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

[ReddDreadtheLead]

I don't really get this idea of "big enough jump to be a successor" when this is Nintendo we're talking about. Wii was the Gamecube's successor but was probably a smaller jump than n3DS over the 3DS.

Big enough jump can mean more than a power upgrade if it’s feature set is so far removed from the original. N3DS was still the same features as the 3DS it just had more hardware to work with, Wii was basically a GCN Pro and has the same (or similar). Switch to Dane would be a similar jump between PS3 and PS4, feature set stretches beyond simply having more TFLOPs. It goes beyond what the PS4 Pro was to the PS4 or the XBOX One X was to the One S, which both used the same CPU for the most part in many aspects just a different GPU. Higher clocked CPU but the same still. Though a bit less so with One X CPU as it used Bulldizer which has its roots with Jaguar. Zen was a big departure from the Jaguar-Bulldozer architecture, where it was a noticeably big performance jump.

Dane would be like the Series X|S is to the One X|S, completely different GPU uArch, different CPU and different way of handling storage, etc.

 

[lemonfresh]

Honestly I feel Dane will take the Switch Brand into the late 2020s or even early 2030's so that system would likely be Altan-Next.

Unless if Nintendo keeps updating the Swtich with new hardware on a reasonable time table ala Smartphones/What Xbox is likely to do with the Series systems.

If they do the latter then we may see

• 2022
  • Switch Dane
• 2024
  • Switch Dane Lite
• 2026
  • Switch Altan/ Switch Altan Lite
    • I feel if they move to an interative release model, they will release the Lite and
• 2030
  • Nintendo Next
    • TBH though, in the current market, I feel Nintendo may keep the Switch brand as their main brand out of necessity as they got burned hard by the Wii U and even the 3DS arguably versus the DS.
      • Gimmicks only sell insanely if they appeal to the mass audience, that is why the Wii and DS worked (cost helps).
      • I just don't see the financial incentive to do a big risk like another Wii or Wii U in the modern market with the Switch being as strong as it is, especially after over a decade at this point of Switch models, even if they cut the Switch off in 2026 versus my 2030 estimate.
        • Also with DLSS being the main driving point for the Switch for 4-8 years depending on when this would come out, they'd have to market power somehow.
        • Also not to mention that by 2030 and even arguably 2026, Msoft's push for Xcloud/streaming would've been even stronger and people may just want a handheld dedicated to systems as their home internet would be good enough for game streaming.
          • Also not to mention Msoft at this point likely would have released the Series S2|X2 sort of validating the Iterative console concept no matter what Nintendo does.
  • Switch Altan+/ Switch Altan+ Lite
    • Nintendo would likely use a refreshed/die-shrunk version of the SoC in the previous systems, also to let whatever their new concept/ "Third Pillar" is to have the highest specs of the lot.

Made some logos

 

[Dakhil]

Nintendo seems to have “confirmed“* that they are aiming for the Pro, rather than treating it like an eventual successor, despite the hardware difference being massive. The chip itself could have been used for a Successor though, or a Pro, as those are marketing positions. It is that big of a potential jump, yet they are probably treating it like a Pro or whatever you consider the GBC to be.

Again, they could have easily used this as a succ but seem to be against it, so Atlan derivative will be the actual succ for this platform That is “Nintendo Switch”


*”confirmed” is being used very loosely here, don’t take it as the literal meaning

I think it ultimately depends on how Nintendo decides to name the DLSS model*.

This is my personal opinion, but I think Super Nintendo Switch could be a good name for the DLSS model* since I think Super Nintendo Switch as a name is ambiguous enough where it can be marketed as either a mid-gen refresh or a successor.

 

[Mercury_Sagit]

I think it ultimately depends on how Nintendo decides to name the DLSS model*.

This is my personal opinion, but I think Super Nintendo Switch could be a good name for the DLSS model* since I think Super Nintendo Switch as a name is ambiguous enough where it can be marketed as either a mid-gen refresh or a successor.

Ambiguity is playing with fire (case in point: Wii U), so I would nominate Switchfourk/Sfourk to make the value proposition crystal clear to the customers

Regarding GTC, even if the next Jetson board featured there is not 1 to 1 compared to Dane, we can still glean so much technical info there, possibly even more than what Nintedo and NV will advertise for Dane unless we book another order with Chipworks (now TechInsights) ... Examples: uarch config (more like GA100 or GA10x?), tensor core config, lithography, clock speed, etc.

 

[ArchedThunder]

I think it ultimately depends on how Nintendo decides to name the DLSS model*.

