Consoles running around 200 watts vs Switch 2 at 15 watts probably. Even the ROG Ally barely surpasses a base PS4 at 30 watts in performance mode and 1:30h battery life. It also can't even match a PS5 at 720p, even while being the most advanced portable "console" right now.So Nintendo's next "hybrid" console that will probably launch in a year or so will be roughly equal in power to consoles that Sony and MS released 10 years ago?
Hopefully it's slightly more powerful than gen 8 + DLSS so we can get some ports on Nintendo's next console.Battery life is where it’s at. I’m playing way more on Switch because that lasts for two sessions while I mostly use my Deck plugged in, so…
Or we have gotten to the point of demising returns, and more power is no longer needed, especially with DLSS and FSR.If this is true, if, I don't think people understand how bad that is considering that the Switch was considered to be stronger than Wii U and closer to Xbox One and PS4 back in 2017, so if this is still not there and still "close" we are looking at a marginal upgrade with the only big improvements possibly being resolution and battery life with a slight uptick in performance. if this is true.
Basically, it would barely be a Switch Pro, but it will be the successor console instead.
Or we have gotten to the point of demising returns, and more power is no longer needed, especially with DLSS and FSR.
The Switch's GPU, docked, has about 1/3 of an Xbox One's power. If it were to match a PS4, that'd be over a 4x jump. If it matched the Pro, that'd be closer to 9x, and that's just in teraflops, not considering the advantages of newer hardware (or, to be fair, the disadvantages of a mobile RAM setup). We could be looking at a full generational leap here...If this is true, if, I don't think people understand how bad that is considering that the Switch was considered to be stronger than Wii U and closer to Xbox One and PS4 back in 2017, so if this is still not there and still "close" we are looking at a marginal upgrade with the only big improvements possibly being resolution and battery life with a slight uptick in performance. if this is true.
Basically, it would barely be a Switch Pro, but it will be the successor console instead.
No, because I have eyes and have seen the sales number for the Switch and it's software, along with the quality that is coming from those titles far exceed those on more powerful hardware, that is not particularly much more graphically impressive.You think a Switch being "close" to Xbox One form 2013 is a sign of diminishing returns and more power is no longer needed because of two things you don't understand that don't remove the need for more power?
Ps5 graphics aren’t even possible or being delivered on PS5.You mean in 12 years we can get ps5 graphics on Switch 3? Sweet.
Are the people in charge at Nintendo so cheap they simply refuse to invest in their most important money maker?
Why on earth, when you are as profitable as they are, do you release something that was dated at release 10 years ago?
Genuinely, I'm perplexed by such timid behaviour.
They have some incredible I.P, a devoted fan base, vast resources, and instead of offering something that can facilitate the vision of creative developers, they offer something that will be a dinosaur by the time it has been out 5 or 6 years.
I mean, imagine Breath of the Wild or the sequel at 4k 60, or even 1440-120, with everything turned up, or Mario, or Metroid.
I just cannot understand this kind of thinking.
Maybe think about battery life for a portable? You can’t have ps5 graphics and use the device for 5 or 6 hours without a huge external power supply/battery.Are the people in charge at Nintendo so cheap they simply refuse to invest in their most important money maker?
Why on earth, when you are as profitable as they are, do you release something that was dated at release 10 years ago?
Genuinely, I'm perplexed by such timid behaviour.
They have some incredible I.P, a devoted fan base, vast resources, and instead of offering something that can facilitate the vision of creative developers, they offer something that will be a dinosaur by the time it has been out 5 or 6 years.
I mean, imagine Breath of the Wild or the sequel at 4k 60, or even 1440-120, with everything turned up, or Mario, or Metroid.
I just cannot understand this kind of thinking.
Does it have to be portable?Maybe think about battery life for a portable? You can’t have ps5 graphics and use the device for 5 or 6 hours without a huge external power supply/battery.
Nintendo tries to pack as much power in an as small and low usage of energy package as possible. The reactions I see in this thread about lack of power are absolutely baffling. Having e.g. ps4 power in a 720p handheld is absolutely amazing if the battery also lasts for at least 3 to 5 hours.
I get all that, I do.Nintendo used to technologically competitive until the Wii. That console saw them strike gold as motion-controlled gaming became a big thing and after that their focus was trying to maintain that momentum and sales. The Wii U was flop, badly marketed at a time when motion-controlled gaming was dying a quiet death, but they managed to hit gold again with the Switch by combining their handheld and console strategies into one unit.
It's obviously a winning formula and because of the handheld limitations it means the future hardware based on this strategy will never compete with Microsoft's or Sony's offerings. The best we can hope for, if the next console is Switch 2 and really it cannot be anything else in my opinion as the DS is no more, is that Nintendo incorporate some kind of extra chip or hardware into the dock for TV use that can enhance the games to an acceptable visual level for 4K TVs, something the Switch does not and cannot do because it is restricted to 1080p and most games do not even render at that resolution natively.
