Mownoc
Member
The PS4 CPU was garbage 13 years ago so I'd hope so.
CPU is the most disappointing part of the Switch 2. Worse than 6 year old phones.
-
Hey Guest. Check out your NeoGAF Wrapped 2025 results here!
DF doubles down on they were right about the switch 2 specs.
- Thread starter subzero83
- Start date
CPU is the most disappointing part of the Switch 2. Worse than 6 year old phones.
SegaSnatcher
Member
I mean its better than base PS4 hardware in most categories with the main hit being ram bandwidth. Switch 2's CPU/GPU architecture and total ram available for games is obviously superior to base PS4.
winjer
Member
The Jaguar was never meant to be a high end CPU. It's meant to be frugal using energy and use a small amount of die space, leaving more for the GPU.
For those constrains, Jaguar was very good for the time.
bender
What time is it?
We have an academic there.
LakeOf9
Member
That's fantastic for a modern platform and handheld
Now we just need Nintendo to put out actual good games for it
But the hardware is excellent, and DF's assessment was correct
nowhat
Member
...and yet, Jaguar became a bottleneck pretty early on. But it's not like there were many alternatives at the time, when it comes to x64 CPU+GPU combos. In retrospect though, the Jaguar cores may have been a blessing in disguise of sorts - previously, game engines were pretty much universally single-thread. As consoles were/are an important target market, the Jaguar cores forced engines to go multi-thread.
kevboard
Member
yeah, and on a technical level the PS4 can also do 4k. Sony even promised a firmware update to enable 4k.
but like their promised 8k support on base PS5, it never happened...
it went so far that digital foundry even asked the Devs of Trine 2 back in 2013 if a 4k mode was possible if Sony releases the promised update, and the devs said that this wouldn't be an issue since they already run the game at 1080p with stereoscopic 3D at 60fps. so a 4k 30fps mode wouldn't be hard to implement.
Gaiff
SBI’s Resident Gaslighter
Me, me, me. Tens of millions of people have found use for the portability at home and on the go. The fact that you don't find it useful is irrelevant and unimportant. Not to mention that you didn't even address what you were asked. You completely sidestepped the point just to bitch some more. Bravo.
Last edited:
rodrigolfp
Haptic Gamepads 4 Life
If you don't want then don't use the SW2 in portable mode and use anything else. Because your phone can't run Mario Kart World and some other games.
Last edited:
bender
What time is it?
The released Kirby's Air Riders which was 2025's GOTY. And while I have complaints about Mario Kart World and Monkey Kong, those easily qualify as "good games".
hope Nintendo still does Air Riders demo at some point.
because I still need to know if the controls will work for me
Last edited:
February nd hype
Rocco Schiavone
Member
feel the powers in my hands
nowhat
Member
feel the powers in my hands
CRUD!!!
Idleyes
Gold Member
I own both the first and second Switch. I enjoy Nintendo games. Hell, I'm a big Nintendo fan, kid-at-heart and all. But let's be real: Nintendo's hardware has been behind since discs were still considered futuristic. Not saying discs are the issue, just saying their specs have been straight laced ass ever since. I'm literally trying to 100% TOTK right now using Zelda Notes GPS because I'm too damn old to pretend my memory still works. So yes, on the software side Nintendo is good.
That said, the Switch still ain't got shit on the Steam Deck in my lineup. The Switch 2 reminds me of the Apple ecosystem: you're trapped in a maze of paywalls… just without the performance. The Steam Deck is more like Android: do whatever you want, full control, but without trash scattered everywhere.
That said, the Switch still ain't got shit on the Steam Deck in my lineup. The Switch 2 reminds me of the Apple ecosystem: you're trapped in a maze of paywalls… just without the performance. The Steam Deck is more like Android: do whatever you want, full control, but without trash scattered everywhere.
S0ULZB0URNE
Member
Wrong as usual.
BlackTron
Member
Excuse me, the 80 dollar games are not PS4 games. They're Wii U games
newtypepilot
Member
don't need to provide value when their diehards were willing to pay $100 for a few pieces of cardboard.
Punished Miku
Banned
PS4.5 with upscaling is really all I expected. Wii U was a PS3.5.
wiiu was actually less powerful then 360, every game ran much worse then the 360. Switch 2 more like a ps4.2
Punished Miku
Banned
I dont have Digital Foundry robot vision. Xenoblade X was 4x the size of Fallout 4 and had no loading. Shit looked at least as good as PS3. System was very compact too and ran with low electricity use.
