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

[ReddDreadtheLead]

I really hope this is a successor and not a revision, it would be such a massive waste of potential for this hardware to be held back by it's games still having to work on a Tegra X1 and so still being PS3.5 graphics just with a better framerate and sharper picture.

I'm out of the loop on this, is there any indication if this is a proper new generation?

Short answer: yes.


Medium answer: it’s likely that Nintendo will still keep games in check development wise even if it’s stronger, but things will be easier to achieve as a new gen console



Long answer:
It’s a GPU that can be at least a 6x uplift in theoretical performance and a CPU that can be at around at least 7x the theoretical performance uplift. It will have 4x the memory bandwidth at least to its disposal.


When looking at the GPU, it has modern feature sets that put it closer to the latest generation of PC and console graphics that follow features that are compliant with the Direct X12U graphics api. It should come with Ray Tracing acceleration, mesh shaders, Variable Rate Shading, Sampler Feedback, etc.

Not only that but it should have Tensor Cores for DLSS2, allowing it to achieve a more clear image without having to resort to rendering at that perceived resolution.


When accounting for the architectural improvements to the GPU, despite on paper it being 4x the memory bandwidth the architectural improvements can make it more like 4.5 or 5x the bandwidth effectiveness. It’s still 4x, but it just means that it’s more efficient at using it.


The CPU should be above those in the PS4, One, One S, Pro and One X, but be behind the Series S/X and PS5. In truth it should be somewhere around the midway point.


Regardless of how it is sliced, it’ll be a pretty big jump that can last them the rest of the decade without them having to worry about much.

 

[Alovon11]

laughs in Dynasty Warriors 9

I think Gust forked an older version of the DW engine, and Dead or Alive/Nioh/etc took the DW9 engine and forked that

not a counterpoint, but a funny occurrence

Is it weird I prefer the lighting in the Switch version? The PS4 version looks a bit off, like everything is lit underneath somehow.

 

[Deleted member 1324]

just watching a clip of the new Pokemon hacked to run 60fps and boy what an improvement you can almost forgive the basic visuals when everything is nice and smooth. maybe Pokemon isn't the best example but with Bayonetta they have a top dev in that genre working on an exclusive title for years and there ends up being sacrifices due to underpowered hardware. if Drake isn't coming with Zelda it will be incredibly dissapointing with the Switch showing it's age so much. and if it isn't coming in 2023 we're into laughable territory. don't drop the ball Nintendo.

Do you have a link?

 

[Truno]

Do you have a link?

 

[ILikeFeet]

Is it weird I prefer the lighting in the Switch version? The PS4 version looks a bit off, like everything is lit underneath somehow.

there's a nostalgic charm to the Switch version. like it unintentionally calls back to the PS2 days

 

[Deleted member 887]

For the record I have played two Pokémon games in my life, the original Pokémon Red on Gameboy (once, on a spring break in college) and a few hours of Arceus which I thoroughly hated. I simply do not see the appeal.

The current state of mainline Pokémon is a direct consequence of Game Freak moving to vastly more capable hardware. NuSwitch might ameliorate some frame rate issues, but leave everything else, and only if GF decides to forgo any additional complexity, and keeps their technical ambition in the solidly “embarrassing” tier.

Outside of that, my biggest concern is just ethics. I can’t imagine working as a designer/coder at GF is a pleasant experience, and if all the tools are bespoke you’re unlikely to take any useful knowledge with you when you leave.

 

[ShadowFox08]

I guess for me it would make the most sense for Nintendo to use a majority of the T239 chips even the binned ones for something like a New Switch Lite eventually. That version of the Switch by itself has outsold every Nvidia Shield product combined and I'm sure Nintendo can charge more for it than Nvidia can meaningfully get away with on a new Shield TV and be successful.

Hmm maybe that will depend on the battery life of the first Drake model. They could make a Drake lite with a 3nm revision, assuming a scenario that Drake's battery life is similar to v1 switch.

Pretty strong evidence that ScarVi is, in some situations, storage limited. This will not go away with new hardware, I'm afraid, and more indications that GameFreak + The Pokemon Company's ridiculous release schedule will produce bad games no matter what they run on.