This is my personal opinion, but I think Super Nintendo Switch could be a good name for the DLSS model* since I think Super Nintendo Switch as a name is ambiguous enough where it can be marketed as either a mid-gen refresh or a successor.

I will die on the “Nintendo Switch Ultra” hill.

 

[fwd-bwd]

From the investor Q&A of the November earning report, there are only two hardware related questions (machine translated):

Q4: How do you see the production of Nintendo Switch in the midst of the severe supply of semiconductors from 2022 to 2023? Is it possible to increase production by changing the design in hardware development? Also, how do software developers view the shortage of hardware supply?​

​

A4: [Furukawa] As I have continued to tell you since the beginning of the fiscal year, the supply and demand conditions of semiconductor components have been tight and the future is uncertain. We revised our sales plan for the second half of the fiscal year because we are unable to produce the number we expected at the beginning of the fiscal year. However, although there are restrictions on the supply of hardware, software can be sold without problems, and from the end of the year to the next year, I would like to sell as much software as possible and not lose the momentum of the Nintendo Switch business by firmly telling customers not only new titles but also evergreen titles. We are under scrutiny of our sales plans for the next fiscal year and beyond, so I will talk again when we can make concrete announcements.​

​

[Shiota] In response to the tight supply and demand of semiconductor components, the hardware development side of Nintendo Switch is also continuing efforts such as evaluating alternative parts and reviewing the design so that the impact can be reduced as much as possible.​

​

[Miyamoto] Since Nintendo Switch has already been purchased by many customers around the world, it will not have a significant impact on the software development side. In addition, there are no hardware problems in the mobile business or video business.​

​

Q5: Please tell us your thoughts on the timing and concept of launching next-generation hardware.​

​

A5: [Furukawa] I can't talk about the next game console here today. It's been five years since the Nintendo Switch was released, and the cumulative sell-through has exceeded 90 million units, and it is recognized that it is in the middle of the life cycle. With the release of Nintendo Switch (OLED Model), the momentum of sales is continuing, and we are proposing three models and various software that match the way of playing and lifestyle. We believe that we have a foundation for growth beyond the hardware life cycle that we have been thinking about in the past.​

​

[Edit: Sorry I somehow missed this last paragraph; adding it now] We are considering various things in-house regarding the next game console, but please understand that we cannot tell you about the timing and concept of the launch today.​

For me at least, the last sentence may be the most interesting/telling. "We believe that we have a foundation for growth beyond the hardware life cycle that we have been thinking about in the past." Furukuwa seems to be hinting that Nintendo's future hardware transition (I'm not going to use the loaded word "generation") will be unlike what we've ever seen from them.

Edit: Forgot to include source link

 

[Alovon11]

For me at least, the last sentence may be the most interesting/telling. "We believe that we have a foundation fo growth beyond the hardware life cycle that we have been thinking about in the past." Furukuwa seems to be hinting that Nintendo's future hardware transition (I'm not going to use the loaded word "generation") will be unlike what we've ever seen from them.

Iterative Release model baby!!

Time for Switch 2, 3, 4, 5, until Nintendo doesn't make consoles anymore.

 

[Dakhil]

Ambiguity is playing with fire (case in point: Wii U), so I would nominate Switchfourk/Sfourk to make the value proposition crystal clear to the customers

Regarding GTC, even if the next Jetson board featured there is not 1 to 1 compared to Dane, we can still glean so much technical info there, possibly even more than what Nintedo and NV will advertise for Dane unless we book another order with Chipworks (now TechInsights) ... Examples: uarch config (more like GA100 or GA10x?), tensor core config, lithography, clock speed, etc.

I'd personally argue that unlike the Wii U, which implies from a name standpoint it's a separate accessory for the Wii, Super Nintendo Switch from a name standpoint at least makes it reasonably clear that the console hardware has been upgraded from the Nintendo Switch, similar to how the Game Boy Advance from a name standpoint that the hardware has been upgraded from the Game Boy or Game Boy Color. The only ambiguous part about the Super Nintendo Switch from a name standpoint is whether Super Nintendo Switch implies a mid-gen refresh or a successor, because I personally think it could be marketed either way.

Although Nvidia could talk about the general details of Orin (e.g. what process node is being used, what GPU architecture is being used, how many CUDA cores are there, etc.) during GTC 2021 (November 2021), I personally don't think Nvidia's going to talk about Orin in great detail (e.g. a detailed layout of the GPU components in Orin, etc.) during GTC 2021 (November 2021), since Nvidia hasn't really talked about Arm based SoCs in great detail during past GTC events, usually saving the nitty-gritty details for Hot Chips. That being said,

That being said, I imagine someone here who's knowledgeable when it comes to hardware and software who also plans on buying Jetson Orin can uncover a good amount of information (i.e. CPU frequency, GPU frequency, RAM frequency, etc.). But I think there are some pieces of information that can only be uncovered through a die shot (i.e. a detailed layout of the GPU components in Jetson Orin, etc.).

