• 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
Tof said:
Most here don’t think it will be on 8nm despite what the DF video claims. I can’t find the post Thraktor wrote some time ago but it’s very comprehensive in breaking down why 8nm is unlikely to be the the node that NG uses. To summarise I believe it boils down to battery life considerations and reducing the voltage below a certain value actually causes instability and less optimal performance when on 8nm however if on 5nm the maths works out just fine. I probably massacred the explanation somewhere but I’m on mobile and can’t find the original explanation anywhere.
Click to expand...
Nvidia have their own process in TSMC what is 4N( what is basically 5nm+)
 
Quoted by: Tof
1
Hermii said:
13,56 is not "plenty of room" for 4k60. It means the game got about 3 ms to render before dlss.
Click to expand...
I feel you're under the impression that GPU rendering is halted while DLSS is running. That isn't what is going on here because DLSS runs on the tensor cores, separate from the CUDA cores. They can run together just like the CPU and GPU can, handling different stages of the overall output. I went over this in my last post. The CPU could be working on frame 1, then when it finishes, it passes the work over to the GPU and starts frame 2. When the GPU finishes with frame 1, it passes the work over to DLSS, and begins work on frame 2 after the CPU hands it over. To which at this point, the CPU is handling frame 3. It's an assembly line.

  • CPU - frame 1
  • CPU - frame 2, GPU - frame 1
  • CPU - frame 3, GPU - frame 2, DLSS - frame 1
  • CPU - frame 4, GPU - frame 3, DLSS - frame 2
  • CPU - frame 5, GPU - frame 4, DLSS - frame 3
  • ...
  • CPU - frame n + 2, GPU - frame n + 1) DLSS - frame n
Even with multiple stages, the actual frame rate we see is based on the slowest stage. If the CPU processed each game logic frame in 15ms, the GPU rendered each native frame in 15ms, and DLSS upscales each final frame in 15ms, then we see the results of that every 15ms, which is ~66.66fps, even if it took 45ms to go from start to finish. This is because each stage is taking 15ms to process. This 45ms number would be the input/display latency, or close to it. If both CPU and DLSS were only 8ms, we would still see the results update every 15ms because of the GPU. The CPU and DLSS would have a wait period of 7ms each added to their overall timing because of this. An assembly line is only as fast as its slowest stage.
 
Forgive me putting on the tin foil hat again...

200px-WWMI_NA_cover.jpg


On the cover of Wario Ware Move IT!, the Joy-Con Wario holds are... Unique. They appear to be thick, with a round rear grip pushing into his hand. While I could suggest this is merely using the Joy-Con AA Battery Pack, there are visible seams on Wario's controllers that don't line up with AA Battery Pack and are light grey rather than black, and on AA Battery Pack, the strap exits the accessory on the opposite corner to where they are displayed exiting the controller near the Joy-Con Rail. The Joy-Con Strap on the cover is of a style not currently seen from Nintendo. The colours of the Joy-Con are extremely light grey, closer to that of the Super Famicom controller than that of the Nintendo Switch Joy-Con Pair in Gray, which is a dark gray.

So we have a controller that appears to be larger than the ones we have, with a new style of strap, in a colourway that doesn't fit any extant example.

Also, this game is called Super Smooth Moves in Japan.

I'm not saying it means anything, but they're SO off-model it raises my eyebrows. Super Famicom colourdy buttons have been suggested, and from that, we get the suggestion of Super Famicom grey for the default colourway. We have rumours the new controllers are larger, rounder, uglier, which this depiction is.

Super Smooth Moves with larger Joy-Con in Super Famicom grey...

I don't think this is an intentional hint, Nintendo doesn't work like that, but maybe a minor oversight? An expectation that the game would release with or just after the new system, only for the system to fall back or the game get pulled forward, but large, light grey controllers with new straps remained prominent on the cover, because who cares.

Sloppy edit or next gen controller depiction oversight. Personally I'm uncertain, even if I think sloppy edit is more likely, some part of me thinks... These changes are so specific, and if it's a mistake, it's such a sloppy one, it's hard to believe.
 
Concernt said:
Forgive me putting on the tin foil hat again...

200px-WWMI_NA_cover.jpg


On the cover of Wario Ware Move IT!, the Joy-Con Wario holds are... Unique. They appear to be thick, with a round rear grip pushing into his hand. While I could suggest this is merely using the Joy-Con AA Battery Pack, there are visible seams on Wario's controllers that don't line up with AA Battery Pack and are light grey rather than black, and on AA Battery Pack, the strap exits the accessory on the opposite corner to where they are displayed exiting the controller near the Joy-Con Rail. The Joy-Con Strap on the cover is of a style not currently seen from Nintendo. The colours of the Joy-Con are extremely light grey, closer to that of the Super Famicom controller than that of the Nintendo Switch Joy-Con Pair in Gray, which is a dark gray.

So we have a controller that appears to be larger than the ones we have, with a new style of strap, in a colourway that doesn't fit any extant example.

Also, this game is called Super Smooth Moves in Japan.

I'm not saying it means anything, but they're SO off-model it raises my eyebrows. Super Famicom colourdy buttons have been suggested, and from that, we get the suggestion of Super Famicom grey for the default colourway. We have rumours the new controllers are larger, rounder, uglier, which this depiction is.

Super Smooth Moves with larger Joy-Con in Super Famicom grey...

I don't think this is an intentional hint, Nintendo doesn't work like that, but maybe a minor oversight? An expectation that the game would release with or just after the new system, only for the system to fall back or the game get pulled forward, but large, light grey controllers with new straps remained prominent on the cover, because who cares.

Sloppy edit or next gen controller depiction oversight. Personally I'm uncertain, even if I think sloppy edit is more likely, some part of me thinks... These changes are so specific, and if it's a mistake, it's such a sloppy one, it's hard to believe.
Click to expand...
He might also just have very puffy/flabby hands. So they kinda fold over the rest of the thickness of the joycons? I dunno.

But this is the kind of speculation I live for

the trees!
 
Skittzo said:
He might also just have very puffy/flabby hands. So they kinda fold over the rest of the thickness of the joycons? I dunno.

But this is the kind of speculation I live for

the trees!
Click to expand...
As someone with flabby hands, it looks like they're squishing into some sort of rounded rear, the Joy-Con aren't naturally very thick... But I could just be misinterpreting the perspective. ¯⁠\⁠⁠(⁠ツ⁠)⁠⁠/⁠¯
 
Concernt said:
Forgive me putting on the tin foil hat again...

On the cover of Wario Ware Move IT!, the Joy-Con Wario holds are... Unique. They appear to be thick, with a round rear grip pushing into his hand. While I could suggest this is merely using the Joy-Con AA Battery Pack, there are visible seams on Wario's controllers that don't line up with AA Battery Pack and are light grey rather than black, and on AA Battery Pack, the strap exits the accessory on the opposite corner to where they are displayed exiting the controller near the Joy-Con Rail. The Joy-Con Strap on the cover is of a style not currently seen from Nintendo. The colours of the Joy-Con are extremely light grey, closer to that of the Super Famicom controller than that of the Nintendo Switch Joy-Con Pair in Gray, which is a dark gray.

So we have a controller that appears to be larger than the ones we have, with a new style of strap, in a colourway that doesn't fit any extant example.

Also, this game is called Super Smooth Moves in Japan.

I'm not saying it means anything, but they're SO off-model it raises my eyebrows. Super Famicom colourdy buttons have been suggested, and from that, we get the suggestion of Super Famicom grey for the default colourway. We have rumours the new controllers are larger, rounder, uglier, which this depiction is.

Super Smooth Moves with larger Joy-Con in Super Famicom grey...

I don't think this is an intentional hint, Nintendo doesn't work like that, but maybe a minor oversight? An expectation that the game would release with or just after the new system, only for the system to fall back or the game get pulled forward, but large, light grey controllers with new straps remained prominent on the cover, because who cares.

Sloppy edit or next gen controller depiction oversight. Personally I'm uncertain, even if I think sloppy edit is more likely, some part of me thinks... These changes are so specific, and if it's a mistake, it's such a sloppy one, it's hard to believe.
Click to expand...
There are more images with various characters holding joycons here, including image of joycons alone
 
Concernt said:
Forgive me putting on the tin foil hat again...

200px-WWMI_NA_cover.jpg


On the cover of Wario Ware Move IT!, the Joy-Con Wario holds are... Unique. They appear to be thick, with a round rear grip pushing into his hand. While I could suggest this is merely using the Joy-Con AA Battery Pack, there are visible seams on Wario's controllers that don't line up with AA Battery Pack and are light grey rather than black, and on AA Battery Pack, the strap exits the accessory on the opposite corner to where they are displayed exiting the controller near the Joy-Con Rail. The Joy-Con Strap on the cover is of a style not currently seen from Nintendo. The colours of the Joy-Con are extremely light grey, closer to that of the Super Famicom controller than that of the Nintendo Switch Joy-Con Pair in Gray, which is a dark gray.

So we have a controller that appears to be larger than the ones we have, with a new style of strap, in a colourway that doesn't fit any extant example.

Also, this game is called Super Smooth Moves in Japan.

I'm not saying it means anything, but they're SO off-model it raises my eyebrows. Super Famicom colourdy buttons have been suggested, and from that, we get the suggestion of Super Famicom grey for the default colourway. We have rumours the new controllers are larger, rounder, uglier, which this depiction is.

Super Smooth Moves with larger Joy-Con in Super Famicom grey...

I don't think this is an intentional hint, Nintendo doesn't work like that, but maybe a minor oversight? An expectation that the game would release with or just after the new system, only for the system to fall back or the game get pulled forward, but large, light grey controllers with new straps remained prominent on the cover, because who cares.