The fact that Arceus seems to be the technically superior game to the point that Scarlet and Violet almost seem like an older engine, something went deeply wrong over there. Game Freak would be better off tossing their engine entirely and going with Unity, and I can't believe I'm saying that.

I think what Nintendo needs to to do is have Monolithsoft help them out. That includes using their engine. They worked wonders for Zelda with botw..

 

[Cuzizkool]

Just bringing this up again, since we have nothing new to talk about, but where do you all stand on screen size/rez? Is it still most likely 7” 720p? I’m wondering about the deep dive estimates here: Is Samsung or any other screen company likely to offer any discounts? Is 720p so old now it may cost more than 1080? Or is this where Nintendo will go cheaper to balance out the overall cost of the system? Will it even be OLED? Is a 1080p screen more of a power draw than an 8nm T239 can afford? Etc etc.

 

[Tentacle-tropes]

I think what Nintendo needs to to do is have Monolithsoft help them out. That includes using their engine. They worked wonders for Zelda with botw..

So first what is their engine? Because MS’ engine is different from BOTW’s engine? Second what do you do if GF says no to said? Third does MS even have enough people to be stretched between Zelda & annual Pokémon games?
The better idea is to get GF to move to Unreal or Unity.

 

[ertaboy356b]

Just bringing this up again, since we have nothing new to talk about, but where do you all stand on screen size/rez? Is it still most likely 7” 720p? I’m wondering about the deep dive estimates here: Is Samsung or any other screen company likely to offer any discounts? Is 720p so old now it may cost more than 1080? Or is this where Nintendo will go cheaper to balance out the overall cost of the system? Will it even be OLED? Is a 1080p screen more of a power draw than an 8nm T239 can afford? Etc etc.

I believe that if 1080p is more cost effective than 720p, Nintendo will certainly go that route. They can then make any switch games to behave in Dock Mode on a handheld Drake although that might have it's issues like certain games optimizing for TV Play with smaller fonts on Dock Mode.

 

[Concernt]

Just bringing this up again, since we have nothing new to talk about, but where do you all stand on screen size/rez? Is it still most likely 7” 720p? I’m wondering about the deep dive estimates here: Is Samsung or any other screen company likely to offer any discounts? Is 720p so old now it may cost more than 1080? Or is this where Nintendo will go cheaper to balance out the overall cost of the system? Will it even be OLED? Is a 1080p screen more of a power draw than an 8nm T239 can afford? Etc etc.

I fully believe that it won't just be 720p- it'll be the exact same panel. Maybe HDR? But I doubt it. This device is meant to do two things, run Gen 9 games on a handheld, and run Switch games at 4K. Honestly, I think 720p just makes sense, not just from a reuse components perspective, but from a power perspective. This thing is set to be like, a Steam Deck on ARM. I'm oversimplifying, but Steam Deck targets 720p in 16:9 with its 800p 16:10 display. 720p should mean plenty of games hit the native res, and those that don't, or just those that want to save power, can use DLSS to allow rendering at super low resolutions.

 

[Terrell]

So first what is their engine? Because MS’ engine is different from BOTW’s engine? Second what do you do if GF says no to said? Third does MS even have enough people to be stretched between Zelda & annual Pokémon games?
The better idea is to get GF to move to Unreal or Unity.

I've seen this argument before, so I'll tweak what I already wrote:

The main benefit of external engines is:

• the ability to more easily deploy across multiple platforms
• not spending money developing your own engine tools
• no reliance on the tools of a benefactor

None of that is relevant to the mainline Pokemon team at Game Freak; the relevance comes in when talking about developers outside Game Freak that TPC contracts to do work (as they seem to be doing for remakes, if BD/SP is any indicator), but that’s not what’s being discussed.
They’re only deploying to one platform, they wouldn’t have to spend a dime on tools if they accessed pre-existing ones that might be less creaky than GF’s own from the multiple options they'd have access to and they’re already reliant on a benefactor for these releases anyways. So it's just spending no small sum of money for Unreal or Unity branding, at that point.

And Game Freak isn't exactly averse to asking for help from companies within the Nintendo umbrella when they need it. If their internal tools aren't cutting the mustard, Nintendo can provide without a dime spent.

 

[ILikeFeet]

Game Freak already has a unity license and experience working with it, so they're not spending extra money on that front

 

[Terrell]

Game Freak already has a unity license and experience working with it, so they're not spending extra money on that front

OK, what kind of license? The last game I saw them release built in Unity was Little Town Hero, also known for having technical issues like its absolute crap frame rate stability... so maybe Unity ain't the right choice to solve their problem with technical performance? Plus, it would seem wasteful to spend on a perpetual license for 2 games, especially ones that weren't expected to be big performers anyways (which they weren't) and cheaper to use on a more standard Unity pay-per-sales performance license agreement per title.

 

[Tentacle-tropes]

I've seen this argument before, so I'll tweak what I already wrote:

The main benefit of external engines is:

• the ability to more easily deploy across multiple platforms
• not spending money developing your own engine tools
• no reliance on the tools of a benefactor

None of that is relevant to the mainline Pokemon team at Game Freak; the relevance comes in when talking about developers outside Game Freak that TPC contracts to do work (as they seem to be doing for remakes, if BD/SP is any indicator), but that’s not what’s being discussed.
They’re only deploying to one platform, they wouldn’t have to spend a dime on tools if they accessed pre-existing ones that might be less creaky than GF’s own from the multiple options they'd have access to and they’re already reliant on a benefactor for these releases anyways. So it's just spending no small sum of money for Unreal or Unity branding, at that point.

And Game Freak isn't exactly averse to asking for help from companies within the Nintendo umbrella when they need it. If their internal tools aren't cutting the mustard, Nintendo can provide without a dime spent.

I get all that and I already knew that going into my response. Even on the help part I knew about Iwata but GF seems to like outsourcing or using affiliate studios for their needs.

 

[Terrell]

I get all that and I already knew that going into my response. Even on the help part I knew about Iwata but GF seems to like outsourcing or using affiliate studios for their needs.

I've not seen them outsource or use affiliate studios for new mainline Pokemon games. At most, I've seen them relegate a single remake so far to ILCA so Game Freak could work on PLA instead.

 

[Tentacle-tropes]

I've not seen them outsource or use affiliate studios for new mainline Pokemon games. At most, I've seen them relegate a single remake so far to ILCA so Game Freak could work on PLA instead.

So how else are they making mainline Pokémon games if they are not outsourcing or using affiliate studios?

 

[ILikeFeet]

OK, what kind of license? The last game I saw them release built in Unity was Little Town Hero, also known for having technical issues like its absolute crap frame rate stability... so maybe Unity ain't the right choice to solve their problem with technical performance? Plus, it would seem wasteful to spend on a perpetual license for 2 games, especially ones that weren't expected to be big performers anyways (which they weren't) and cheaper to use on a more standard Unity pay-per-sales performance license agreement per title.

Three games so far. And if you're worried about poor technical performance there, then I don't see how any other option would be better and GF be likely to fuck that up to.

In any case, studios don't just get the benefit of up front licensing costs but they get perks than individual game licensing doesn't get like hands on support from engineering staff from within Unity. What kind of licensing deal they have is something we'll never know and, quite frankly, pointless to argue because of it and the fact that it changes between companies. But the benefits are obvious should they choose to use it as the foundation going forward

 

[Deleted member 887]

I've actually come around on a 1080p screen on a lot of levels. I think 720p is still the better bet, but assuming Nintendo doesn't stuff the thing full of cameras or streaming tech, then "1080p screen" is the most likely way to feel that handheld mode is an upgrade. Especially if lots of games are cross-gen and the OLED model has better battery life.

 

[Link_enfant]

I've actually come around on a 1080p screen on a lot of levels. I think 720p is still the better bet, but assuming Nintendo doesn't stuff the thing full of cameras or streaming tech, then "1080p screen" is the most likely way to feel that handheld mode is an upgrade. Especially if lots of games are cross-gen and the OLED model has better battery life.

