware. Quick question, are indie developers planning to stop releasing cross gen games after 2 years too? Do you expect Nintendo to stop making 2D games 2 years after Switch 2 release?

Also there.are rumours Last of Us Factions online game will be releasing of PS4. Also we still getting cross gen games by third parties into Year 3, Diablo 4, Street Fighter 6 etc.

 

[LiC]

Is there dynamic DLSS that can switch modes on the fly e.g. target 60 FPS with a 1080p -> 2160p upscale but drop to 720p -> 2160p if needed?

Dynamic (input) resolution support was added in DLSS 2.1. Normally, for a given target resolution and perf/quality mode, you're supposed to query the "optimal settings" for input resolution. So you say you want 4K via Performance mode, and the library will tell you it needs a 1080p input to do that. But when dynamic res is supported, it gives you minimum and maximum allowable input resolutions, in addition to the optimal value.

 

[Cuzizkool]

The screen still has to be fed power.

Yes, but so does the GPU. Power allocation can be saved elsewhere (like from DLSS) to power the screen, no?