splattered
Member
Nintendo will probably never invest in powerful hardware again, they don't have to. don't need to. People will buy their consoles no matter what.
The Steam Deck uses an SoC in N7 process node, with RDNA2 and Zen2.
By the time the Switch 2 comes out, in a couple of years, it can use the N3 process node. Or even the N3 Finflex, if Nintendo wants the vey best.
This means much higher transistor density, bigger chip, more units, more TFLOPs, etc.
And then it can use much more advanced CPUs and GPUs, than what the Steam Deck has today. Regardless of Nintendo sticking with nVidia or going AMD.
The idea that the Switch 2 can't be more powerful than the Steam Deck is complete non-sense from someone that doesn't understand tech.
So how can the Switch 2 not be more powerful than the Steam Deck?
Exactly, because NintendoBecause even if all the logic makes sense, since when has Nintendo ever followed logic with how they run their business?
The problem with that is that Nintendo doesn't want the very best. They want the cheapest acceptable components they can get their hands on, so they can make as much money as possible from it. Nintendo doesn't do loss leaders.
But in 2024-2025, something like RDNA3 or Ada Lovelace, won't be the best. And still it will be much better than the Steam Deck.
Are people here so oblivious to the constant improvement of tech?
Well, the Tegra hasn't been evolving in the same way as desktop GPUs.
Would that be a DS that can travel through time
nVidia Orin is releasing this year, with Ampere arch. And it has 2048 cuda cores and 64 tensor units.
It's a 4 TFLOP SoC, that can also do DLSS.
Nvidia has already announced Atlan, in 2021, as it's next SoC.
By 2024-2025, any of these can be used by Nintendo, and still be more powerful than the Steam Deck.
Can they be used in a device like the Switch with similar battery life without making the battery and thus the device much larger (battery tech has not really gone anywhere in a long time)?
Nintendo always goes for price-quality on the node side of things.Of course. Remember that the Steam Deck uses the N7 process node from TSMC. The N3 process starts mass production in the second half of 2022.
It could, steam deck is not even that powerful.
But this is Nintendo, if they had a 2 Tflop part they would downgrade it at least 30% making it functionally behave worse than Steam Deck who's a 1.6 Tflop part.
Also bare in mind that Steam Deck is "powerful" for a 720p screen, but the switch also plugs onto a TV, so at the same flop output they would already be at a disadvantage at 1080p but they'll have pressure to go higher. I guess that's where the tensor cores will come in.
Nintendo is historically never trying to be ahead on the node war, they always go for price-quality whatever that is.
If they can be 7 nm's for the Switch 2, when everything else is 3nm's... they will
Yeah, but powerful on paper is different from the spec Nintendo finds best for balancing battery, heat, and RMA rate.Nintendo choose to use a Maxwell SoC, at a time when nVidia already had Pascall out.
If they use the same strategy, they´ll use Ada Lovelace in 2024-2025. Ada is made in N5, in 2022. But it could be made in N4 or N3 in 2024-2025. Neither of these will be leading edge at that time.
And it's more powerful than what is inside the Steam Deck.
Also, despite those node advantages, power consumption is still rising. As I'm sure you know, the upcoming RTX 4090 (5nm) is rumoured to be a 800W part, against RTX3090 (8nm) who was a 500W part. But it's not just on GPU's that this is happening we're seeing it everywhere with a few notable exceptions. Node evolution on paper should mean at this point that everyone's current gen desktop i3 to be a 25W part, but that isn't the case.Now consider that N5 offers 40% power reduction over N7.
And N3 offers another 30% power reduction over N5.
Yeah, but powerful on paper is different from the spec Nintendo finds best for balancing battery, heat, and RMA rate.
As I said, unless heat and power consumption is not a concern at all, you can always expect a 30% power output decrease.
Also, despite those node advantages, power consumption is still rising. As I'm sure you know, the upcoming RTX 4090 (5nm) is rumoured to be a 800W part, against RTX3090 (8nm) who was a 500W part. But it's not just on GPU's that this is happening we're seeing it everywhere with a few notable exceptions. Node evolution on paper should mean at this point that everyone's current gen desktop i3 to be a 25W part, but that isn't the case.
What I mean is, against Tegra X1, these designs we are discussing might still mean less battery life or a bulkier design to support it. And Nintendo faced with that might opt to halve the chip design. So the 4 Tflop part what was already touched upon could be requested to be manufactured with a 2 Tflops spec with half the processor logic instead. This design exists with the Jetson Orin NX, a 2 TFlop part based on the same Orin/Ampere design as the 4Tflop part, which I find more likely to be used if Nintendo was about to release something.
You are correct and ppl need to stop acting like the Steam Deck is a powerhouse. I am a happy steam deck owner but this is a console of compromises (they needed the price to be low). If I had the option of spending $200 more for 50 percent power power, I would. If Nvidia builds in some form of DLSS in switch 2/pro, it would smoke the built in, useless FSR that steam deck hasThis is, very clearly, a direct response to that other thread
I posted this in said thread as a simple comment, but I just was in the mood to make this thread about it.
Thinking that the Switch 2 could be as powerful or even more powerful than the Steam Deck is not at all unrealistic. People look at the Switch and see a system barely more powerful than the Wii U, then just assume that the jump to the new system will not reach Steam Deck levels of performance.
so 2 things about that.
1: The Steam Deck is not as powerful as many seem to think it is. The Steam Deck is less powerful in some respects than the PS4, mainly the GPU can not quite keep up with the PS4. And we are talking base PS4 here btw.
The PS4 has a 1.8TF GPU with consistent clock speeds that never change, while the Steam Deck has a 1.6TF GPU with variable clock speeds that can throttle under load.
It does have a decent CPU and enough Memory to perform very well, and it can reach 60fps in games where the PS4 could not, be it at a way lower resolution/graphical fidelity.
2: The Hardware inside the Switch is not a weak as some seem to think.
First of all it outperforms the Wii U and Xbox 360 quite a bit, either allowing for higher framerates or higher resolutions than on those consoles in similar or the same games.
All of this while also having a more modern feature set that can handle modern engines which would not even be able to run on 360 or PS3.
But most importantly, we have to look at the actual hardware that Nvidia had available since at least back in 2019... namely the Tegra X1+, codename Mariko, which is the SoC used in all current Switch models since 2019
This Tegra X1+ could have easily been used to create a Nintendo Switch Pro, with a big boost in GPU and CPU performance, but Nintendo simply used it due to cost reduction and to have longer battery life.
How powerful is the Tegra X1+ when actually used to it's fullest? well, look at the stats below
Switch max clock speed:
-CPU: 1.02ghz
-GPU: 0.768ghz / 393 GFLOPs (max speed when docked)
Mariko Tegra X1+ max rated clock speed:
-CPU: 1.90ghz
-GPU: 1.267ghz / 649 GFLOPs
again, this is the same chip that is IN EVERY current Switch model and has been since 2019.
Let us assume Nvidia and Nintendo are designing the new console, let us also assume the WORST CASE SCENARIO possible, and that is that Nintendo uses an SoC that is merely double as performant as the Tegra X1+
Basically we are assuming that since 2019, the best Nvidia has to offer now, or in 1 to 2 years when the Switch 2 will release, is a chip that is 2x as powerful.
That would instantly mean 1.3 TF of GPU power and most likely way more performant CPU cores.
so in this worst case scenario we see that the Switch 2 would "only" reach Xbox One S (yes S not FAT) GPU performance
This is of course if Nintendo would use this Worst Case Scenario Chip at it's full speeds available, but still...
So worst case we will probably see a Switch 2 with the GPU power of an Xbox One S, with more modern features than the One S, and a better CPU than the One S.
This would still be below the Steam Deck tho of course.
but remember, this is the worst case possible imo... any wiggle-room above that and that 1.6TF Steam Deck will be very close indeed. If we get a 2.5x increase over the X1+ it would be above the Deck at 1.62TF, if the new tegra is 3x as powerful as the X1+ we are at 1.94TF and have at that point passed the PS4 in raw power.
IMO the real question will be if Nvidia and Nintendo will make use of Nvidia's newer technology with Tensor Cores and RT Cores. The inclusion of both would mean that even at a lower raster performance the Switch 2 could still keep up or even eclipse the Steam Deck in visual quality and performance.
DLSS and better RT hardware could mean games could run or look better on Switch 2 than on Steam Deck.
all of this is of course speculation, and I am in no way saying that any of this will happen, but what I am saying is that it is ridiculous to assume that there is no way that the Switch 2 would possibly reach Steam Deck levels of performance. Especially considering that Valve can not push their profit margins as low as Nintendo with it's higher production capacity and with the amount of first party games they sell every week. Mario Kart 8 hasn't left the top 20 charts in what feels like a decade...
Remember, all Nvidia needs is a 3x jump in GPU power and a reasonable jump in CPU performance to easily outpace the PS4 with their SoC for the Switch 2.
as a comparison the jump from Wii U to Switch is 176GF to 393GF, a 2.2x increase in GPU performance, and that was going from a home console to a tablet sized hybrid that doesn't even use the full power of its hardware
But I don't think it'll have worse performance per clock...How can anyone think that an SoC made in 2024-2025, will have worse performance and power usage, than a part made in 2021.
Do you think that tech just stops in 2022 and nothing else happens?
But I don't think it'll have worse performance per clock...
I just think that to conform to Nintendo list of priorities, it might not be as powerful as it could/should.
Steam deck lasts from 1 hour and 20 minutes to 2 hours when running "AAA games" with a 44 Wh battery. I can tell you here and now that Nintendo would never use that spec on a shipping console. Switch Lite does 3-7 Hours with a 13,6 Wh battery, I don't think they'll go lower than that and they also won't want to increase the battery capacity a lot. And normal Switch uses a 16 Wh battery.
In short, I believe one of the conditions for Nintendo is that it will have to do at least 3 hours with a battery only as big as 20Wh.
If a console matches the current Steam Deck with those limitations in place it'll be powerful per Watt and cycle.
That's already better than Steam Deck. Steam Deck is essentially an 800p40 device that performs between an Xbox One and PS4, based on DF's benchmarks.It'll be a mobile chipset that's capable of PS4 graphics at 1080p handheld and maybe a slightly better resolution docked.
People who want a Switch Pro/2 only want more ports of AAA games. I'd say just buya Steam Deck if portable AAA gaming is what they wanted.People who want a Switch Pro/2 both A) don't understand how Nintendo does its business, and B) don't really want a Switch to begin with.
The tegra chip they use in the switch is a modified 2015 chip. I could see an improvement if they design a successor.So you think that a baseline cheap mobile chip set will automatically beat Steam Deck at a price that is family friendly for a mega portable machine?
I'm sorry but I just don't see it. I think they will purposely avoid using anything that could do that.
Came in to say just this. Anything 'could' happen. I see the words 'let's assume' and 'speculation' in there too.It could be. Theoretically I could end up with Rihanna.
I mean.... solid state batteries existAmazing all these years have gone by and they still don't understand, you increase a handhelds graphical power the battery life goes to shit. Unless they make it huge & stuff a massive battery in there you are going to only get a tiny battery life similar to valves deck.
Came in to say just this. Anything 'could' happen. I see the words 'let's assume' and 'speculation' in there too.
I don't remember a single sub par Nintendo game selling very well, most of those sports games sell less than one or two millions and the rest are mostly average or total masterpieces for most of their audience... In that case, also graphics are good enough to great, specially with the art styles they go for.Modern Nintendo thinks it's okay to release games with such abysmal framerate as Link's Awakening remake. It's clear that there is no seal of quality anymore, so I dunno if it really matters to them if the next system is powerful. They seem content with releasing sub-par quality games, knowing full well that those games will be sell because it bears their intellectual property.