• Hey everyone, staff have documented a list of banned content and subject matter that we feel are not consistent with site values, and don't make sense to host discussion of on Famiboards. This list (and the relevant reasoning per item) is viewable here.

StarTopic Future Nintendo Hardware & Technology Speculation & Discussion |ST| (Read the staff posts before commenting!)

Reader mode
  • Some of the changes seen in 17.0.0 system update doesn't make sense if there's no BC.
  • BOTW demo at Gamescom seems like a weird choice if there's no plan or intention of including BC.
  • The absence of any recent mentions of Metroid Prime 4, makes me think it's a cross-generation title
  • Nintendo throughout much of its history had provided BC
None of those inherently confirm BC, but when you add those up together, I think Switch 2 is far more likely to have BC than not.
I'm sure I'm missing other bulletpoints here (I need coffee)

Edit: I don't know how the other commenter managed to make the leap of logic going from bulletpoints below to somehow being "confident" there won't be BC (emphasis in bullepoints mine)
Edit 2: Also, I faintly remembered the "XBoxEra" name (which Nick is owner of), it was setting off alarm bells in my head for some reason. I did a search, there was this shared with me in the past:

ItWasMeantToBe19 said:
He was banned from Era for pretending to verify sources with the mods after claiming that Pixel Opus was working on a Sly Cooper revival.

www.resetera.com

PlayStation Studios |OT25| Aloy brings a bow to a giant machine fight Sony

Don’t lie dude. Maybe if you actually replied to DMs or took the request to a conversation in Discord I’d be able to show you specifically anything you want. Again, I already know you won’t accept redacted Discord messages, but feel free to join me in a Discord DM and I’ll show you dozens...
www.resetera.com www.resetera.com

(Pixel Opus was closed the next year and had fewer than 20 employees before closing, meaning there was no chance they were doing a big revival of Sly Cooper)
Click to expand...
 
Last edited:
lemonfresh said:
I mean it should still be around ps4 power, like no way is it touching ps5 level so I think that is a good guess
Click to expand...
The PS4 and the PS5 are further away from each other in terms of power than a lot of people seem to think. The gap between PS4 and PS5 levels of performance, which is where the Switch 2 will probably end up, is huge and could entail tons of different things
 
Blocking digital BC on one model for no hardware reason would be a massive risk to Nintendo’s reputation with very minimal upside.

If instead, one model doesn’t have BC because it doesn’t have the Switch 1’s GPU in it……. Come on, they’re not shoving the Switch 1’s GPU into the Switch 2 and then blocking devs from using the Switch 1’s GPU for Switch 2 games. What the fuck.

“Digital only model” is believable but unlikely. “No BC model” is extremely fucking stupid. The two paths there just are nonsense.
 
PS4 level power with image reconstruction and fast load times would be completely fine docked.

It’s not like most devs have the money to match or surpass TLOU2 or Red Dead 2 even now.
 
Imagining how fucking stupid big the Switch 2 premium would have to be to include the Switch 1’s GPU as an addition.

How would this even work design wise, this sounds like a nightmare. Wouldn’t the entire Switch 2 design (from the chip to the heat distribution etc) have to be changed if they shoved this in?
 
ns156 said:
I simply disagree that it would be fine for the next 7+ years. The only way IMO this is happening is if the curse of 8nm came true and Nintendo cheaped out because they got some kind of incredible deal.
Click to expand...

I mean, it wouldn’t be amazing or anything and the Switch 2 would probably miss out on the highest end multi platform titles, but it would be perfectly fine for me idk. TLOU2 and Red Dead 2 look better than almost all PS5 games because graphics are largely about how many talented artists and programmers you can afford at this point.
 
ns156 said:
I simply disagree that it would be fine for the next 7+ years. The only way IMO this is happening is if the curse of 8nm came true and Nintendo cheaped out because they got some kind of incredible deal.
Click to expand...

You mean...

Like using Nvidia's X1 on OG switch? :LOL: Largely turning it into an overpowered Nvidia shield tablet? That deal convinced me to get Nvidia stock which proved to be quite a good decision back in 2016 lol
 
BC chat again?!
giphy.gif
 
ILikeFeet said:
the demo would only be possible if the application was native and not BC
Click to expand...
I think "possible" is the wrong word here- it's almost certainly a native port that was demoed, but a patched BC solution is possible. In fact, there's a good chance that patching the Switch version is what Nintendo will do in lieu of releasing the souped up port.
 
ns156 said:
I've said this before, but PS4 power when docked is going to suck, and will start being pretty terrible again nearer the end of the lifespan of the device. PS4 handheld? Yeah sure that would be grand.

The closer to PS4 Pro docked we get, the better.
Click to expand...
In all likelihood, it'll be similar to PS4 in terms of raw power, or slightly above, in handheld mode, but targeting lower internal resolutions. But close to Series S (not quite touching it), with more features in TV mode.

Putting it down as "PS4 level quality in TV mode" isn't being realistic, it's being pessimistic.
 
Hermii said:
To be fair, they would only have to include the tx1 gpu, cause arm 78 is already compatible.

But I agree there are far better ways to solve the problem,
Click to expand...
Depends if the game was made “uniquely”, like The Witcher 3, so it’s not always a simple process. Though that’s more of an exception than a norm
 
Concernt said:
In all likelihood, it'll be similar to PS4 in terms of raw power, or slightly above, in handheld mode, but targeting lower internal resolutions. But close to Series S (not quite touching it), with more features in TV mode.

Putting it down as "PS4 level quality in TV mode" isn't being realistic, it's being pessimistic.
Click to expand...
honestly its better to have expectations low so if Nintendo goes above we are pleasantly surprised. Rather than be disappointed if they dont go stronger on power
 
TechnicalTip6578 said:
i mean this IS nintendo we're talking about
Click to expand...
ANYONE who uses this talking point always uses it for scenarios that would never happen because despite all of Nintendo's faults, they just go against what Nintendo is known to do for the sake of doomposting. Like, I am the last person who will peddle some random "pattern" or "tendency" that Nintendo has as proof they have a schedule or habit, etc. but BC is an exception. Nearly every new portable system they've ever shipped has had it in some regard.

When they're on the record saying "We want the transition to next-gen to be as easy as possible for the consumer" please give me one realistic reason why they wouldn't make their next system BC when signs are pointing to this likely being the case. Outside of you fantasizing of a Wii U-caliber stumble that will doom Nintendo again or something.
 
A "this is Nintendo" move would be including the next gen Kinect for all Switch 2 purchases (and I could talk myself into this one if I ran Nintendo to be clear... It's really interesting now...)

Shoving the Switch 1's GPU in one model and not putting it in the other model is not a move any company would do because it's a fucking nightmare.
 
0
maybe not remove bc but I wouldn't be surprised if Nintendo does something dumb with the switch 2. Like to play your switch 1 games you have to pay a small fee to get availibity to play it on switch 2, and we heard they will make it a LCD screen instead of oled so going back in tech with that.
 
I'm fairly confident it will have backwards compatibility. Switch games will be able to run on the new Switch.

My concerns are in the implementation.

Will the new Switch have a card reader for Switch games?

If not, will Nintendo provide a means to obtain digital copies for physical game owners?

Will the BC implementation require per-game patches?

If so, will they charge an update fee? Will most patches be available at launch, or will they drip feed them?

Best case scenario is I buy a Switch 2 and I can insert every Switch game cart I own and the games just work (with increased resolution and frame rate where possible).

Worst case scenario is only some digital games are supported at launch, with titles getting patches over time, there's a upgrade fee for each one, and Nintendo charges some fee to convert a physical license into a digital one.

I'm expecting something in-between the two.
 
Last edited:
lemonfresh said:
honestly its better to have expectations low so if Nintendo goes above we are pleasantly surprised. Rather than be disappointed if they dont go stronger on power
Click to expand...
For me, low expectations still put it in the 2-3TF range + DLSS. Which is very good, for a handheld!

Think about it, why would they create a chip as big as T239 if they were going to clock it so low at all times, rather than using a cheaper chip at higher clocks?

Unless you believe there's a risk Nintendo won't use T239, the power expectation is above PS4 by a nice little bit, in the worst case scenario.
 
lemonfresh said:
maybe not remove bc but I wouldn't be surprised if Nintendo does something dumb with the switch 2. Like to play your switch 1 games you have to pay a small fee to get availibity to play it on switch 2, and we heard they will make it a LCD screen instead of oled so going back in tech with that.
Click to expand...
Why would they charge to play games you already own? The last time they sort of tried that with the Wii U Virtual Console was a total failure, and that was still technically paying for a new piece of software, and a seperate copy of the game.

As for the LCD screen? OLED is not some linear progression from LCD. It's a different display technology, and a 1080p, HDR LCD is absolutely better than a 720p OLED display. I can assure you, since I've used both!
 
I'm almost certain the Switch 2 screen will not have HDR. Maintaining extremely high brightness for the entire time would be an electricity hog on a system that already seems ultra power hungry.

An HDR and OLED revision after a die shrink to reduce power seems more likely but a die shrink would be years and years away and involve a complete revision of the hardware.
 
The Switch 2 will surely be backwards-compatible, but yeah, if there's a digital-only version of the Switch 2 then it may not be 'backwards compatible' due to a lack of cartridge reader directly. Now, i see absolutely zero reason why a console that already has a backwards-compatible version wouldn't sell past-generation games in the store. I mean, if you can't play backwards compatible cartridges due to lack of a reader, but the hardware supports it... simply sell the old games digitally, Xbox style? Makes no sense to downgrade the hardware so much simply to strip backwards compatibility. I'm guessing there might've been a misunderstanding in that entire report/speculation/rumor.
 
lemonfresh said:
and we heard they will make it a LCD screen instead of oled so going back in tech with that.
Click to expand...
Why do I need to pay premium for something that I'd use for only 1% of overall Switch 2 playing time? I played Switch 1 docked 99% of the time and expect to continue to do so.

Besides this, Nintendo might have had to make some sacrifices to keep the overall cost per unit profitable for the company. I feel like Nintendo went far to get devs what they want out of the new hardware so LCD -> OLED wasn't a priority.

And no, selling at loss is not a good business move so please don't try to argue that point.
 
Concernt said:
I think "possible" is the wrong word here- it's almost certainly a native port that was demoed, but a patched BC solution is possible. In fact, there's a good chance that patching the Switch version is what Nintendo will do in lieu of releasing the souped up port.
Click to expand...
I think what he meant was that the resolution, framerate and loading times of the demo would only be possible through a native port, I don't think BOTW can reach 4k 60fps in bc mode, not even with a patch.
 
The rumors about a cheaper Digital console make zero sense to me because unlike Sony and MS, Nintendo doesn't save much by removing the game reader. And I'm not sure they will want to split their manufacturing lines, a decision that even Sony backtracked.

Concernt said:
I think "possible" is the wrong word here- it's almost certainly a native port that was demoed, but a patched BC solution is possible. In fact, there's a good chance that patching the Switch version is what Nintendo will do in lieu of releasing the souped up-port.
Click to expand...
By patching you mean like on Xbox, were developers can update their games to be Gen9Aware and take advantage of the increased performance and functions, right? If so, agreed.
Concernt said:
As for the LCD screen? OLED is not some linear progression from LCD. It's a different display technology, and a 1080p, HDR LCD is absolutely better than a 720p OLED display. I can assure you, since I've used both!
Click to expand...
Right. And modern quality LCD are also a far cry from the OG Switch LCD (Which was decent back then). They're much better, even if OLED still gives a more pleasing image. Still, Nintendo can also give tune the LCD to use a colorspace that align more closely to OLED Vibrant settings. I think LCD x OLED will be a bit a moot point.
 