On a 1080p screen the same size of the current OLED model, would current Switch games really look noticeably worse than on a 720p screen?
Of course I'm mostly thinking about BC, and taking into account that some games render at much lower resolution, but I feel like - at least - games that already reach 720p in portable mode wouldn't look that much worse on a 1080p screen despite what I've read on this.
It makes me think of how DS games look awful (imo) on 3DS, but this shouldn't be near as bad I guess.
(hope my post makes sense, sometimes my English doesn't come as easily for some reason)

 

[Deleted member 887]

On a 1080p screen the same size of the current OLED model, would current Switch games really look noticeably worse than on a 720p screen?
Of course I'm mostly thinking about BC, and taking into account that some games render at much lower resolution, but I feel like - at least - games that already reach 720p in portable mode wouldn't look that much worse on a 1080p screen despite what I've read on this.

There would be IQ artifacts, and it's one of the reasons I have been opposed, but I've somewhat come around. At that pixel density, it is unlikely to be an issue.

 

[HankyPanky]

i'd rather have more advanced third party games run native 720p than have to use DLSS in handheld mode or run with sub-optimal settings. keeping with 720 seems like the simplest solution for all concerned.

 

[Link_enfant]

If there happens to have good reasons for a 1080p display in an ideal world, with proper patches/enhancements for existing Switch games (and obviously cross-gen/exclusives), implying the use of DLSS or not, then I'm fine with the idea but otherwise yes, sticking with 720p seems to be the most reasonable choice and still is what I'm expecting.

 

[Concernt]

I've actually come around on a 1080p screen on a lot of levels. I think 720p is still the better bet, but assuming Nintendo doesn't stuff the thing full of cameras or streaming tech, then "1080p screen" is the most likely way to feel that handheld mode is an upgrade. Especially if lots of games are cross-gen and the OLED model has better battery life.

Well as regards handheld mode being an upgrade:
Better performance (why would you buy this thing at launch if you didn't care about that?)
Exclusive games and non-Cloud ports.
Better battery life (than even the OLED Model) in games that run in original Switch profiles. Drake is more efficient than Mariko, I'd be willing to bet it has more efficiency gains than the translation layer has efficiency loss, so I have no reason to suspect that without a Drake patch, Switch games will have bettery battery life on Switch.

Remember when they revealed the Switch with the WILD claim of 2.5 hours to 12? It still sort of holds water, the original Switch will do 12 hours of Shovel Knight at minimum brightness in airplane mode. I wonder what the absolute maximum you can get out of an OLED Model? Maybe Drake will hit 24 hours on minimum brightness, original Switch, 2D games, in airplane mode. Doubt it, though.

 

[ReddDreadtheLead]

So ORIN has begun to emerge on the Geekbench 5 score list.


Seems like that score that got 7100 was more of an outlier, as ORIN tends to score higher.

N/A - Geekbench

Benchmark results for a N/A with an ARM ARMv8 processor.

browser.geekbench.com

N/A - Geekbench

Benchmark results for a N/A with an ARM ARMv8 processor.

browser.geekbench.com

N/A - Geekbench

Benchmark results for a N/A with an ARM ARMv8 processor.

browser.geekbench.com

Jetson Orin Dev Kit - Geekbench

Benchmark results for a N/A with an ARM ARMv8 processor.

browser.geekbench.com

N/A - Geekbench

Benchmark results for a N/A with an ARM ARMv8 processor.

browser.geekbench.com

From this I can gather that nVidia has a better implementation of the cores.

Per GHz in ST I get an average of 352
Per GHz in MT I get an average of 300

So, for sake of this I guess if it’s 1.5GHz the ST should be like 529

And the MT score at 1.5GHz (8 cores) would be 3600 or so on Geekbench.


Guesstimate of course.

 

[Brofield]

Kotaku should have made a case to pirate this game instead of Metroid Dread for improved performance, my god.

I'm not even a 60fps snob and would happily take a rock solid 30fps, but damn even with pop-in that is gorgeous.

 

[cw_sasuke]

Really wish i hadnt seen that 60fps mod footage of Pokemon.

ffs the difference is ridiculous. Might drop a Thug tear if Drake doesnt release with TotK. Most of these Top Tier Switch games would look amazing just with higher res and 60fps.

 

[ILikeFeet]

"60FPS Pokemon Footage Shows Why Nintendo Needs to go Third Party for the Benefit of Everyone"

 

[ReddDreadtheLead]

I like how there’s a whole thread specifically for a Pokémon Scarlet and Violet discussion, and this thread has basically just become the 2.0 version of that.

 

[Tentacle-tropes]

I like how there’s a whole thread specifically for a Pokémon Scarlet and Violet discussion, and this thread has basically just become the 2.0 version of that.

I think both threads are dealing with different aspects of the game.

 

[Deleted member 887]

Well as regards handheld mode being an upgrade:
Better performance (why would you buy this thing at launch if you didn't care about that?)

Better performance where? Top 10 best selling Switch games: MK8DX, Animal Crossing, Smash, BotW, Sword and Shield, Mario Party, Diamond and Pearl, RFA, Let's Go. Let's imagine Nintendo gives every single one a DLSS based 4k patch for docked mode. What would the equivalent enhancement be for the handheld versions

Mario Kart: Zero change
Animal Crossing: Zero change
Smash: Zero change
Breath of the Wild: Small res bump! Korok forest sucks less
Sword and Shield: Stable framerate, decent res bump, nice!
Mario Party: Zero change for tabletop mode
Diamond and Pearl: Zero change
RFA: Uh, not really playable in tabletop mode I think?
Let's Go: Stable framerate decent res bump, nice.

Exclusive games and non-Cloud ports.

I'm dubious about non-Cloud ports, and my point was if most games are cross-gen. If there is a heavy library of exclusives,I think the argument is compelling. If not...

Better battery life (than even the OLED Model) in games that run in original Switch profiles. Drake is more efficient than Mariko, I'd be willing to bet it has more efficiency gains than the translation layer has efficiency loss, so I have no reason to suspect that without a Drake patch, Switch games will have bettery battery life on Switch.

Nintendo won't advertise the battery life as a main selling feature of the pro model if their history with Mariko is any indication. Especially when you consider how complex the equation is.

I'm not saying that Handheld mode doesn't have additional value, by the way. I'm just saying that a 1080p screen makes the value proposition extremely simple to sell

"NuSwitch, games up to 4k docked, 1080p handheld, all evergreens patched, exclusives coming, you're welcome"

Or

"NuSwitch, games up to 4k docked, and some games that kinda sucked in handheld mode before will be a little less sucky now? I dunno, did you play a of pokemon? You're a premium buyer so probably not, but Pokemon plays really pretty good now. I mean all the bugs are still there, but it doesn't judder so much. Oh and battery life is better for some games, but not the ones we enhanced. The ones we enhanced have some ray tracing effects so the battery life is actually slightly worse, but look at the shadows! There are two exclusives and one of them is 4k Wind Waker"

I'm still betting on a 720p screen but now that it's clear that Nintendo wants this thing to go the distance, biting the 1080p bullet at launch, when they can charge a premium price, might make sense. The iPhone 20 is likely to come out by the time Drake's successor comes, a 720p screen is going to be hard to justify tby hen. Sure, Nintendo could release a 1080p model the same way they released the OLED, but likely the library isn't going to be there, unless they start on day 1.

 

[Dakhil]

The Drake that Nintendo will use? Yes. Because they’ll clock it low.

Drake as a whole? No.

At 3GHz all cores, all 8 of the performance cores, it would trounces the A15


Apple silicon is good don’t get me wrong, but it wouldn’t be that much in its favor in this scenario.


Apple A15 Bionic is a 6-core processor, only 2 of those cores are huge performance cores and they can clock to 3.23GHz

And it is accompanied by 4 “efficiency” cores that don’t go above 2GHz.

The A78 at max can clock to 3.3GHz. And has 8 of them. And they are performance cores.


If the comparison was to the M1 or the M2? Yes it would be bested by those.