I will die on the “Nintendo Switch Ultra” hill.

How would you feel if Nintendo didn't name the DLSS model* the "Nintendo Switch Ultra"?

Iterative Release model baby!!

Time for Switch 2, 3, 4, 5, until Nintendo doesn't make consoles anymore.

Iterative consoles are definitely not a new concept for Nintendo, going by the Game Boy Color, the Game Boy Advance, the Nintendo DSi, and the New Nintendo 3DS. So outside of using numerals for names, I wonder how Nintendo can make hardware transitions different than expected, assuming fwd_bwd's interpretation of Shuntaro Furukawa's comments is correct.

 

[ArchedThunder]

How would you feel if Nintendo didn't name the DLSS model* the "Nintendo Switch Ultra"?

I would die, most likely on a hill.

 

[chocolate_supra]

The "Switch 4K" name could be dangerous, I think. For example I don't have a 4K tv and if I weren't glued to the gaming rumor mill I might look at a "Switch 4K" as something I wouldn't benefit from due to not having a 4K tv. But, the power bump is enough that even us 1080peeps can experience a significant bump in performance, some (apparently) exclusive ports, and maybe even replay some older games in higher fidelity (if they go the patching route).

So I doubt Nintendo will just call this the "4K Model" like they did with the OLED. Because it'll be a lot more than just 4K. It'll be... super.

 

[Alovon11]

The "Switch 4K" name could be dangerous, I think. For example I don't have a 4K tv and if I weren't glued to the gaming rumor mill I might look at a "Switch 4K" as something I wouldn't benefit from due to not having a 4K tv. But, the power bump is enough that even us 1080peeps can experience a significant bump in performance, some (apparently) exclusive ports, and maybe even replay some older games in higher fidelity (if they go the patching route).

So I doubt Nintendo will just call this the "4K Model" like they did with the OLED. Because it'll be a lot more than just 4K. It'll be... super.

Reasons why "Nintendo Switch S" is the best name outside of Switch 2 imho.

it keeps the bit of ambiguity as to if it's a Successor or Sequel, while also making it clear that it's a direct continuation of the Switch line.

Dodges the Wii-U ambiguity problem that "Super Nintendo Switch" would have, especially if affixing an Iterative release model in the future to it, while also giving them the option to opt-out of an iterative model if they don't want to as Switch S can easily just be the "Game Boy Color" of the Switch Family.

Not to mention that Switch S can be short for Switch Super, like the Super Nintendo and NVIDIA's Super Graphics Cards.

 

[chocolate_supra]

Reasons why "Nintendo Switch S" is the best name outside of Switch 2 imho.

it keeps the bit of ambiguity as to if it's a Successor or Sequel, while also making it clear that it's a direct continuation of the Switch line.

Dodges the Wii-U ambiguity problem that "Super Nintendo Switch" would have, especially if affixing an Iterative release model in the future to it, while also giving them the option to opt-out of an iterative model if they don't want to as Switch S can easily just be the "Game Boy Color" of the Switch Family.

Not to mention that Switch S can be short for Switch Super, like the Super Nintendo and NVIDIA's Super Graphics Cards.

This makes a lot of sense. I just like the nostalgia push of having the words "Super" and "Nintendo" right next to each other again. I don't actually expect them to do it, I just want it. Your idea is more likely, I'm sure.

But seriously, "Switch 4K" has "WiiU" confusion vibes, where a lot of normies could see that name and go "oh I already have one of those, I don't need the one new feature that this one comes with," without realizing it's a serious upgrade.

 

[Dakhil]

Dodges the Wii-U ambiguity problem that "Super Nintendo Switch" would have, especially if affixing an Iterative release model in the future to it, while also giving them the option to opt-out of an iterative model if they don't want to as Switch S can easily just be the "Game Boy Color" of the Switch Family.

I think Super Nintendo Switch is a less ambiguous name than the Wii U in the sense that I think Super Nintendo Switch at least implies reasonably clearly that the console hardware is upgraded whilst Wii U implies that it could be a separate accessory for the Wii instead of being upgraded console hardware.

