I’m convince in 32GB( at least in PS6 since is Late 2028 but Xbox also should have that in Late 2026) because devs love RAM and PS6 will be then for another 8 years so is just thinking long term and make dev life easier like it is Mark Cerny philosophy
3P AAA support very much matter beacuse it mean more people will buy Switch 2 and games in it
Another question is about whether AAA budget games make money consistently anymore. How many copies must a game sell to make back a $200,000,000 budget?
I think so since TSMC's N6 process node has higher yields, which means Nintendo and Nvidia should get more non-defective chips from less wafers with TSMC's N6 process node vs Samsung's 8N process node.
It doesn't need any of that. Look at Switch currently. Even if it's weaker than PS4, it's receiving some support alongside PS5/XSeries.
if game is good it will sells good
That’s very possible scenario based on what we know
16gigs ram
512gigs storage
5nm
Nintendo has one hardware division now, and while they break up to work on individual projects, the hardware lead for the Switch, the Lite and the OLED model are all the same. So it seems reasonable that if there was a Pro revision, it was substantially the same people who are working on the successor console now.
1TB storage.
16gigs ram
512gigs storage
5nm
But how good? What is the line? Fully serious here. Napkin math - best case scenario for a 3rd party is that they sell at a full price of $70 and get to keep 70% of the price, but have to give another $8 to the platform holder. They end up with $41 a copy. They have to sell about 4.9 million copies just to break even. Someone with better numbers will correct me, but I doubt that the number of copies sold goes down by much. Probably the other way.
16gigs ram
512gigs storage
5nm
i think it depends on how much vram they want to leave for the integrated gpu
Makes sense. And that's why we can't rule it out.
The first one. Storage can be upgraded.
They announced it for Gamecube Wii and WiiU though
There's an interesting thought here for me that if the big new thing for the Switch 2 is that it's the big tech update that gets 4K and a bunch of third party games that have been absent because of porting issues, then why not talk about the specs? Talk about RAM and graphics capabilities and talk about it all being in a hand held form factor.
no i am realistic, i very skectical, Nintendo is gonna be able to have such powerful console, has we not learned nothing for Wii? Nintendo aim for ways for us to enjoy, a purely gameplay focused focus, not a graphical focus(at up to Sony/Microsoft
Not at all. Going with SD Express is in itself a workaround to not go with that, NVME can be quite hot and power hungry.
Honestly, what is after PS6? I don't see any true major improvements after 6
Over a lot of reading and including posts by @Thraktor even, it reads that the heat is more dependent on the flash itself and the speed at which it's read, and only really becomes an issue over time. MicroSD Express is NVMe. Same with CFExpress. The only real difference is the thermal expectations (and therefore throttling) and the number of PCIe lanes in use. M.2 offers 2 or 4 depending, and CFExpress is 1, 2, or 4 depending on A, B, or C, and SD Express can be either 1 or 2, depending on if it's Micro or Regular sized.
It also helps SD Express uses the same slot layout, so you could theoretically insert an UHS-1 SD in there. Big help for physical bc.
Except this wasn't what the Switch was? They went with one of the most powerful mobile gpus for its time.
I'm mostly thinking internal - NVMe SSDs come in BGA packages too. For cartridges, I'm thinking that data pins switch modes upon negotiation - which will probably be a requirement anyway.
did you learn nothing from Switch? or are you ignoring the chip used was top class at the time.
There's a pretty good chance you're right on the money. S1 cartridges used a different layout compared to UHS-1 microSDs but essentially achieved the same theoretical speeds (implying it's the same standard underneath, in this case NVME), just convenience for the manufacturer really.
"Because Nintendo" is the worst reason to reject analysis or thinking.
I think it is the other way around. Has Nintendo learned anything in 20 years.
I saw this question and decided to punch some numbers in.
Gen10 will be push full RT and AI&ML, what after? Who Knows
I think people still think that this Nintendo is still the Wii U era Nintendo because if we see take a look, we can see that they have change a lot.
sorry this is weird lol you just said last page you doubt Nintendo cares about 3rd party AAA ports and they're more concerned about console costs. I think they're fully aware that missed 3rd party games - AAA or not - is a missed 30% cut and over time it'll negate the cost of having a more expensive system to make
They will probably come but they would not be advertised.
I have no idea how these corporate relationships work. I'd think that if Nintendo reached out to the big streamers (Netflix, Amazon Prime, Apple TV+, Disney+, Paramount+, and Peacock), all 6 would be there. I'm staring at a android tv box remote I have, and it has Youtube, Netflix, Disney+, and Paramount+ buttons on it. All 4 of those companies paid to have dedicated buttons on that remote.
Because Nintendo aside, they learned everything they had to learn. They delivered the fastest handheld console back in 2017 with specs that, considering market availability at the time, were cutting edge. They're seemingly doing it again with its successor, this time with forward thinking as their main driving force. I think it's fine to let them deliver the fastest handheld devices, no one else at the industry is doing this besides non-custom PC handhelds with zero specific optimization.
There is always have something that i think they should do, but in the last gen they seems not willing to do, and that make me a little bit confuse.
If the PS6 can use this* in a fuller scale as in every character looks this good. It is a wrap. I would say if we have mass pedistrian on that level not just the main cast in an open world.... then we don't need a PS7.
lol. I should qualify further. There are questions about the cost of a machine capable of that with the slowing of Moore's law and such. Then there's the cost of game development on top of that. I think we might be into the era of streaming games where that gets reasonable and you're just paying a subscription fee (or hourly) to play the game.Lol no...
You are out on a hunt to hurt my feelings. Is a true cloud future viable?
Idk, whatever it is. I want no parts with the cloud.
The only thing that's still up in the air is latency. If that can get handled, and this is much a problem of the TCP protocol (defined in RFC 793 in September 1981) as anything, then I think cloud gaming could be a thing. Between QUIC and a couple of other things (on which I'm blanking on names right now - probably in my post history), then I think it really is possible.
Cloud will never happen if cost cutting is what they're looking for, all the opposite. It'll destroy the little profits they're having at the moment... Just look at the streaming landscape and how much money those platforms keep bleeding after decades of existing, or just Gamepass even.
If it means for better graphics and development cost, most likely.