Assuming Nvidia plans to release a Drake equipped Nvidia Shield TV model, I personally don't expect Nvidia to have the 8 Cortex-A78C cores run at 3-3.3 GHz.

 

[TonyBaduy]

just watching a clip of the new Pokemon hacked to run 60fps and boy what an improvement you can almost forgive the basic visuals when everything is nice and smooth. maybe Pokemon isn't the best example but with Bayonetta they have a top dev in that genre working on an exclusive title for years and there ends up being sacrifices due to underpowered hardware. if Drake isn't coming with Zelda it will be incredibly dissapointing with the Switch showing it's age so much. and if it isn't coming in 2023 we're into laughable territory. don't drop the ball Nintendo.

It's Platinum, they never achieve 60fps no matter the hardware. They could make an action game for PS5/XSX and still have it dip below 60fps because yes, that's how they operate. Even Nier Automata on PS4/XBO didn't achieve solid 60fps.

 

[Link_enfant]

Really wish i hadnt seen that 60fps mod footage of Pokemon.

ffs the difference is ridiculous. Might drop a Thug tear if Drake doesnt release with TotK. Most of these Top Tier Switch games would look amazing just with higher res and 60fps.

I know right?
Not only the 60fps looks great but it also seems to remove annoying lags like when you start a wild battle, or navigating menus in general.

 

[ReddDreadtheLead]

Assuming Nvidia plans to release a Drake equipped Nvidia Shield TV model, I personally don't expect Nvidia to have the 8 Cortex-A78C cores run at 3-3.3 GHz.

Oh I know, I’m only providing evidence to the contrary. A78 is designed to clock pretty high and has 8 cores, this isn’t really the equivalent to the A15B with 2P+4”E” cores.

I know apple silicon is a marvel, but if it’s more cores and they are all perf cores then the comparison is already flawed as is.

 

[ezidro3]

I thought it would be cool to see Portal with RTX on Drake specifically since it’s developed by Lightspeed Studios, same developers that handled the Companion Collection.

Until I saw today that it’s apparently fully path traced? And the MINIMUM requirements want a full desktop RTX 3060 for… 1080p at 30fps?

Holy shit. Never mind.

 

[Hermii]

I thought it would be cool to see Portal with RTX on Drake specifically since it’s developed by Lightspeed Studios, same developers that handled the Companion Collection.

Until I saw today that it’s apparently fully path traced? And the MINIMUM requirements want a full desktop RTX 3060 for… 1080p at 30fps?

Holy shit. Never mind.

They might update companion collection for Drake, with some kind of RT though. Maybe.

 

[kvetcha]

I thought it would be cool to see Portal with RTX on Drake specifically since it’s developed by Lightspeed Studios, same developers that handled the Companion Collection.

Until I saw today that it’s apparently fully path traced? And the MINIMUM requirements want a full desktop RTX 3060 for… 1080p at 30fps?

Holy shit. Never mind.

It does look amazing, though.

 

[ILikeFeet]

I thought it would be cool to see Portal with RTX on Drake specifically since it’s developed by Lightspeed Studios, same developers that handled the Companion Collection.

Until I saw today that it’s apparently fully path traced? And the MINIMUM requirements want a full desktop RTX 3060 for… 1080p at 30fps?

Holy shit. Never mind.

as usual, it's best to wait to see how scalable it is. if some features can be turned off or even lower, then it could be more flexible

EDIT: not talking about drake, just pcs

 

[Deleted member 887]

I thought it would be cool to see Portal with RTX on Drake specifically since it’s developed by Lightspeed Studios, same developers that handled the Companion Collection.

Until I saw today that it’s apparently fully path traced? And the MINIMUM requirements want a full desktop RTX 3060 for… 1080p at 30fps?

Holy shit. Never mind.

as usual, it's best to wait to see how scalable it is. if some features can be turned off or even lower, then it could be more flexible

Portal with RTX is built using RTX Remix, which intercepts DX8/9 driver calls to override texture/geometry/lighting systems without altering the underlying engine. The tech isn't portable to Switch.

 

[RennanNT]

I'm just saying that a 1080p screen makes the value proposition extremely simple to sell

I don't think "1080p screen" convey much value proposition. I dare say that even if it's 1080p, they won't market it.