Sloppy edit or next gen controller depiction oversight. Personally I'm uncertain, even if I think sloppy edit is more likely, some part of me thinks... These changes are so specific, and if it's a mistake, it's such a sloppy one, it's hard to believe.
Click to expand...
 
SiG said:
I really doubt it, unless AMD pivots their entire GPU line to suddenly support heavy machine learning loads by having dedicated hardware for Tensor-like instructions that can run in parallel with shaders like Nvidia's (and even perhaps Intels) GPUs.
Click to expand...

They kind of already have. RDNA3 added matrix accelerators, which are broadly similar to tensor cores in that they accelerate matrix multiplication (although the implementation is quite different). According to this blog post, they get 512 ops per clock per CU for FP16 and BF16 data types, which would put "matrix performance" at 122 Tflops for the RX 7900XTX. This doesn't match the top-end Nvidia cards, but frankly something like the RTX 4090 is absurdly over-specced for DLSS upscaling. The lowest end card, the RX 7600, has about 43.5 Tflops of matrix performance, which is roughly in line with the RTX 2060. That puts the entire RDNA3 desktop line well within the range of performance required for solutions like DLSS.

The real issue is that Nvidia have spent years working on AI temporal upscaling as a software problem, and AMD haven't. It's not a trivial problem to solve, and there's significant work involved in just building up the data set needed to train it. I have no doubt AMD will get there, but they also have to leap straight to a solution that's competitive with Nvidia's DLSS, they can't get away with a poor version 1 like Nvidia did.

Microsoft have been working in this area for a while. I remember they published papers on AI upscaling way back in the day before DLSS was a thing (although it was a purely spatial upscaling solution at the time) and probably haven't ignored it since then. They're a software company, after all, so throwing software engineers at problems is pretty much what they do.
 
Maybe it's just me but the joycons from the Wario game just look stylized and doodled. The art in Wario isn't exactly realistic or serious so I don't see why the art for the game needs 1-for-1 recreations of the joycon.
 
SiG said:
I really doubt it, unless AMD pivots their entire GPU line to suddenly support heavy machine learning loads by having dedicated hardware for Tensor-like instructions that can run in parallel with shaders like Nvidia's (and even perhaps Intels) GPUs.
Click to expand...
Don't understimate Mark Cerny, though. He already presented an RT acceleration patent not so long ago, and he believes on the raytracing dream more than anyone else. Hardware upscaling is a given if he's looking to achieve that.
 
Thraktor said:
They kind of already have. RDNA3 added matrix accelerators, which are broadly similar to tensor cores in that they accelerate matrix multiplication (although the implementation is quite different). According to this blog post, they get 512 ops per clock per CU for FP16 and BF16 data types, which would put "matrix performance" at 122 Tflops for the RX 7900XTX. This doesn't match the top-end Nvidia cards, but frankly something like the RTX 4090 is absurdly over-specced for DLSS upscaling. The lowest end card, the RX 7600, has about 43.5 Tflops of matrix performance, which is roughly in line with the RTX 2060. That puts the entire RDNA3 desktop line well within the range of performance required for solutions like DLSS.

The real issue is that Nvidia have spent years working on AI temporal upscaling as a software problem, and AMD haven't. It's not a trivial problem to solve, and there's significant work involved in just building up the data set needed to train it. I have no doubt AMD will get there, but they also have to leap straight to a solution that's competitive with Nvidia's DLSS, they can't get away with a poor version 1 like Nvidia did.

Microsoft have been working in this area for a while. I remember they published papers on AI upscaling way back in the day before DLSS was a thing (although it was a purely spatial upscaling solution at the time) and probably haven't ignored it since then. They're a software company, after all, so throwing software engineers at problems is pretty much what they do.
Click to expand...
Microsoft on that slide from court wants to add NPU chip to SoC, what would be only responsible for AI stuff
 
0
darthdiablo said:
There are more images with various characters holding joycons here, including image of joycons alone
Click to expand...
Hilariously and intentionally off model due to being in-game relics made of rock is not what I expected. 😂

Still, it has my gears turning. Those are some SERIOUSLY visually different controllers. What is the right control stick doing that far south? 🤪

And that IR Motion Camera window is TEENY!

And it's a different design of IR Motion Camera window, not turning the corner of the device, instead flat against the bottom.

Hm. If you scale them so that the in-game IR Motion Camera window is the same size as the current, IRL one, you do indeed get... Slightly larger than current Joy-Con... Huh.

Somehow this leaves me even more confused.
 
Molybdenum said:
I thought I'd do a little math with the DLSS frametime cost from the DF video. First, the assumption made in the video is that the docked clock would be 1GHz, but we don't know for sure what the final clocks will be, and 1GHz is slower than a lot of the estimates from this thread. Assuming the DLSS performance scales linearly with GPU clock speed, then running the GPU faster would allow DLSS to take less time. Another common assumption we've been making is that docked clocks will be around double the portable clocks, and going by the portable clock estimate in the video of 540MHz, we would expect docked to be around 1080MHz, so slightly faster than what was tested in the video. Also, the switch's lowest portable speed was 40% of the docked speed, so I decided to check that one too. Also I'm assuming DLSS will be rendered concurrently with the next frame.