Yes its hard to judge system on graphical preference. Its best to just look at multiple ports and wiiu was losing in almost every game.
ReasonBeing
Member
I immediately thought of him when I saw that meme as well
I was startled to see your message immediately follow it.
Last edited:
Wasn't PS Vita actually quite reasonably priced in 2012? US$250 in 2012 is equivalent to approximately US$350 in 2026.
But a 16 GB memory card that could only hold about 5 large games...
There weren't many 'high-end' portable alternatives on the market at the time. Actually, was there anything like GPD Win in the early 2010s?
PeteBull
Member
U answered urself, those memory cards is what killed the vita in the end, psp on the other hand was extremly succesful with its 80m+units sold(official number on sony site)- 250$ usd price wasnt bad either but those 250$ would be today 415usd(usd inflation is crazy, dolar is weak af) so far from low price considered we remember ps4 in 2013 launched at 400usd and ps5 digital launched at 400 too in 2020Wasn't PS Vita actually quite reasonably priced in 2012? US$250 in 2012 is equivalent to approximately US$350 in 2026.
But a 16 GB memory card that could only hold about 5 large games...
There weren't many 'high-end' portable alternatives on the market at the time. Actually, was there anything like GPD Win in the early 2010s?
And stronger ps2 at that time could be gotten for way cheaper obviously(official pricecut in 2004 to 149$, by 2006 official price of ps2 was 129$):
(Yes with out 2026 eyes those graphics looks similar tier but back then in 2005 every1 saw clearly ps2 was bit stronger
).
Last edited:
KungFucius
King Snowflake
If it had DLSS it could have obviously this is a ~ and not an =.
darrylgorn
Member
So it's a PS4 but good?
CentralScrutinizer
Banned
Sony fanboys shook, clearly.
"It's basically a base ps4 but with DLSS but it can also run games ps4 can't run at all and can also do it while in handheld mode"
Let's remember that a "ps3 with extra features" Nintendo Switch released 11 years after PS3 is going to take the crown for best selling console of all time. That thread will be glorious.
"It's basically a base ps4 but with DLSS but it can also run games ps4 can't run at all and can also do it while in handheld mode"
Let's remember that a "ps3 with extra features" Nintendo Switch released 11 years after PS3 is going to take the crown for best selling console of all time. That thread will be glorious.
Last edited:
SomeNorseGuy
Gold Member
Just release good, optimised, and exlusive games for it and very few will care how powerful it is.
And patch the Xenoblade games already you cunts.
And patch the Xenoblade games already you cunts.
Just cause games don't come doesn't mean it can't run them. many games are starting to skip ps4 that are not even demanding and coming out on OG switch 1. does that make Og switch more powerful then ps4?
RT could be replaced with baked lighting if they really wanted to port bad enough. we have seen this with the majority games coming to switch 2. like cronos removes lumen for switch 2, and so does fortnite, same with AC Shadows .
Last edited:
Trilobit
Absolutely Cozy
Skill issue by Sony
I'd say that Nintendo is a very ambitious company. It's amazing how such a relatively small company has been able to go against MS and Sony and even winning.
I think 3DS and WiiU made them realize that in case one console bombs they need to keep their consoles lean to stay in the green and be able to launch a new console asap. They probably have plans B, C, D and E after launching a console nowadays, with ideas for how to replace the current one. So taking "off-the-shelf" tech stuff is incredibly intentional, their staff in charge of tech is probably as high-grade as their own developers and programmers.
Last edited:
Horseganador
Member
J Required
Gold Member
I don't understand how this is a "skill issue" on Sony's part. Hitting native 4K is demanding even for high-end PC GPUs in 2025. If anything, Sony has been the most forward-looking company out of the big three—pushing industry standards with DVD on PS2, Blu-ray on PS3, VR on PS4/PS5, and consistently strong hardware designs. The PS4 alone launched at just $399 and was an incredibly well-balanced, forward-thinking machine for its time.
It's their core business—ambition has nothing to do with it. Sony stormed into the industry in 1994, and Nintendo made a deliberate choice to stay out of their way in the high-end console space. Even in handhelds, their supposed "safe zone," the PSP gave them a serious scare.
The real threat, of course, came from the iPhone and the rise of smartphones, which completely changed how people consume entertainment. Add the skyrocketing costs of HD game development, and the Switch became a logical evolution: merge handheld and console into one platform, streamline development, and consolidate their audience. It worked brilliantly.
But that success comes with risk. The Switch model puts all of Nintendo's eggs in one basket—and if that formula slips, there's no second ecosystem to fall back on.