For people who doesn't understand about native resolution, 1080p will just make it sound inferior to 2017 1440p phones. For those who understand, 1080p output doesn't means much without specs.

They're probably better just showing, not telling:

"Here's the NuSwitch, HDR OLED screen, 4k support while docked. Here's TotK footage looking way better than BotW or anything on OG, here's an exclusive and here's a couple non-downgraded AAA PS4 game you can't play on OG either."

 

[Dekuman]

How close can they get the Switch 2 exclusive Mario game to look like what we saw in the Mario movie trailer? Especially the materials on his overalls, the strands of mustache and stiching on his cap?

 

[Deleted member 887]

I don't think "1080p screen" convey much value proposition. I dare say that even if it's 1080p, they won't market it.

For people who doesn't understand about native resolution, 1080p will just make it sound inferior to 2017 1440p phones. For those who understand, 1080p output doesn't means much without specs.

I think this heavily misunderstands the market. "Is the Series S really a 1440p console" is a question that has come up in this very thread, a place where folks are generally pretty technically savvy, despite the fact that it is, on its face, a completely non-sensical idea. My ZX-81 is a 41 year old computer with a 1Kb of memory can generate a 1440p image, as long as you don't care that it's all black. The ones who understand are a pretty small group indeed. And the ones who do understand will see the beefy SOC and wonder why they couldn't bump the handheld resolution at all.

720p also makes it sounds like it's inferior to 2017 iPhones - but more to my point it sounds like it's not an upgrade. If a substantial part of the pitch is "play your current games at higher resolution" then there are none of the Switch's evergreen titles that will actually deliver that in handheld mode that don't have Pokemon in the name.

I'm not expecting Nintendo to market based on the screen's resolution either. I'm just saying "higher resolution for your preexisting games" is a much cleaner pitch when you can actually offer that to 100% of you customer base, not the 25% who play in docked mode with a 4k screen. Imagine the Nintendolife FAQ after the announcement

What about handheld mode?
It's the same 720p screen, so the big NuSwitch-enhanced games in the launch trailer will actually play the same in handheld mode as they do on your current switch. Some future patched games may offer new RT options in handheld mode. Some unpatched games which run poorly now may see improvement. Nintendo specifically mentioned the current Pokemon games play better on NuSwitch - though it probably doesn't fix any of the numerous non-performance bugs.

Or

What about handheld mode?
All the games in the launch trailer get a bump in handheld mode thanks to NuSwitch's sexy new high res screen

See?

 

[ILikeFeet]

Portal with RTX is built using RTX Remix, which intercepts DX8/9 driver calls to override texture/geometry/lighting systems without altering the underlying engine. The tech isn't portable to Switch.

I know. I missed the Drake mention in the post I quoted. I though they were just referring to PC hardware

How close can they get the Switch 2 exclusive Mario game to look like what we saw in the Mario movie trailer? Especially the materials on his overalls, the strands of mustache and stiching on his cap?

not very close. the lack of raw power will be apparent

 

[Deleted member 887]

How close can they get the Switch 2 exclusive Mario game to look like what we saw in the Mario movie trailer? Especially the materials on his overalls, the strands of mustache and stiching on his cap?

Nowhere near. Illumination's primary render farm is the size of a parking lot and still only renders a single frame a second.

By way of comparison, rewatch the trailer and then watch a video of the Matrix Awakens demo for PS5 and compare cloth and hair rendering. They're not in the same ballpark.

 

[Hidden04]

I don't think Nintendo wants a Mario game to have the graphical prowess of the Mario Movie, plus it would look off and it wouldn't improve the gameplay imo.

 

[JoshuaJSlone]

Is a 1080p screen more of a power draw than an 8nm T239 can afford? Etc etc.

If it were a world where every game were forced to use the screen's max resolution, this might be a concern. But it's not the case for Switch, wasn't for Vita, isn't for Steam Deck, won't be for Drake. So leaving out a 1080p+ screen for this reason would just be punishing the games that can handle it so the games that can't won't seem as inferior. I've put it this way before, but should the Switch's screen have been 540p because more games would actually hit that? Some say yes, but we'd have worse experiences on... the vast majority of notable games, plus the large number of low budget releases that aren't pushing the hardware. But those mid-level games and miracle ports wouldn't feel so bad about themselves.