Here are a few clock speed and DLSS frametime combinations I've calculated:

  • DF video: 1000MHz clock, 18.3ms DLSS (4k30 viable, 4k60 impossible)
  • 2x DF portable clock estimate: 1080MHz clock, 16.94ms DLSS (4k60 just barely impossible)
  • Minimum clock speed for 16.7ms DLSS: 1095.8MHz
  • Docked clock estimate from earlier in this thread: 1100MHz, 16.63ms DLSS (4k60 just barely possible)
  • Docked clock 2.5x estimated portable clock (like switch): 1350MHz, 13.56ms DLSS (plenty of room for 4k60)
In conclusion; DLSS to 4k60 is impossible if the docked clock is 1GHz like the DF video assumed, but it doesn't take much more docked speed to make it theoretically viable.
Click to expand...
I like option 4 because it allows the least amount of hurdles to backwards compatibility. Hopefully Nintendo agrees with me.
 
SNP said:
probably not, we don't even have something super simple like custom button mapping for each game...
Click to expand...
We do have it at a system level, at least, even if it isn't perfect.

Personally, I think it's likely Nintendo will stick with their current philosophy of "we make one game with one performance profile, take it or leave it".

Personally I'd rather them optimise for just one resolution and framerate, too, and to offer performance profiles would be a pretty significant departure from their established ethos.
 
oldpuck said:
A (long) Note About The DF Video and How To Interpret The Results
I want to quote a DF Direct real quick (edited for clarity)



Consoles are weird machines. CPUs and GPUs both have new major release every two years, and the industry is constantly pushing those boundaries. A console needs to provide a great bang for the buck now, while making decisions that will allow the technology to hold up 7 years from now.

This is the way to think about Rich's tests. Nvidia brings technologies to the table that have, even in their budget products, never been tested in such a small device. It brings up a number of questions, like -
  • How good does a console implementation of DLSS - lower than 4k res, on a big TV - look?
  • How well does DLSS perform on a low power device?
  • How good is Nvidia's Ray Tracing hardware on a lower power device?
  • What could such a small GPU do, if paired with a more modern CPU/Storage solution?
Let's look at the games and see what lessons we can extract instead of "this looks good" or "that runs poorly" or "I don't like that resolution."

Death Stranding: PS4 delivered 1080p30 on this game, and Rich shows that native. PS4 Pro delivered 4k checkerboarded, also 30fps, the test machine does it with DLSS Ultra Performance mode, though somewhat unstably. Rich also shows a 1440p30 mode that is much more stable.

What did we learn: The drum I have beat is "PS4 power, PS4 Pro experiences possible, but different tech means devs might make different decisions." Here we see all of that hold up. The raw power is plenty good enough to just "do" the PS4 experience without any real work. A 4k DLSS experience hits some performance snags that would be ironed out by a quality optimized port.

We also see the DLSS is a totally different technology from checkerboarding. It looks better, it's more flexible, but its cost grows differently. This creates different tradeoffs, and we shouldn't expect devs to make exactly the same choices.

Cyberpunk 2077: Death Stranding is a last gen console game with a good PC port. Cyberpunk is a PC game with a shitty last gen console port. Rich shows us the game running at PS5 quality settings, but at 1080p30, with instability.

What did we learn: We start to see how and why developers might make different decisions than on the AMD consoles. PS4 Pro runs at 1080p30, with a series of settings that are described by DF themselves as "extremely blurry and just kind of visually kind of glitchy". Series S has a 1080p60 mode. Both are 4 TFLOP machines. Here we see the 3 TFLOP Ampere card absolutely smack the pant off the PS4 Pro, running at comparable frame rates and resolutions, with substantially higher quality settings, but unable to deliver the Series S 1080p60, even with DLSS enabled.

DLSS is a different tech, it doesn't behave like "just more flops."

A Plague Tale: Requiem: A game that didn't come to last generation consoles, that runs at 900p30fps on the Series S, is here comfortably at 1080p30fps.

What did we learn: That the GPU isn't all that matters. Plague Tale is rough on the GPU, sure, but it's famously CPU limited. Pairing even this weak GPU with a modern CPU and storage solution, and suddenly 9th gen exclusives become viable.

Control: This runs at 30fps on the last gen machines, and kinda badly at that. 1080p on the PS4 Pro. Here it runs more stably, but same resolution, matching the PS5's settings.

What did we learn: Here, once again, we have the PS4 Pro performance/resolution experience via DLSS, but that's not the interesting story. What's interesting is that we're getting that level of performance with ray tracing enabled. Compare to the PS5 - these settings are matched, with PS5 at 1440p30fps. The Series S can't deliver an RT mode at all. But here we actually have a case where something "comparable" to the PS5's RT mode is actually easier to achieve than an ugly-but-fast 60fps mode.