 

[Alovon11]

I think Super Nintendo Switch is a less ambiguous name than the Wii U in the sense that I think Super Nintendo Switch at least implies reasonably clearly that the console hardware is upgraded whilst Wii U implies that it could be a separate accessory for the Wii instead of being upgraded console hardware.

But Super Nintendo Switch implies it's a different product based on the association.

People know the SNES and NES were different things.

So Super Nintendo Switch would sort of implying that it is a cutoff/next-gen system/the succ.

If they want to go Iterative, Switch S or Switch 2 are the only real options IMHO.

 

[chocolate_supra]

But Super Nintendo Switch implies it's a different product based on the association.

People know the SNES and NES were different things.

So Super Nintendo Switch would sort of implying that it is a cutoff/next-gen system/the succ.

If they want to go Iterative, Switch S or Switch 2 are the only real options IMHO.

But thanks to PlayStation, "Switch 2" sounds like a cutoff/next-gen succ.

 

[Dakhil]

I personally like the name Super Nintendo Switch. But of course, I personally don't expect Nintendo to pick Super Nintendo Switch as the name for the DLSS model*. But what's interesting is that NateDrake has heard Super Nintendo Switch being used as the name, but of course he doesn't know if Nintendo chooses Super Nintendo Switch as the final name.

 

[NineTailSage]

Reasons why "Nintendo Switch S" is the best name outside of Switch 2 imho.

it keeps the bit of ambiguity as to if it's a Successor or Sequel, while also making it clear that it's a direct continuation of the Switch line.

Dodges the Wii-U ambiguity problem that "Super Nintendo Switch" would have, especially if affixing an Iterative release model in the future to it, while also giving them the option to opt-out of an iterative model if they don't want to as Switch S can easily just be the "Game Boy Color" of the Switch Family.

Not to mention that Switch S can be short for Switch Super, like the Super Nintendo and NVIDIA's Super Graphics Cards.

I stand on "Switch Advance" being the most direct narrative of what this new hardware will be and it hearkens back to Nintendo's past hardware, while also not limiting them from using it in the future for a theoretical "Switch II Advance" or "Switch III Advance" down the road...

4k is a limiting moniker and would be more confusing by the time the next-gen successor Switch is launched and people ask the question of what's special about this newer device.

 

[RennanNT]

With the release of Nintendo Switch (OLED Model), the momentum of sales is continuing, and we are proposing three models and various software that match the way of playing and lifestyle. We believe that we have a foundation for growth beyond the hardware life cycle that we have been thinking about in the past.

For me at least, the last sentence may be the most interesting/telling. "We believe that we have a foundation for growth beyond the hardware life cycle that we have been thinking about in the past." Furukuwa seems to be hinting that Nintendo's future hardware transition (I'm not going to use the loaded word "generation") will be unlike what we've ever seen from them.

You're reading too much on it. Furukawa is saying that they found a way to grow beyond releasing a new generation, and that way is through selling models and software which appeal to different playing and lifestyles.

In other words, there are people who bought a Lite or OLED which wouldn't have bought OG, so both model grew Switch potential. Same for software, with system sellers for vastly different audiences.

This hints to new Switch models and software targeting audiences that the existing offering doesn't (in part or completely), but not that they're moving away or sticking with traditional transitions.

 

[lemonfresh]

I kinda hope they just call it switch dane lol

 

[NineTailSage]

You're reading too much on it. Furukawa is saying that they found a way to grow beyond releasing a new generation, and that way is through selling models and software which appeal to different playing and lifestyles.

In other words, there are people who bought a Lite or OLED which wouldn't have bought OG, so both model grew Switch potential. Same for software, with system sellers for vastly different audiences.

This hints to new Switch models and software targeting audiences that the existing offering doesn't (in part or completely), but not that they're moving away or sticking with traditional transitions.

Also the fact that Nintendo are actively tracking Switch players engagement with the device in a given year definitely proves that they want to stay on top of when to introduce new technology in order to keep early adopters and their overall base interested in both future software and hardware.

 

[Terrell]

You're reading too much on it. Furukawa is saying that they found a way to grow beyond releasing a new generation, and that way is through selling models and software which appeal to different playing and lifestyles.

In other words, there are people who bought a Lite or OLED which wouldn't have bought OG, so both model grew Switch potential. Same for software, with system sellers for vastly different audiences.

This hints to new Switch models and software targeting audiences that the existing offering doesn't (in part or completely), but not that they're moving away or sticking with traditional transitions.

Yeah, this. There’s a lot of ways this could go. Here’s one:

If they get full or 99.99% compatibility with Maxwell pinned down for Dane (which everyone should assume they will, one way or another) and it needs significantly less/fewer cores of the CPU/GPU to do it, there’s a possibility for Nintendo to introduce something like a Switch nano or whatever, using a combination or a much lower performance per watt requirement, fewer/smaller component parts and binned Dane chips that might otherwise be considered scrap to get close to a sub-$100 Switch. That’d open up some real big avenues for sales after Dane’s release, including an extremely affordable model for emerging markets and the financially-disadvantaged who deserve some affordable entertainment.

 

[Mr.Gamerson]

Have you guys seen the demographics of the Switch userbase? If i'm Nintendo i'm naming the iterative model Super Nintendo Switch. The free promo from the name alone is worth it to me. They might even bring the super naming convention back for some of their first party titles and services. They can have super patches, and super download speeds, etc.

 

[chocolate_supra]

Have you guys seen the demographics of the Switch userbase? If i'm Nintendo i'm naming the iterative model Super Nintendo Switch. The free promo from the name alone is worth it to me. They might even bring the super naming convention back for some of their first party titles and services. They can have super patches, and super download speeds, etc.

Super Metroid Dread
Yoshi's Super World
Super Pikmin

 

[ILikeFeet]

if anything, NIntendo has done a great job in keeping the SNES relevant in wider culture. "Super Nintendo Switch" would be a good way to tap into that. additionally, "Switch Advance" similarly taps into that culture, albeit a bit more limited to an older crowd, but that's who'd be the first people to pick up this device

 

[Thraktor]

How likely is this new Jetson to be Dane?

Non-zero. People here seem to be taking for granted two things that I don't necessarily agree with. Firstly, that the only place Dane would fit in the Jetson roadmap is Nano Next. The Orin family in that diagram includes both the high end ($899+) and mid-range ($249+) segments, and big Orin is a 21 billion transistor, probably ~400mm2 die, which even in cut down form they're not going to be selling as part of systems anywhere near $249. Logically that means that the mid-range boards would use a smaller chip in the Orin family, and Dane fits that description perfectly. Dane should also match or exceed Xavier in performance for a variety of Jetson use-cases, and as Xavier boards are still selling for about $1000, it seems unlikely to me that Nvidia had ever planned on using Dane for ~$129 Jetson boards in 2021/2022.

The second thing is that Nintendo wouldn't possibly allow Nvidia to announce Dane, or products powered by it, before the new Switch model is announced. While I think it's likely that the new Switch will be the first device to use Dane, it's by no means guaranteed. With Switch they chose an SoC that was already available and used in other products, and with Mariko they clearly had no problem with Nvidia using it in other products. This is a very different approach than the 100% custom chips Nintendo have used before, and nobody knows what their agreement with Nvidia is for this new chip. They might simply not care whether Jetson boards are announced first (they're hardly competing products), or Nvidia may give them a better deal in exchange for freedom to announce and sell the chip as and when they want.

That said, I think the focus of the talk will almost certainly be on a ~$1000+ big Orin Jetson board, but I don't think it's impossible that they may announce a Dane-powered Jetson board, without giving detailed specs. The talk includes "the latest product roadmap", which could include an "Orin CX" powered Jetson board coming next year in the mid-range segment, with details to follow. At best we may get a Watts and TOPS measure, similar to what they gave for Orin S a couple of years ago.

 

[Alovon11]

Non-zero. People here seem to be taking for granted two things that I don't necessarily agree with. Firstly, that the only place Dane would fit in the Jetson roadmap is Nano Next. The Orin family in that diagram includes both the high end ($899+) and mid-range ($249+) segments, and big Orin is a 21 billion transistor, probably ~400mm2 die, which even in cut down form they're not going to be selling as part of systems anywhere near $249. Logically that means that the mid-range boards would use a smaller chip in the Orin family, and Dane fits that description perfectly. Dane should also match or exceed Xavier in performance for a variety of Jetson use-cases, and as Xavier boards are still selling for about $1000, it seems unlikely to me that Nvidia had ever planned on using Dane for ~$129 Jetson boards in 2021/2022.

The second thing is that Nintendo wouldn't possibly allow Nvidia to announce Dane, or products powered by it, before the new Switch model is announced. While I think it's likely that the new Switch will be the first device to use Dane, it's by no means guaranteed. With Switch they chose an SoC that was already available and used in other products, and with Mariko they clearly had no problem with Nvidia using it in other products. This is a very different approach than the 100% custom chips Nintendo have used before, and nobody knows what their agreement with Nvidia is for this new chip. They might simply not care whether Jetson boards are announced first (they're hardly competing products), or Nvidia may give them a better deal in exchange for freedom to announce and sell the chip as and when they want.