It's bizarre to me that anyone would have hoped for anything better for a new Switch. People scoff at this, while maybe not realizing what a massive upgrade in power this would actually be. We got TotK on an old crappy phone chip, now Nintendo will have a PS4 to work on and we complain?
Base PS4 power was also my assumption, of course being a more modern/newer device it will be better than than comparison on paper. I think anyone who expects much more power than this in a handheld device from Nintendo, just neither understands hardware nor N's strategy going back decades.
Did anyone really expect a new handheld that was a PS5 or something? Maybe for $1500+ lol
Honestly, I'd guess it'll probably be a little above that, somewhere between the PS4 and the Pro in terms of raw numbers and better than the Pro in terms of capability thanks to newer architecture.It's bizarre to me that anyone would have hoped for anything better for a new Switch. People scoff at this, while maybe not realizing what a massive upgrade in power this would actually be. We got TotK on an old crappy phone chip, now Nintendo will have a PS4 to work on and we complain?
Base PS4 power was also my assumption, of course being a more modern/newer device it will be better than than comparison on paper. I think anyone who expects much more power than this in a handheld device from Nintendo, just neither understands hardware nor N's strategy going back decades.
Did anyone really expect a new handheld that was a PS5 or something? Maybe for $1500+ lol
I guess to make it more affordable so they can sell more. They can get away with it because they have a great library of games.can someone explain why they never make powerful systems? I don't understand.
can someone explain why they never make powerful systems? I don't understand.
Nintendo has a long history of releasing portables and since the latest generation is a smash hit it’s pretty easy to assume the next Nintendo will be hybrid portable again.Does it have to be portable?
Is that a given?
Honestly, I'd guess it'll probably be a little above that, somewhere between the PS4 and the Pro in terms of raw numbers and better than the Pro in terms of capability thanks to newer architecture.
And yeah, you're completely correct, it may not be anywhere near PS5 levels but Nintendo working in the realms of PS4 Pro would be amazing. Look at what they could do with hardware from 2014.
Pikmin 4 looks amazing and people need to stop forgetting the lighting and detail in Luigi's Mansion 3.
their powerful systems all performed worse than their less powerful ones.
SNES performed worse than the NES,
the N64 and GameCube performed worse than the Wii.
their handhelds, all of which always had at least 1 more powerful competitor, all performed really well.
those consoles are a thousand years old though, the world has changed. Can only imagine how good their flagship franchises would look on high fps and visual quality :-(
According to the old rumors (that looked to be true) about the Switch Pro, they would've used the AGX model that only has 1790 CUDA cores, but with 16GBs of RAM. If it used the same clocks as the original switch it would do 1.2TF handheld and 2.8TF docked.well, it all depends on which chip you think is most likely used.
there are basically 3 tiers of chips available to them. all of which have a full spec and a reduced spec variant.
so 6 possible configurations total.
the Orin AGX, the Orin NX, and the Orin Nano.
full spec variant of each is 5.32TF, 1.88TF, and 1.28TF respectively.
they all also have varying amounts of RT and Tensor Cores
According to the old rumors (that looked to be true) about the Switch Pro, they would've used the AGX model that only has 1790 CUDA cores, but with 16GBs of RAM. If it used the same clocks as the original switch it would do 1.2TF handheld and 2.8TF docked.
Of course we don't know if the successor will use Orin or wait on Thor, which Nvidia already has close to production. If those rumors from earlier this month were to be believed, they were waiting on Tegra Atlan (die shrunk Ampere) but because of Samsung's bad yields with 8nm Ampere, Nvidia broke their contract with them and can'd the 5nm Ampere+. While I see Nintendo probably going back to Orin, Thor being 4nm would be best for battery life and heat. Could run at higher clocks without using a lot of power and be put in a smaller form factor than what we see with the Steam Deck and ROG.
those consoles are a thousand years old though, the world has changed. Can only imagine how good their flagship franchises would look on high fps and visual quality :-(
Besides cooling, Nintendo has been power cautious since the Gamecube. I believe it's a Japanese thing but I still remember the WiiU being underclocked as well to meet a 15w power draw for Japanese homes.honestly I will be so disappointed if they reduce docked clock speeds yet again it was nonsense for the original Switch and would be nonsenae again here.
so whichever chip they use, I hope they crank it to the maximum stable speed in docked mode. worst case scenario would be still below Series S levels of power draw and most likely easy to cool.
Besides cooling, Nintendo has been power cautious since the Gamecube.
You're right, the GC used 48watts compared to the Wii's 14.Not sure that's true, the gamecube went up against PS2 and the original Xbox and wasn't underpowered, it certainly got better versions of multiplatform games versus PS2.
I think it was the Wii when they threw power out the window.
I think I've misinterpreted "power" here to mean "graphical fidelity" rather than electricity draw.You're right, the GC used 48watts compared to the Wii's 14.