Dimensio said:
I think what he meant was that the resolution and framerate of the demo would only be possible through a native port, I don't think BOTW can reach 4k 60fps in bc mode, not even with a patch.
Click to expand...
Hmm interesting. I would have thought a BC patch would suffice to do 4k60fps on Switch 2, but I'm no expert on this kind of subject matter (what's possible, what's not possible)
 
0
Dimensio said:
I think what he meant was that the resolution and framerate of the demo would only be possible through a native port, I don't think BOTW can reach 4k 60fps in bc mode, not even with a patch.
Click to expand...
I don't see why it couldn't, since you can totally run BOTW at 4K60 on an emulator if you have the horsepower for it
 
wikiales said:
I don't see why it couldn't, since you can totally run BOTW at 4K60 on an emulator if you have the horsepower for it
Click to expand...
That was my impression as well, so I am kind of confused on why there are mentions it has to be a native port. With a patch, the DLSS could help Switch 2 get BOTW to 4k60fps slightly easier too, or so I thought.
 
Last edited:
Superstarxalien said:
videocardz.com

Frame Generation on RTX 20/30 cards in Portal Prelude RTX is just a bug, NVIDIA confirms - VideoCardz.com

NVIDIA confirms DLSS Frame Generation does not work on RTX 20/30 GPUs in Portal Prelude RTX, despite what some users claim We’ve received multiple reports regarding a potential discovery made by gamers in Portal Prelude RTX, a game tech demo jointly released by NVIDIA and Valve, introducing RTX...
videocardz.com videocardz.com
Click to expand...
Some ppl thought nvidia might be withholding feature back from RTX 20/30 intentionally, that was debunked. Well, technically it can be rigged to do some DLSS-FG but not enough of a benefit to make it worthwhile.
 
0
darthdiablo said:
  • Some of the changes seen in 17.0.0 system update doesn't make sense if there's no BC.
  • BOTW demo at Gamescom seems like a weird choice if there's no plan or intention of including BC.
  • The absence of any recent mentions of Metroid Prime 4, makes me think it's a cross-generation title
  • Nintendo throughout much of its history had provided BC
None of those inherently confirm BC, but when you add those up together, I think Switch 2 is far more likely to have BC than not.
I'm sure I'm missing other bulletpoints here (I need coffee)

Edit: I don't know how the other commenter managed to make the leap of logic going from bulletpoints below to somehow being "confident" there won't be BC (emphasis in bullepoints mine)
Edit 2: Also, I faintly remembered the "XBoxEra" name (which Nick is owner of), it was setting off alarm bells in my head for some reason. I did a search, there was this shared with me in the past:
Click to expand...
The boys in the lab (aka the folks on my discord) have discussed Nick's "leaks" in the past and we basically summed up our discussion as "He seems to be getting better, but mainly with Xbox info". There's a case to be made that he's just repeating a rumour (like I did a fair while ago), but it's fairly safe to assume that this rumour is false.

In more uplifting news, that information surrounding the 17.0.0 update surrounding BC gives me hope. There is no real reason not to have BC for a Switch 2.
 
SoldierDelta said:
The boys in the lab (aka the folks on my discord) have discussed Nick's "leaks" in the past and we basically summed up our discussion as "He seems to be getting better, but mainly with Xbox info". There's a case to be made that he's just repeating a rumour (like I did a fair while ago), but it's fairly safe to assume that this rumour is false.

In more uplifting news, that information surrounding the 17.0.0 update surrounding BC gives me hope. There is no real reason not to have BC for a Switch 2.
Click to expand...
the better question is why is there switch leaks on xboxera lol
 
lemonfresh said:
maybe not remove bc but I wouldn't be surprised if Nintendo does something dumb with the switch 2. Like to play your switch 1 games you have to pay a small fee to get availibity to play it on switch 2, and we heard they will make it a LCD screen instead of oled so going back in tech with that.
Click to expand...
Nintendo can’t give you everything you want and not have losses on each system sold. There’s a balancing act to this.
 