That said, I think the focus of the talk will almost certainly be on a ~$1000+ big Orin Jetson board, but I don't think it's impossible that they may announce a Dane-powered Jetson board, without giving detailed specs. The talk includes "the latest product roadmap", which could include an "Orin CX" powered Jetson board coming next year in the mid-range segment, with details to follow. At best we may get a Watts and TOPS measure, similar to what they gave for Orin S a couple of years ago.

Well the thing to consider is that even a normal Jetson Orin board based on big Orin would help us hone in on the actual power of Dane.

Especially if someone in these forums, ResetERA, the Pipeline Discord, or others who have speculated on Dane/Next-Gen Switch can get their hands on one, but even without that we can gleam most of the customizations to Dane there would be from normal Orin as those likely will make their way to the Prosumer/Dev oriented Jetson Orin.

No need for A78AE's in a board not for automotive purposes, same with other auto-elements.

So Jetson Orin likely will be an A78/A78C powered board with who knows what else cut/added in to replace the cut stuff.

So there would be a fair bit to discuss from Jetson Orin I say.

 

[Mercury_Sagit]

Well the thing to consider is that even a normal Jetson Orin board based on big Orin would help us hone in on the actual power of Dane.

Especially if someone in these forums, ResetERA, the Pipeline Discord, or others who have speculated on Dane/Next-Gen Switch can get their hands on one, but even without that we can gleam most of the customizations to Dane there would be from normal Orin as those likely will make their way to the Prosumer/Dev oriented Jetson Orin.

No need for A78AE's in a board not for automotive purposes, same with other auto-elements.

So Jetson Orin likely will be an A78/A78C powered board with who knows what else cut/added in to replace the cut stuff.

So there would be a fair bit to discuss from Jetson Orin I say.

Even if we have the hardware on hand, it will not be straightforward to infer Dane's performance I'm afraid. On the software side, we have almost none of the ingredients (drivers, engine support, etc ). That said, if Orin somehow allows Android installation, we can at least estimate the gaming performance ball park.

On the hardware side, we do have info per NV's marketing materials. However, anything further that that will require a close study on the SoC itself (like what folks have arranged with Chipworks for Wii U).

 

[Anatole]

I have a pretty basic question to ask.

It seems like these SOC codenames are grouped roughly (very roughly) into families of characters: for example, Tegra K1 is Logan and Tegra X1/X1+ are respectively Erista and Mariko, who are Wolverine’s son and romantic interest. Tegra 3/4 are Kal-El and Wayne. Likewise, Orin and Atlan are related in the lore of Aquaman.

So the part that doesn’t click for me is this: if the comic book characters of similar SOCs are generally related, why would Dane be the codename for an SOC derived from Orin when the comic book characters are unrelated and cross the Marvel/DC boundary?

I know we have this from kopite7kimi (well, “black knight” originally) and I’ve just taken the word of others in the thread that they have been reliable, but if Dane is an Orin derivative, the codename doesn’t make much sense comic-book-lore-wise, right? Plus, if it does turn out to be Orin S… isn’t that already a sufficient codename? Why would Nvidia need another?

It’s not like there’s any rules to codenames; they’re arbitrary by design. I’m just picking nits while they’re in season.

 

[Dakhil]

I have a pretty basic question to ask.

It seems like these SOC codenames are grouped roughly (very roughly) into families of characters: for example, Tegra K1 is Logan and Tegra X1/X1+ are respectively Erista and Mariko, who are Wolverine’s son and romantic interest. Tegra 3/4 are Kal-El and Wayne. Likewise, Orin and Atlan are related in the lore of Aquaman.

So the part that doesn’t click for me is this: if the comic book characters of similar SOCs are generally related, why would Dane be the codename for an SOC derived from Orin when the comic book characters are unrelated and cross the Marvel/DC boundary?

I know we have this from kopite7kimi (well, “black knight” originally) and I’ve just taken the word of others in the thread that they have been reliable, but if Dane is an Orin derivative, the codename doesn’t make much sense comic-book-lore-wise, right? Plus, if it does turn out to be Orin S… isn’t that already a sufficient codename? Why would Nvidia need another?

It’s not like there’s any rules to codenames; they’re arbitrary by design. I’m just picking nits while they’re in season.

My guess is that for the most part, Nvidia's automotive SoCs use names/codenames corresponding with characters in the DC Comics universe (e.g. Xavier, Orin, Atlan, etc.), whilst non-automotive SoCs use codenames corresponding with characters from the Marvel Comics universe (i.e. Erista, Mariko, Dane, etc.). (The Tegra X2, or codenamed Parker, has been advertised as an automotive SoC, but didn't have any design wins on the automotive side.)