Again, just like DLSS, RT cores change the math, opening up options that aren't possible on other hardware. RT is viable.

Fortnite: Rich tests with Nanite on, Lumen with hardware RT, Virtual shadow maps at high. With DLSS, he gets a comfortable 1080p30.

What did we learn: "Do I wanna play Fornite at 30fps???" I dunno man, I don't know your life. Who cares, that's not what this is about. The next-gen game engine, running with it's entire feature set fully enabled, and is still delivering HD resolutions and acceptable frame rates.

This is the power of a modern device. At nearly every level, Nvidia is providing a more advanced solution than AMD. UE5 is built for temporal upscaling, and DLSS is best-of-breed. Nanite uses mesh shaders on hardware that supports it, and Ampere does. Lumen has a software fallback for better performance and older machines, but Nvidia's RT hardware performs nearly identically to the software solution.

"Is the Series S holding gaming back" is a dumb discussion point of the last few years. Now we get to ask "Is the PS5 holding gaming back?" With it's lack of mesh shaders, it's lack of decent hardware RT, it's lack of AI accelerated rendering - it's Nintendo that is making the promise of UE5 fully possible. And that's what Rich is demonstrating here.
Click to expand...
Just wait until developers get their hands of this thing, and make quality ports too. We already see that you can pretty much throw a PS5 game on their, and it will work. But what happens when porting studios get involved and heavily optimize.

Also, as time progresses, DLSS is going to get much, much better too. Where the upscaler will need far less base resolution to upscale at an even greater quality. We have already seen this quite a bit, where DLSS is getting better. And in having a dedicated console space with DLSS, we could see developers play with the texture quality, geometry, and get it just right to look perfect while having great performance.
 
ILikeFeet said:
easy to denoise, but we see that it takes as much time as a high end device denoising more complex scenarios. on a battery powered device, there's gonna have to be some work in optimizing denoisers since they won't have the raw power. not that the work hasn't already been done judging by insider reports

it's a shame there's no Lumen detail because that's the one effect I have big questions for. the irradiance cache resolution and how Qualcomm mitigate a lot of the boiling effect in particular
Click to expand...
IIRC there's a 165 pages pdf on Lumen which talks about frame time cost of the different steps, although lumen works in a weird way and I can't find what step is actually supposed to be the denosing. It should be in the 2nd link dump I made, I think.
 
Gerald said:
So If 660MHz in Handheald mode, 1.1GHz in Docked Mode, what think guys will be CPU clocks? 2GHz would be perfect imo
Click to expand...
Honestly, I couldn't really see Nintendo clocking the A78C above 1.5 Ghz if we are projecting a 4N node. On the DF video, it was assumed to be 1 Ghz based on an 8nm process node. Like the original Switch, Nintendo will want to balance thermals, battery life, and performance regarding SOC performance capabilities.
 
boomersooner2000 said:
Honestly, I couldn't really see Nintendo clocking the A78C above 1.5 Ghz if we are projecting a 4N node. On the DF video, it was assumed to be 1 Ghz based on an 8nm process node. Like the original Switch, Nintendo will want to balance thermals, battery life, and performance regarding SOC performance capabilities.
Click to expand...
most people here bet 1.7GHz for CPU if im correct,Switch 2 also will have most likely bigger battery, anyway 8nm would be really terrible in everyway
 
0
Paul_Subsonic said:
IIRC there's a 165 pages pdf on Lumen which talks about frame time cost of the different steps, although lumen works in a weird way and I can't find what step is actually supposed to be the denosing. It should be in the 2nd link dump I made, I think.
Click to expand...
oh I was talking about Qualcomm's implementation. they made a custom denoiser for their custom RT shadow solution, so I expected them to make one for handling RTGI and RT Reflections from their lumen modifications. they show frame time of lumen before and after optimization and final frame rates, but some numbers don't add up. so they probably made some changes to denoising to make those numbers work
 
Concernt said:
Forgive me putting on the tin foil hat again...

200px-WWMI_NA_cover.jpg


On the cover of Wario Ware Move IT!, the Joy-Con Wario holds are... Unique. They appear to be thick, with a round rear grip pushing into his hand. While I could suggest this is merely using the Joy-Con AA Battery Pack, there are visible seams on Wario's controllers that don't line up with AA Battery Pack and are light grey rather than black, and on AA Battery Pack, the strap exits the accessory on the opposite corner to where they are displayed exiting the controller near the Joy-Con Rail. The Joy-Con Strap on the cover is of a style not currently seen from Nintendo. The colours of the Joy-Con are extremely light grey, closer to that of the Super Famicom controller than that of the Nintendo Switch Joy-Con Pair in Gray, which is a dark gray.

So we have a controller that appears to be larger than the ones we have, with a new style of strap, in a colourway that doesn't fit any extant example.

Also, this game is called Super Smooth Moves in Japan.

I'm not saying it means anything, but they're SO off-model it raises my eyebrows. Super Famicom colourdy buttons have been suggested, and from that, we get the suggestion of Super Famicom grey for the default colourway. We have rumours the new controllers are larger, rounder, uglier, which this depiction is.

Super Smooth Moves with larger Joy-Con in Super Famicom grey...

I don't think this is an intentional hint, Nintendo doesn't work like that, but maybe a minor oversight? An expectation that the game would release with or just after the new system, only for the system to fall back or the game get pulled forward, but large, light grey controllers with new straps remained prominent on the cover, because who cares.

Sloppy edit or next gen controller depiction oversight. Personally I'm uncertain, even if I think sloppy edit is more likely, some part of me thinks... These changes are so specific, and if it's a mistake, it's such a sloppy one, it's hard to believe.
Click to expand...
Higher res image directly from nintendo's website:
5b072b55e8a6993071b4cde9f74d9cf7aeac0b52141177efed6c8ce9b580a435

For now I would say probably just sloppy edit. In the background you can see the models holding joycons too and they appear like standard joycons but grey.
 


What it do bruh

If we ignore everything else (power draw, heating concerns, etc) and were forced to make an assumption based only on history, with PS5 being out for 3 years now using 6nm, Nintendo would likely choose 4N (5nm).
 
darthdiablo said:


What it do bruh

If we ignore everything else (power draw, heating concerns, etc) and were forced to make an assumption based only on history, with PS5 being out for 3 years now using 6nm, Nintendo would likely choose 4N (5nm).
Click to expand...

PS5 aleardy move to 6nm last year, Summer or even earlier, Pro will be N4P(4nm) according to Kelper_L2. thats why 4N is obv choice for Switch 2,and Nvdia will start use 3nm next year for Blackwell etc
 
Kise Ryota said:
I think he skipped the wii u. Techpowerup says it was at 40nm (in 2012)
Now I'm curious to see the handhelds too. Time to do a search
Click to expand...
It was 40nm, but that’s the newer device compared to the 360 and PS3 which were on the 90nm process

By the time the Wii U released it was on the same node as the other two which was 40 at the time.

Edit: well, not PS3 which was on the same process as the PS4 by the time it was out….
 
Kise Ryota said:
I think he skipped the wii u. Techpowerup says it was at 40nm (in 2012)
Now I'm curious to see the handhelds too. Time to do a search
Click to expand...

Ah - which was it, Wii U ahead or behind the competition in that regards?

Edit: Nvm, ReddDreadtheLead just answered that. So Wii U was also ahead of the competition at the time (40nm vs 90nm)
 
Concernt said:
Forgive me putting on the tin foil hat again...

200px-WWMI_NA_cover.jpg


On the cover of Wario Ware Move IT!, the Joy-Con Wario holds are... Unique. They appear to be thick, with a round rear grip pushing into his hand. While I could suggest this is merely using the Joy-Con AA Battery Pack, there are visible seams on Wario's controllers that don't line up with AA Battery Pack and are light grey rather than black, and on AA Battery Pack, the strap exits the accessory on the opposite corner to where they are displayed exiting the controller near the Joy-Con Rail. The Joy-Con Strap on the cover is of a style not currently seen from Nintendo. The colours of the Joy-Con are extremely light grey, closer to that of the Super Famicom controller than that of the Nintendo Switch Joy-Con Pair in Gray, which is a dark gray.

So we have a controller that appears to be larger than the ones we have, with a new style of strap, in a colourway that doesn't fit any extant example.

Also, this game is called Super Smooth Moves in Japan.

I'm not saying it means anything, but they're SO off-model it raises my eyebrows. Super Famicom colourdy buttons have been suggested, and from that, we get the suggestion of Super Famicom grey for the default colourway. We have rumours the new controllers are larger, rounder, uglier, which this depiction is.

Super Smooth Moves with larger Joy-Con in Super Famicom grey...

I don't think this is an intentional hint, Nintendo doesn't work like that, but maybe a minor oversight? An expectation that the game would release with or just after the new system, only for the system to fall back or the game get pulled forward, but large, light grey controllers with new straps remained prominent on the cover, because who cares.

Sloppy edit or next gen controller depiction oversight. Personally I'm uncertain, even if I think sloppy edit is more likely, some part of me thinks... These changes are so specific, and if it's a mistake, it's such a sloppy one, it's hard to believe.
Click to expand...
Those aren't Joy-Cons, they're form stones (which are probably not always drawn super on model).
 
It would be very nice if history is indeed repeating itself, and we get 4N.
 
0
Ghostsonplanets said:
1.No, but it's likely that they'll use eUFS for the internal storage. 2. I don’t think they will go the proprietary route for external storage.

The discussions about storage come and go frequently here. Everyone agrees that they will very much likely use eUFS for internal. But external storage is a big unknown. They can keep using MicroSD, but mSD is slow. Outside of MicroSD, there's SDExpress, CFExpress, UHS-II. But they all have their drawbacks and one glaring one: They're way more expensive than mSD.

What will Nintendo adopt or do? It's anyone guess.
Click to expand...
You missed one that helps resolve the pricepoint issue you brought up.
ItWasMeantToBe19 said:
High speed SSDs aren't really viable for mobile hardware. It's probably UFS memory, either UFS 2.2, UFS 3.1, or UFS 4.0 (higher better but more expensive here).

The issues are:

1. Will Nintendo allow UFS memory to reach very high speeds in game read speed?
2. Will many Switch 2 games have mandatory installs to make use of the high game read speed?

Because this leads to the major third issue of

3. No one has ever made expandable storage with UFS so the Switch 2 expandable storage using UFS would be extremely expensive for its first several years.

If they throttle the speed to like 100 MB/s, then people will probably just be able to use SD cards again. But UFS cards can hit 1 GB/s and an SD card wouldn't be able to keep up.
Click to expand...
The slowest eUFS physically possible (eUFS1.0) is still a speed improvement over eMMC with far better power consumption. eUFS 2.x outperforms eMMC 5.1 currently used by Nintendo by every metric, be it read speed (every comparison I’ve seen shows a super-high random read performance boost, 3x at the BAREST minimum) or power consumption.

Also, #3 isn’t true. First UFS Card was announced for retail release by Samsung in July 2016, which could reach eUFS 2.x single-lane performance, and the standard was updated to reach 2-lane eUFS 2.x performance on a single lane back in 2020. NAND flash prices are in the crapper right now and UFS Card 1.0 had a way better price per GB MSRP compared to UHS-II microSD (the closest speed match to UFS Card 1.0) when it released in 2016, even when there were so few devices that used it, and with NAND prices so low and supply so high for the past 4 years now, price isn’t likely to be that significant of an issue.

The reasons Nintendo would have to throttle the speed of the internal storage disappear In the face of that.
oldpuck said:
A (long) Note About The DF Video and How To Interpret The Results
I want to quote a DF Direct real quick (edited for clarity)



Consoles are weird machines. CPUs and GPUs both have new major release every two years, and the industry is constantly pushing those boundaries. A console needs to provide a great bang for the buck now, while making decisions that will allow the technology to hold up 7 years from now.

This is the way to think about Rich's tests. Nvidia brings technologies to the table that have, even in their budget products, never been tested in such a small device. It brings up a number of questions, like -
  • How good does a console implementation of DLSS - lower than 4k res, on a big TV - look?
  • How well does DLSS perform on a low power device?
  • How good is Nvidia's Ray Tracing hardware on a lower power device?
  • What could such a small GPU do, if paired with a more modern CPU/Storage solution?
Let's look at the games and see what lessons we can extract instead of "this looks good" or "that runs poorly" or "I don't like that resolution."

Death Stranding: PS4 delivered 1080p30 on this game, and Rich shows that native. PS4 Pro delivered 4k checkerboarded, also 30fps, the test machine does it with DLSS Ultra Performance mode, though somewhat unstably. Rich also shows a 1440p30 mode that is much more stable.

What did we learn: The drum I have beat is "PS4 power, PS4 Pro experiences possible, but different tech means devs might make different decisions." Here we see all of that hold up. The raw power is plenty good enough to just "do" the PS4 experience without any real work. A 4k DLSS experience hits some performance snags that would be ironed out by a quality optimized port.

We also see the DLSS is a totally different technology from checkerboarding. It looks better, it's more flexible, but its cost grows differently. This creates different tradeoffs, and we shouldn't expect devs to make exactly the same choices.

Cyberpunk 2077: Death Stranding is a last gen console game with a good PC port. Cyberpunk is a PC game with a shitty last gen console port. Rich shows us the game running at PS5 quality settings, but at 1080p30, with instability.

What did we learn: We start to see how and why developers might make different decisions than on the AMD consoles. PS4 Pro runs at 1080p30, with a series of settings that are described by DF themselves as "extremely blurry and just kind of visually kind of glitchy". Series S has a 1080p60 mode. Both are 4 TFLOP machines. Here we see the 3 TFLOP Ampere card absolutely smack the pant off the PS4 Pro, running at comparable frame rates and resolutions, with substantially higher quality settings, but unable to deliver the Series S 1080p60, even with DLSS enabled.

DLSS is a different tech, it doesn't behave like "just more flops."

A Plague Tale: Requiem: A game that didn't come to last generation consoles, that runs at 900p30fps on the Series S, is here comfortably at 1080p30fps.

What did we learn: That the GPU isn't all that matters. Plague Tale is rough on the GPU, sure, but it's famously CPU limited. Pairing even this weak GPU with a modern CPU and storage solution, and suddenly 9th gen exclusives become viable.

Control: This runs at 30fps on the last gen machines, and kinda badly at that. 1080p on the PS4 Pro. Here it runs more stably, but same resolution, matching the PS5's settings.

What did we learn: Here, once again, we have the PS4 Pro performance/resolution experience via DLSS, but that's not the interesting story. What's interesting is that we're getting that level of performance with ray tracing enabled. Compare to the PS5 - these settings are matched, with PS5 at 1440p30fps. The Series S can't deliver an RT mode at all. But here we actually have a case where something "comparable" to the PS5's RT mode is actually easier to achieve than an ugly-but-fast 60fps mode.

Again, just like DLSS, RT cores change the math, opening up options that aren't possible on other hardware. RT is viable.

Fortnite: Rich tests with Nanite on, Lumen with hardware RT, Virtual shadow maps at high. With DLSS, he gets a comfortable 1080p30.

What did we learn: "Do I wanna play Fornite at 30fps???" I dunno man, I don't know your life. Who cares, that's not what this is about. The next-gen game engine, running with it's entire feature set fully enabled, and is still delivering HD resolutions and acceptable frame rates.

This is the power of a modern device. At nearly every level, Nvidia is providing a more advanced solution than AMD. UE5 is built for temporal upscaling, and DLSS is best-of-breed. Nanite uses mesh shaders on hardware that supports it, and Ampere does. Lumen has a software fallback for better performance and older machines, but Nvidia's RT hardware performs nearly identically to the software solution.

"Is the Series S holding gaming back" is a dumb discussion point of the last few years. Now we get to ask "Is the PS5 holding gaming back?" With it's lack of mesh shaders, it's lack of decent hardware RT, it's lack of AI accelerated rendering - it's Nintendo that is making the promise of UE5 fully possible. And that's what Rich is demonstrating here.
Click to expand...
This is a more technically-founded way of saying what I did earlier. Leaving aside DLSS, the raw performance without it is better than I would have imagined when looking at what these tests were tasked to render. When you factor in the caveats, it’s… impressive in its own right without what DLSS can offer.
 
darthdiablo said:
Ah - which was it, Wii U ahead or behind the competition in that regards?

Edit: Nvm, ReddDreadtheLead just answered that. So Wii U was also ahead of the competition at the time (40nm vs 90nm)
Click to expand...

Well, that questions is always going to be controversial I think lol
I see the wii u competing with the ps4 and xone, so even it came one year before, it is what it is. It's bizarre to compare the wii u to consoles released 6 years before it.

Also, ps3 had many revisions, and I think it was in a smaller node than the wii u's GPU. It was a time where CPU and GPU had different manufacturing process (ps3 had a 45nm CPU and a 28nm GPU at some point)
 
darthdiablo said:
What process nodes were PS4 and XBone?
Click to expand...

28nm.

Also, ps3 had many revisions, and I think it was in a smaller node than the wii u's GPU. It was a time where CPU and GPU had different manufacturing process (ps3 had a 45nm CPU and a 28nm GPU at some point) I have edited my previous post

edit: still, it was an interesting video, because I haver never stopped to see what nodes nintendo used on their consoles. Now I'm going to find out about the handhelds
 
Last edited:
ReddDreadtheLead said:
Genshin impact on an actual portable mainstream console please and thanks
Click to expand...
Perhaps, but Sony has invested so much in making the console versions of Mihoyo/Hoyoverse titles such as Genshin exclusive to PlayStation that the chances of them being released on Switch 2 are slim to none.
They chose Mihoyo over Persona, even scrapping the Persona exclusivity. I don't see them giving it up easily.
 
Kise Ryota said:
edit: still, it was an interesting video, because I haver never stopped to see what nodes nintendo used on their consoles. Now I'm going to find out about the handhelds
Click to expand...
Ditto - I learned a couple of things about history of process node choices from the video, still enjoyed video even if it's not useful to making assumption for what process node Switch 2 would use.
 
majimazio said:
Perhaps, but Sony has invested so much in making the console versions of Mihoyo/Hoyoverse titles such as Genshin exclusive to PlayStation that the chances of them being released on Switch 2 are slim to none.
They chose Mihoyo over Persona, even scrapping the Persona exclusivity. I don't see them giving it up easily.
Click to expand...
While PlayStation is bouyed up by MTX on their platform so the incentives are clear, Hoyoverse has already announced Genshin Impact for Nintendo Switch and have never (officially) retracted it. It's somewhat clear there aren't legal or contractual reasons it can't release on Switch, with them commenting on ongoing development not too long ago.
 
0
majimazio said:
Perhaps, but Sony has invested so much in making the console versions of Mihoyo/Hoyoverse titles such as Genshin exclusive to PlayStation that the chances of them being released on Switch 2 are slim to none.
They chose Mihoyo over Persona, even scrapping the Persona exclusivity. I don't see them giving it up easily.
Click to expand...
A “Switch” version was announced years ago fyi, and when asked about it they usually say it’s still coming
 
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