Hermii said:
I missed this part. What was j 17.0.0 about BC?
Click to expand...
Account transfer procedures, removal of references to NX and introduction of flag NN to certain calls. Basically, it changed some of the system software from "NX" software to "NN" (Nintendo) software, implying that the system software will jump generations. Furthermore, it introduced touchscreen resolution resizing, which would really only have a use for BC, and the ability of the system software to identify the hardware it's on, where NX=Device 0 (Switch, regardless of model), and something else =Device 1, etc.
 
ns156 said:
I've said this before, but PS4 power when docked is going to suck, and will start being pretty terrible again nearer the end of the lifespan of the device. PS4 handheld? Yeah sure that would be grand.

The closer to PS4 Pro docked we get, the better.
Click to expand...
Much better CPU, almost certainly much more RAM, significantly better upscaling techniques. In the hands of competent developers the PS4 Pro will be well in the rearview mirror unless they've clocked it at Switch 1 speeds or something.
 
JoshuaJSlone said:
Much better CPU, almost certainly much more RAM, significantly better upscaling techniques. In the hands of competent developers the PS4 Pro will be well in the rearview mirror unless they've clocked it at Switch 1 speeds or something.
Click to expand...
At Switch 1 speeds, that would still be the case in most scenarios, since at the same clocks it's still 6x more capable, at minimum, on top of all its extra bells and whistles.

You're right on all other counts, though. The question with low clocks is, why not use a smaller chip at higher clocks to achieve that kind of power consumption. The fact they didn't implies that Switch 1 clocks are the basement level here, and hopefully we're looking at a lot more than that.
 
darthdiablo said:
That was my impression as well, so I am kind of confused on why there are mentions it has to be a native port. With a patch, the DLSS could help Switch 2 get BOTW to 4k60fps slightly easier too, or so I thought.
Click to expand...
To me, it doesn't make any sense to add DLSS support to NVN without adding an Ampere compiler and have the game be native. That's just making things harder for Nvidia (another thing to test for BC) and limiting what devs can do with the patch.
 
RennanNT said:
To me, it doesn't make any sense to add DLSS support to NVN without adding an Ampere compiler and have the game be native. That's just making things harder for Nvidia (another thing to test for BC) and limiting what devs can do with the patch.
Click to expand...
Wouldn't Switch 2 be using NVN2? Hypothetically, we would be running BOTW on T239, not T210, with a game patch update (for Switch 2 only), using NVN2, which has DLSS support.

If NVN vs NVN2 was something that came with the games themselves, that's something I hadn't realized. I was under the impression NVN is internal to Switch 1 system and NVN2 would be internal to Switch 2 system.

Apologies if I got confused by your reply lol.
 
Last edited:
Raploz said:
I know Orin was released after Ampere, so, is it using pure Ampere without any improvements or did it get some architectural improvements not found on Ampere? Do people here think the t239 could have gotten some microarchitectural improvements from Ada, considering it's a custom chip releasing a long time after Ampere and Ada Lovelace products came to market?
Click to expand...
Depends on what you mean by "pure" Ampere.

Nvidia markets the whole GPU die as "Ampere" but really, they make updates to the uncore parts of their chips during the generation. We know that at least some of the uncore features that were marketed as Ada Lovelace improvements actually premiered in Orin - the onboard video encoder getting AV1 support, for example.

When it comes to the actual graphics pipeline, Orin is not the same as desktop, but those aren't "architectural improvements." Nvidia already had two versions of Ampere, one for the data center, and one for gamers. Orin doesn't fit into either category, so the version of Ampere there has some features of both, as well as some custom features.

Drake, the Nintendo chip, seems to be a fourth version of Ampere. It has all of the uncore updates of Orin, but the graphics pipeline seems to be close to or even exactly the desktop version. There is one confirmed Lovelace feature that seems to be added, but it's not well documented, and is related to power saving.

BreakAtmo said:
Well, they could go with a vapor chamber. But that would just mean paying the cost in even more money rather than size. I think it would be worth it, though
Click to expand...
I think a vapor chamber would be rad in the device. But I don't think pushing the GPU clock speeds past the bandwidth limit would pay off in much additional performance.

TechnicalTip6578 said:
so the rumors we're confident of rn are:

-Nintendo gave out dev kits to partners in July this year

-Nintendo showed Visual tech demos to 3rd party companies & indies in Gamescom, those being Matrix Awakens & an improved version of BOTW

-Kotick was told Switch 2 is comparable to PS4 & XONE in terms of performance

-The exclusion of Backwards Compatibility for Switch 2
Click to expand...
TechnicalTip6578 said:
well unless we hear anything new about BC for switch 2 from someone reliable (be it good news or not), i'm still going with a realistic mindset that Nintendo won't include BC on Switch 2
Click to expand...
"Realistic" does not equal "confident". You list four things, two of which come from multiple journalists, one of which was the product of judicial discovery, and one of which has, to my knowledge, never been explicitly stated by anyone. I would not put these things in the same category.

Something Is Going On(tm) behind the scenes with Backwards Compatibility. I've got no sense of what though. Every time I hear something from someone in the know, they say something different from the previous person.

This could simply be Nintendo playing their cards extremely close to their chest, resulting in developer confusion, as different folks get told different things. This could be Nintendo having a business strategy that complicates BC deployment. This could be Nintendo waffling on the business strategy. This could be Nintendo hedging their bets, due to last minute technical issues.
 
darthdiablo said:
Wouldn't Switch 2 be using NVN2? Hypothetically, we would be running BOTW on T239, not T210, with a game patch update (for Switch 2 only), using NVN2, which has DLSS support.

If NVN vs NVN2 was something that came with the games themselves, that's something I hadn't realized. I was under the impression NVN is internal to Switch 1 system and NVN2 would be internal to Switch 2 system.

Apologies if I got confused by your reply lol.
Click to expand...
NVN(2) is an API that allows a program to interface with the SOC(simplifying), and it ships with each game individually, not as a part of the system software. NVN interfaces with Tegra X1(+) and NVN2 interfaces with Tegra T239.
 
Concernt said:
NVN(2) is an API that allows a program to interface with the SOC(simplifying), and it ships with each game individually, not as a part of the system software. NVN interfaces with Tegra X1(+) and NVN2 interfaces with Tegra T239.
Click to expand...

Oh wow, TIL, for some reason I thought those were internal to the system rather than the games themselves. I'm rearranging things around in my head right now. Yeah. I guess that does make it somewhat harder to provide "Switch 2 patches" for individual games, unless they made it relatively easy to swap out NVN for NVN2.
 
darthdiablo said:
Oh wow, TIL, for some reason I thought those were internal to the system rather than the games themselves. I'm rearranging things around in my head right now. Yeah. I guess that does make it somewhat harder to provide "Switch 2 patches" for individual games, unless they made it relatively easy to swap out NVN for NVN2.
Click to expand...

Not really! They can change the API with a patch, for instance, but that takes a lot of work. As for enhancements that are possible without a heavy workload, just look at what emulators are doing to Switch games on PC. Furthermore, we see some PC games getting DLSS modded into them post-release. It's not unreasonable to think Nintendo could apply these in a more optimised fashion, like reducing loading times, increasing resolutions, etc. with a patch, rather than having to introduce an entirely new build.
 
Nintendo would be very brave to not include BC given that their entire business plan for the future - the one they told to investors - is to continue the Nintendo Account ecosystem started by the Switch. Which there would be no point in doing if that didn't involve eShop purchases.
 
Reader mode
You must log in or register to reply here.
Please read this staff post before posting.

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


Back
Top Bottom