 

[ILikeFeet]

I have a pretty basic question to ask.

It seems like these SOC codenames are grouped roughly (very roughly) into families of characters: for example, Tegra K1 is Logan and Tegra X1/X1+ are respectively Erista and Mariko, who are Wolverine’s son and romantic interest. Tegra 3/4 are Kal-El and Wayne. Likewise, Orin and Atlan are related in the lore of Aquaman.

So the part that doesn’t click for me is this: if the comic book characters of similar SOCs are generally related, why would Dane be the codename for an SOC derived from Orin when the comic book characters are unrelated and cross the Marvel/DC boundary?

I know we have this from kopite7kimi (well, “black knight” originally) and I’ve just taken the word of others in the thread that they have been reliable, but if Dane is an Orin derivative, the codename doesn’t make much sense comic-book-lore-wise, right? Plus, if it does turn out to be Orin S… isn’t that already a sufficient codename? Why would Nvidia need another?

It’s not like there’s any rules to codenames; they’re arbitrary by design. I’m just picking nits while they’re in season.

there's no apparent relation

 

[Anatole]

My guess is that for the most part, Nvidia's automotive SoCs use names/codenames corresponding with characters in the DC Comics universe (e.g. Xavier, Orin, Atlan, etc.), whilst non-automotive SoCs use codenames corresponding with characters from the Marvel Comics universe (i.e. Erista, Mariko, Dane, etc.). (The Tegra X2, or codenamed Parker, has been advertised as an automotive SoC, but didn't have any design wins on the automotive side.)

Xavier is Marvel, fwiw. I don’t think there’s a strict taxonomy here, but there are loose trends that it seems like Dane would eschew, and we only have a single source for the name as far as I know.

 

[Dakhil]

Xavier is Marvel, fwiw. I don’t think there’s a strict taxonomy here, but there are loose trends that it seems like Dane would eschew, and we only have a single source for the name as far as I know.

Xavier is weird in the sense that Xavier technically is part of both the Marvel Comics universe and the DC Comics universe, especially with DC Comics and Marvel Comics both owning the Amalgam Comics.

 

[Mr Swine]

Any reason why Nintendo can’t just release a Switch revision with 4 Arm A78 cores clocked at 1Ghz, Dane uArch 256 Cuda core and 6GB LPDDR5 at 50GB/s if the ”true next“ generation Switch hasn’t even been done concept wise?

 

[ILikeFeet]

Any reason why Nintendo can’t just release a Switch revision with 4 Arm A78 cores clocked at 1Ghz, Dane uArch 256 Cuda core and 6GB LPDDR5 at 50GB/s if the ”true next“ generation Switch hasn’t even been done concept wise?

why commission two chips? designing chips is extremely expensive. and to replace it so soon? even more of a waste

the concept is done. devs have kits. Nintendo is just telling investors not to look at the smoke coming from behind the curtain

 

[ShadowFox08]

Any reason why Nintendo can’t just release a Switch revision with 4 Arm A78 cores clocked at 1Ghz, Dane uArch 256 Cuda core and 6GB LPDDR5 at 50GB/s if the ”true next“ generation Switch hasn’t even been done concept wise?

What ILikeFeet said. Chips are expensive. A great deal goes into R&D costs, especially if they make another chip with different specs released in 2 years.

Also they tech isn't even there, notaby the GPU.
I think they want to make it as future proof as they can (while bring affordable), so more than 4 A78s, definitely more RAM than 6GB, and also GPU as well

 

[ILikeFeet]

as much as the Series S is a good value, I think it's a bad idea because MS has to pay for two chip designs and have product linger on shelves being less desirable

 

[Dekuman]

is the expectation still a late 2022 release and or a late 2022 reveal for a 2023 release?

 

[Dakhil]

is the expectation still a late 2022 release and or a late 2022 reveal for a 2023 release?

Personally, I'm still leaning towards a late 2022 release.

 

[Supreme Overlord]

the concept is done. devs have kits. Nintendo is just telling investors not to look at the smoke coming from behind the curtain

And I've said this elsewhere, but the next hardware will still be conceptual and in discussion up until they can't feasibly make further alterations to it.

 

[Skittzo]

why commission two chips? designing chips is extremely expensive. and to replace it so soon? even more of a waste

the concept is done. devs have kits. Nintendo is just telling investors not to look at the smoke coming from behind the curtain

Notice that the slide about their future hardware didn't say "next Nintendo Switch", it said "next gaming system". It's very possible that the concept actually isn't done because that discussion refers to a brand new concept aiming for like 20226-2027 and not a continuation of the Switch brand.

Of course now we know the "discussing the concept" bit wasn't actually even said so that is kinda moot.

is the expectation still a late 2022 release and or a late 2022 reveal for a 2023 release?

As far as I've seen yes.

 

[lemonfresh]

As far as I've seen yes.

Why late 2022 and not 2023? What have you seen?

 

[Skittzo]

Why late 2022 and not 2023? What have you seen?

Nobody has said it's not 2022. The current rumors say late 2022 or early 2023, and they have said this since the beginning of this year. Nothing has changed from then to suggest anything different.

 

[Mr Swine]

why commission two chips? designing chips is extremely expensive. and to replace it so soon? even more of a waste

the concept is done. devs have kits. Nintendo is just telling investors not to look at the smoke coming from behind the curtain

What ILikeFeet said. Chips are expensive. A great deal goes into R&D costs, especially if they make another chip with different specs released in 2 years.

Also they tech isn't even there, notaby the GPU.
I think they want to make it as future proof as they can (while bring affordable), so more than 4 A78s, definitely more RAM than 6GB, and also GPU as well

Ah ok, I just hope that Dane is as good as it can be and that Nintendo doesn’t skimp out on bandwidth just to save a few dollars on each unit

 

[ILikeFeet]

Ah ok, I just hope that Dane is as good as it can be and that Nintendo doesn’t skimp out on bandwidth just to save a few dollars on each unit

memory is one of those things Nintendo has historically splurged on. the TX1 was a case of "it was all that was available", so I expect Dane to have a significantly better memory design.

 

[Hermii]

as much as the Series S is a good value, I think it's a bad idea because MS has to pay for two chip designs and have product linger on shelves being less desirable

I disagree I think it’s a great idea. All it needs is a few non cross gen games and it will sell like gangbusters.

I love the concept of a cheaper next gen sku, because the fact is a large part of the demographic doesn’t give a fuck about 4K or running at high settings. They just want to play all the latest games.

 

[Alovon11]

I disagree I think it’s a great idea. All it needs is a few non cross gen games and it will sell like gangbusters.

I love the concept of a cheaper next gen sku, because the fact is a large part of the demographic doesn’t give a fuck about 4K or running at high settings. They just want to play all the latest games.

I will agree, although making a dedicated SoC for portable mode only would be a bit difficult as the CPU would have to match which would limit the downscaling available.

 

[NineTailSage]

I will agree, although making a dedicated SoC for portable mode only would be a bit difficult as the CPU would have to match which would limit the downscaling available.

Yeah I don't see Nintendo and Nvidia ever going the route of using 2 different SoC's either, we also have to consider the possibility of maybe they might go with something larger in die size but clocked lower for thermal dissipation for Dane.

For reference the TX1 below is 118mm² and the Series S SoC is 197mm², they could definitely fit a similar size chip in the Switch form factor if it also is more efficient with TDP scaling from handheld to docked.

 

[ArchedThunder]

I disagree I think it’s a great idea. All it needs is a few non cross gen games and it will sell like gangbusters.

I love the concept of a cheaper next gen sku, because the fact is a large part of the demographic doesn’t give a fuck about 4K or running at high settings. They just want to play all the latest games.

I don’t know about gangbusters, but I do agree that it was a good idea. My only complaint is that GPU clock speed is a little low. The idea was just to sacrifice resolution and use lower res textures to fit that resolution, but many games have to pare back the visuals beyond that. Some games even exclude the performance and fidelity modes that Series X has, sticking people with a single 30fps mode with lower quality visuals. The resolution of some games is also lower than I would like, a 1440p machine the Series S is not, despite Microsoft’s claims.
Hopefully once devs get a better handle on current gen hardware they’ll work out some of the kinks.

 

[Dakhil]

For reference the TX1 below is 118mm² and the Series S SoC is 197mm², they could definitely fit a similar size chip in the Switch form factor if it also is more efficient with TDP scaling from handheld to docked.

I feel like that's contingent on if Nintendo's willing to spend more money designing and manufacturing, or paying Nvidia to design and manufacture, a much smaller and more compact motherboard that can fit a ~200 mm² SoC.

 

[davec00ke]

I feel like that's contingent on if Nintendo's willing to spend more money designing and manufacturing, or paying Nvidia to design and manufacture, a much smaller and more compact motherboard that can fit a ~200 mm² SoC.

Nvidia had nothing to do with the motherboard in the Switch they just supplied the SOC