On a 1080p screen the same size of the current OLED model, would current Switch games really look noticeably worse than on a 720p screen?
Of course I'm mostly thinking about BC, and taking into account that some games render at much lower resolution, but I feel like - at least - games that already reach 720p in portable mode wouldn't look that much worse on a 1080p screen despite what I've read on this.
It makes me think of how DS games look awful (imo) on 3DS, but this shouldn't be near as bad I guess.

A few differences.
1) For a scaled image that muddles the original as little as possible, integer scaling is best (1440p screen plz). Past that, the next best option is a multiple ending in a half (like 1.5x for 720p->1080p). A multiple ending in a quarter (like 1.25x for DS to 3DS) is the next level below that.
2) Uneven scaling at lower DPI is going to stick out more because every weird pixel is bigger.
3) DS to 3DS was just doing something simple like bilinear filtering. We live in a scaling world today, and even without the full data necessary for techniques like DLSS2 or FSR2, things like FSR1 are just generic scalers meant for gaming images that are generally considered to look better than plain bilinear, to the point where it's considered a major feature for Steam Deck.

Here I've taken a few 720p shots from eShop listings or my own collection and show how they appear in 1080p by nearest neighbor, bilinear, and FSR1.

 

[ReddDreadtheLead]

Hm, doing more numbers assume 8 cores as the chip, not 7 in its console environment:

@ 1.0GHz 352ST/2400MT (>5x the Switch)
@ 1.1GHz 387ST/2640MT
@ 1.2GHz 422ST/2880MT
@ 1.3GHz 458ST/3120MT
@ 1.4GHz 493ST/3360MT
@ 1.5GHz 528ST/3600MT
@ 1.6GHz 563ST/3840MT (~3x the PS4 base)
@ 1.7GHz 598ST/4080MT (Drake is the RTX 4080 confirmed)
@ 1.8GHz 633ST/4320MT (~3x the XBox 1 base)
@ 1.9GHz 669ST/4560MT
@ 2.0GHz 704ST/4800MT
@ 2.1GHz 739ST/5040MT (~3x the PS4 Pro)
@ 2.2GHz 774ST/5280MT (~3x the One X)
@ 2.3GHz 810ST/5520MT
@ 2.4GHz 845ST/5760MT
@ 2.5GHz 880ST/6000MT


Caveat time:

1) this is theoretically speaking, and in a perfect environment.

2) this is going full core vs full core. Aka, it’s the full 8 core CPU vs 8 core CPU, consoles don’t use all cores. They use most of it. PS4 and XBox use 6.5 cores so their MT score would be lower, but Drake will be using that 7 cores for games most likely. In some of these comparisons it would be a bit over 3x the compared console. But it would also be lower because it’s not using 8 cores.

3) this is using Geekbench, that said it should still be a big jump nonetheless.

4) no you will not be getting a 4080

 

[ILikeFeet]

still thinking 1.25GHz or 1.78GHz for the cpu depending on the node

 

[RennanNT]

720p also makes it sounds like it's inferior to 2017 iPhones - but more to my point it sounds like it's not an upgrade.

Which is why they won't mention screen resolution at all, instead of pulling attention to things they're behind others. Showing enhanced games looking better and games OG can't run will make it clear it's an update, just like nobody think PS5 isn't an upgrade from the Pro/1X.

I'm not expecting Nintendo to market based on the screen's resolution either. I'm just saying "higher resolution for your preexisting games" is a much cleaner pitch when you can actually offer that to 100% of you customer base, not the 25% who play in docked mode with a 4k screen.

And I'm not contesting if it's cleaner or not. I'm saying that's not a good pitch for handheld mode, even if you change it to a vague "higher resolution". That's not something tangible for people who don't think native 720p games are blurry, all it conveys it that it is somehow better, and that can be conveyed by a more tangible pitch.