What exactly is Nintendo's plan if the Switch 2 or even Switch 3 struggles? Do they just shelve the idea and push out a "Switch 4"? Do they fall back on another gimmick-heavy console like the Wii? Or do they finally return to the high-end space and face their arch nemesis head-on?
In my view, Nintendo is facing a steeper climb than Sony. They've relied too heavily on a one-dimensional lineup of family-friendly games, and they're consistently late when it comes to adopting modern technologies—cloud gaming, robust online services, proper infrastructure, you name it. That delay is going to hit their famously high margins sooner rather than later, because catching up to industry standards isn't cheap. And companies like Nvidia, AMD, and TSMC will eat straight into those margins as hardware expectations rise.
oh man how i miss the pre-launch youtube screengrab sw2-ps5 comparison threads. those were fun.
The HDMI 2.0 spec which was the first that allowed 4K 60Hz was released two months before the PS4 hit retail. There were no TV, or other devices that supported it out yet.
HDTVs in 2005 were very commonly 720p/1080i. It was December of 2005 that HDMI 1.2a was out which is close to what people think of in terms of what HDMI does. The original HDMI 1.0 was out in 2002, but was basically just the DVI digital signally with basic audio injected into the video blank regions. Many early HDTVs had DVI connectors with analog audio inputs which slowly migrated to HDMI ports that provided the same functionality.
The cycle that never ends. I don't get why you wanna praise hardware that nintendo is not even trying to be great. they are using dated ass tech but they wanna exaggerate the power every gen. its no wonder DF is scared to speak their minds look at the comments for the video by raging fanboys.
Exactly my point. 4k tv's did not exist, but fanboys wanna use it as flex as why switch 2 is superior.
Last edited:
switch 1 was actually way more advanced for its time. it was using such a dated node and GPU, It was the most powerful handheld as well. switch 2 is using 4 year old gpu and a node bigger then what's in ps5 and people wanna praise that shit?
Not sure if this is rhetorical - Sony obviously never enabled 4k video out.
But rendering wise it obviously can - hell even PS3 had a '4k' game on it at some point.
Is the video-out a particularly important thing though?
I mean in SD era, there were two consoles that could output HD (PS2 and XBox) were they part of a different generation alltogether then?
Do you mean something that was doing some type of super resolution rendering at 4K and then downscaling to 1080p? Because neither the PS3 nor base PS4's HDMI encoders could output a 4K signal.Not sure if this is rhetorical - Sony obviously never enabled 4k video out.
But rendering wise it obviously can - hell even PS3 had a '4k' game on it at some point.
Is the video-out a particularly important thing though?
I mean in SD era, there were two consoles that could output HD (PS2 and XBox) were they part of a different generation alltogether then?
The PS2 and Xbox used analog video. And that directly drove the TV's display hardware. So it was possible to modify the signal it was putting out as long as it fit within the bandwidth that was available.
deriks
4-Time GIF/Meme God
I remember seeing Pikmin 3 o the Wii U and I was like "isn't this console a different 360?!"
The original Switch is a little better, and I must say, Metroid Prime 4 on original Switch is really close to PS4 level. Mario Kart World is great looking, but everyone knows that they can do even better, and we have everything to have a Nintendo sorcery with this
The original Switch is a little better, and I must say, Metroid Prime 4 on original Switch is really close to PS4 level. Mario Kart World is great looking, but everyone knows that they can do even better, and we have everything to have a Nintendo sorcery with this
I collect VHS tapes
Gold Member
I'm blown away by how good cyberpunk looks and runs
Obviously something the ps4 could never do
Also, DLSS is magic
Obviously something the ps4 could never do
Also, DLSS is magic
Last edited:
Yes, as I mentioned obviously they didn't output 4k signal.
I mean analogue bit is semantics. CRTC converted the full-HD frame( actual pixels, not stretch shenanigans) into these analogue outputs, and yes both could drive actual HD signal (eg. PS2 maxed out at 1280x960@75hz/1080i@60, I forgot what it was for XBox). And that was by design - GS was originally meant to drive HD set-top boxes, among other things, and EE MPEG2 decoder block was literally designed for 1080p spec - that's why it was so overpowered.
There were in fact some 1080i video discs that played on PS2, and even Netflix (the streaming app) could go higher than 480p on it.
Closer
Member
But 4k resolution was set on stone way before HDMI put it in-spec. There were movies and cameras capable of 4k before it, so 4k resolution existed before the release of PS4.
Last edited: