Dev1lXYZ
Member
Funny how telling the truth about hardware gets labeled as "warring" now. Maybe if more people spoke up early, we wouldn't be normalizing this slow erosion of consumer expectations.
Switch 2 Display Tested. Afterimage is due to "incredibly slow" response time
- Thread starter Topher
- Start date
apple_of_enlightenment
Member
The entire Switch 2 signal chain is likely greater than 100ms so the 30ms extra should be considered in that context.
Underclocked compared to what? The Switch 2 delivers comparable performance to the Steam Deck in portable mode, at less than half the power consumption, on a worse process.I tried to warn people they needed to wait on this sucker. There is no defense for paying for crap quality, especially from Nintendo. The joycons still develop drift, the sub temu quality screen, and under-clocking the processor to prevent a fireball in your hands, and the short battery life…..and we aren't even a month out from launch!Yes sir, that's $450 well spent! They have to be making bank on profit margin because they sure as hell didn't spend much on R&D, quality, or game development!
Minsc
Gold Member
70ms for DLSS?
apple_of_enlightenment
Member
Unity/Unreal can take 2-3 frames or more by default. Then there's OS and IO latency. Not sure about DLSS time/cost but I think it spans some frames.
Topher
Identifies as young
BlackTron
Member
Edited thanks lol (I had said Switch 2 screen is slower than Switch 2, which regrettably may actually also be true because there seem to be multiple types of Switch 2's out there lol)
//DEVIL//
Member
this is assuming the screen can be upgraded via a firmware update. Not all LCD panels have that ability.
Topher
Identifies as young
Which means....
1) The screen can be updated, but Nintendo won't do it
2) The screen is updated by Nintendo, but they may or may not tell anyone
3) The screen can't be updated and Nintendo will never say a word about it
crazyriddler
Member
You're wrong. It's impossible to have a display with VRR and HDR that does not have a controller with firmware that connects to it and "negotiates" the signal with the console hardware. That said, I doubt Nintendo will take action on this because it's a minor issue.
Topher
Identifies as young
Just because it has a controller with firmware, does that mean the firmware can be updated by the user via the normal UI?
Last edited:
crazyriddler
Member
Of course Nintendo can, the system updates are installed "from outside" the system sandbox itself, obviously with all the corresponding signatures and security measures.
Topher
Identifies as young
Fair enough. I don't recall ever having to update a screen's firmware before so I have no idea how that would work.
Ahh good to see this, I had a post earlier reflecting on the potential power usage increase and maybe why Nintendo tuned it the way they did, I guess that's not the case.
Melodrama: a sensational dramatic piece with exaggerated characters and exciting events intended to appeal to the emotions.
I rest my case. Very alarmist.
Last edited:
playbignbox
Member
I had a Steam Deck LCD and the Switch 2's screen is definitely better.
bender
What time is it?
kevboard
Member
the LCD Deck screen has awful colors, that's the main issue of it. but it has slightly faster response times than the Switch 2 apparently.
overall the Switch 2 screen is far superior to it tho of course.
Dev1lXYZ
Member
The Steam Deck runs a more powerful AMD APU with significantly higher wattage and thermal headroom, which is why it can handle more demanding games natively. Can Switch 2 handle Helldivers? I doubt it.
Last edited:
kevboard
Member
the Steam Deck and Switch 2 in handheld mode are essentially identical in GPU performance. so yes it could.
CPU performance is harder to judge, so I can't speak on that... but I assume they are relatively close there too.
the Switch 2 GPU in docked mode is around 2x as powerful as the Deck's GPU in demanding games.
Last edited:
The Switch 2 has 1536 ALUs to the Steam Deck's 512 ALUs. Performance doesn't scale perfectly with compute, but broadly speaking the Switch 2's GPU should be about double as powerful as the Steam Deck's, at the same clocks. That's why the Switch 2 should be able to compete fine with the Steam Deck, at its 561 MHz clock speed in portable mode, when taking into account that games are running on it natively.
crazyriddler
Member
It's not more powerful. The A78C cores in Switch 2 have higher IPC than the Zen 2 cores in Steam Deck. Switch 2 has eight cores, while Steam Deck has four. However, the cores in Steam Deck have a higher frequency.
They have the same memory bandwidth in handheld mode, and the GPU is similar. However, Switch 2 is slightly more powerful (again, in handheld mode) and has DLSS.
Holammer
Member
Digital Foundry Direct weekly talks about this issue.
"last week we posted our review of the Nintendo Switch 2, which was generally highly positive, I'd say. With one Exception. We've stirred up a bit of a hornet's nest by basically saying that we don't like the display that much. And now we're going to sit on that hornet's next by doubling down"
promising!
Last edited:
Madserb2023
Member
I have always been a Nintendo fan but I have absolutely no idea why Digital Foundry criticizing the screen is a problem. I think the screen is poor. I find the PS5 Pro completely underwhelming and playing Silent Hill 2 on it and seeing the shimmering was a gut punch. However, nobody said they were lying and I am sure some didn't notice it. I find the slight fuzzy look that PSSR has very noticeable. I have no doubt there are people playing the PRO on a 1080p LCD from 10 years ago unable to notice it. But at least Sony fans in fairness don't deny any of it. When the VRR stutter on the PlayStation 5 was observed, nobody denied it or criticized DF. Sony fixed it because people weren't happy. Sadly, due to Nintendo fans the screen isn't getting fixed.
Dev1lXYZ
Member
Why is the Switch 2 on the low quality preset on Cyberpunk compared to the Steam Deck which I can run at medium or high quality presets? That's the test right there. You can't go by what DLSS is doing as XESS on the Steam Deck looks just as good, yet it has more populated traffic and people walking around? The comparison videos use the SD presets, but if those fools in the YT videos knew about XESS vs FSR 3 and how to change graphics settings the SD is doing quite a bit more will less frame drops.
Last edited:
Dev1lXYZ
Member
The Steam Deck simply has more raw power where it counts: more usable 66% more usuable RAM, a faster CPU, and the flexibility of a full PC. It handles demanding games and multitasking better, especially when you're running native PC titles. The Switch 2 is impressive with DLSS and great efficiency, but it's not built to go toe-to-toe with the Deck when it comes to pure performance.
crazyriddler
Member
Try setting the target resolution to 1080p in Steam Deck and then tell me about it.
And it is not true that it has more raw power, in cpu is debatable, but not in gpu. The amount of memory is irrelevant because for practical purposes is less, Steam Deck can not move some games that the S Series can because of lack of memory (such as Avatar or Indiana Jones), and that having 2 gigs less than the Switch 2.
yamaci17
Member
yup PC games have insane RAM requirements compared to what they run on consoles
as such steam deck does not have a memory advantage or whatsoever
this is hogwarts legacy at 720p lowest settings (which makes the game look worse than its ps4 version somehow)
10 gb ram usage + 5 gb vram usage
steam deck or rog ally having 16 gb ram is a necessity and not even enough for new games anymore as most of them will require 32 gb going forward
Last edited: