Support NeoGAF

[Klosshufvud]

Elaborate cooling and 60Wh+ battery will drive up cost, noise, and weight. Nintendo is making a mass market kid friendly device. Those tradeoffs will most certainly impact the appeal to a lot of people.

I doubt a slightly larger lithium ion battery and an extra fan adds hundreds of dollars of production costs. But yes Nintendo is cheap and that's also an issue. But there's also the issue of removable Joy cons leaving minimum space left for cooling and battery. The space is not there.

 

[kikii]

Have we found the Nintendo equivalent of Colt?

for me comes to mind that misterXmedia or smt like that, who somehow managed to calculate that SeriesX is somewhat 26TF ^^

 

[Woopah]

for me comes to mind that misterXmedia or smt like that, who somehow managed to calculate that SeriesX is somewhat 26TF ^^

I'm always curious if these Twitter people are real, or just an elaborate troll.

 

[FireFly]

Elaborate cooling and 60Wh+ battery will drive up cost, noise, and weight. Nintendo is making a mass market kid friendly device. Those tradeoffs will most certainly impact the appeal to a lot of people.

Also Nintendo may be planning a Switch 2 Lite, which would further limit the space for cooling. (Albeit probably on a newer manufacturing process).

 

[HogIsland]

Steam Deck can basically run all AAA games. So long as the Switch 2 is better than that then I'm happy

Since it won't be better than that, I hope you find some other way to be happy

 

[Buggy Loop]

No, but I think you are wrong here. Jaguar got them the console design wins and massively improved their perception over Bulldozer (which seems to have been a costly mindshare and money pit). Jaguar (and Bobcat before it) were the ones that inverted the trend and gave them time to come up with and launch Zen. The fall of AMD in those days was not started by Jaguar.

Sure it was not a comeback story as much as Banias / Pentium M was for Intel, but it helped a lot.

For what game consoles needed, it did its job. GPU was again the focus of the transistors’ budget and overall cost. No wonder both console manufacturers pivoted to the same CPU and created semi-custom SoC to hide some of the weaknesses and max on the strengths they had.

I’m not saying Jaguar was the one that almost bankrupted them, but at this period in time everything had better IPC than AMD and that long stretch almost killed them. Had Zen not been a huge step up I think they would have bit the dust

It’s actually thanks to consoles they survived that period and could R&D something worthwhile. But they were on thin wire.

But Jaguar is still a bad CPU. I mean it’s benched. They were kind of cornered and in bad timing to not have many options for an APU. The irony also being that AMD was the first to implement, in January 2014, ARM A57 cores, which they did for a server chip. Timing was close.

 

[scarlet0pimp]

I dont think it will be as powerful as the steam deck.
Steam deck is massive and really has really loud fans, Switch 2 will smaller and quieter. Maybe the chipset in switch is capable of matching Steam deck and being more efficient though

 

[BlackTron]

Nowhere close to being true, the difference between SW2 and modern consoles is enormous. XSS has been the red headed step child of the consoles all gen long and SW2 will be lucky to compete with that console

It's nowhere close to being literally true, but I'm saying that I think it's close to being practically true.

Of course NS2 won't compete with PS5 in real TF numbers. It'll just compete with it in terms of what non-forum people see on the screen and can be arsed to care about.

Average Joe ate up Switch 1 while perceiving the power gap, more as time went on. On NS2 the line will be blurred. Yes there will be a difference, but we aren't talking Mario vs Sonic 1 here.

People take "It's a PS4!" or "It's not as good as Series S!" too literally. Switch 2's chip isn't as strong in TF as that in XSS. But the overall NS2 vs XSS should be comparable in real life use in the end, with a level of caveats we're unsure of yet-for reasons I've stated directly to you too many times to repeat again. The proof will be games coming out on time. I don't think they would have needed to delay BG3 for it, or remove the 2 player. We are talking in leapfrogged tech features it's not a 1:1 this better than that situation.

 

[James Sawyer Ford]

It'll just compete with it in terms of what non-forum people see on the screen and can be arsed to care about.

This isn’t going to be case at all. This isn’t like going from one gpu like to a small tier above where it’s hard to notice sometimes. This is a generational difference in power and it’s going to be easily noticeable

 

[Kataploom]

I can see Nintendo having fun with Ray Tracing for Mario and Luigi as they don't have to push raster with their art style. A game based around lighting is inevitable.

The reason Nintendo wouldn't have to push raster I think it their games are exclusive for their own single console, they don't have to worry about multiplatform development so they can use it to speed up development.

Not saying they definitely will but I wouldn't discard it, the reason why many of us don't like using RT currently is because of the performance penalty because it is being used as a gimmick on top of rasterized lighting model, if only RT is used and games built around it, I'm sure the performance will be much better.

 

[diffusionx]

I dont think it will be as powerful as the steam deck.
Steam deck is massive and really has really loud fans, Switch 2 will smaller and quieter. Maybe the chipset in switch is capable of matching Steam deck and being more efficient though

The one thing is that we are talking about is x86 vs ARM. see what Apple was able to do in terms of efficiency and power when they switched.

 

[Silver Wattle]

Oof this thing is much weaker than I expected, it's likely worse than even the SD.

 

[HogIsland]

The reason Nintendo wouldn't have to push raster I think it their games are exclusive for their own single console, they don't have to worry about multiplatform development so they can use it to speed up development.

Not saying they definitely will but I wouldn't discard it, the reason why many of us don't like using RT currently is because of the performance penalty because it is being used as a gimmick on top of rasterized lighting model, if only RT is used and games built around it, I'm sure the performance will be much better.

the most prominent example being Indiana Jones and the Great Circle, a game that would run at 5fps on Switch 2.

 

[Ozriel]

Since it won't be better than that, I hope you find some other way to be happy

It WILL be better than the Steamdeck, though. You’re getting games designed for and optimized for the Switch 2. Steamdeck runs games not designed for the hardware

I dont think it will be as powerful as the steam deck.
Steam deck is massive and really has really loud fans, Switch 2 will smaller and quieter. Maybe the chipset in switch is capable of matching Steam deck and being more efficient though

ROG Ally is smaller than the Deck and still more powerful.
Size isn’t always everything.

 

[Kataploom]

I dont think it will be as powerful as the steam deck.
Steam deck is massive and really has really loud fans, Switch 2 will smaller and quieter. Maybe the chipset in switch is capable of matching Steam deck and being more efficient though

They can always launch a revision that completely replaces the OG model ala NDS->NDS Lite

 

[Kataploom]

the most prominent example being Indiana Jones and the Great Circle, a game that would run at 5fps on Switch 2.

If it runs on Steam Deck quite well, then it should run much better con Switch 2 even if the theoretical TF are around the same, just by not having to worry about SD overhead (SO + translation layer) and Ampere being leagues better than RDNA 2 in RT

 

[moogman]

The reason Nintendo wouldn't have to push raster I think it their games are exclusive for their own single console, they don't have to worry about multiplatform development so they can use it to speed up development.

Not saying they definitely will but I wouldn't discard it, the reason why many of us don't like using RT currently is because of the performance penalty because it is being used as a gimmick on top of rasterized lighting model, if only RT is used and games built around it, I'm sure the performance will be much better.

Nintendo are very good at concentrating on something and using it in creative ways. With access to RT I can see them using it in cool ways and actually building a game around lighting (at a cost to rasterization). Most of their Mario games have a concept which they play with, so I can see that being the game we'll see it with.

 

[HogIsland]

It WILL be better than the Steamdeck, though. You’re getting games designed for and optimized for the Switch 2. Steamdeck runs games not designed for the hardware

We're gonna find out really quick how little this matters. Probably Elden Ring will be a launch-window title and the compromises will be clear to see.

 

[Kataploom]

BTW I'm noticing ZERO pop-in in MK9 footage, tho still can see how they're relying on rasterized lighting and low res textures, it looks like the game was probably in development for Switch 1 and they moved it to Switch 2? I mean, I know the TV output segment they showed might probably tell nothing but it looks like a very sharp picture in the large TV, and Nintendo tend to polish those details a lot so I'm kinda sure if it wasn't supposed to look that way IRL, they would not show it like that

 

[Negotiator]

The irony also being that AMD was the first to implement, in January 2014, ARM A57 cores, which they did for a server chip. Timing was close.

Not even close, PS4/XB1 APUs were taped out in 2012.

IIRC, Jaguar and FX (Piledriver?) CPUs had similar IPC, but Jaguar had much lower clocks.

Cell/Xenon had way worse IPC (1/5), less general-purpose cores, lack of OoO:



They only excelled at SIMD/FP workloads (to make up for the lack of GPGPU compute in RSX/Xenos). Most people who say "Cell was faster than Jaguar" don't even know what the fuck they're talking about.

P Panajev2001a is right when he says the majority of the transistor budget is allocated to the GPU and the CPU barely gets 30% of that (PS4 APU cost $100, so the Jaguar CPU only cost $30).

For 30 bucks it wasn't that bad (the best you could buy for $30 on PCs back then was a dual-core Celeron, which wasn't a match in MT workloads, even though it was faster in ST) and it forced devs (see: Doom 2016/Doom Eternal/Gears 5/Uncharted 4) to adopt multi-threading and a GPGPU offload mindset (ND already had experience from the Cell SPU/Uncharted 2 era).

Even on PCs it's very common to pair a $100 CPU (12400F) with a $600 GPU (RTX 4070). It's a waste of money to buy overly expensive CPUs for a marginal improvement in framerates, while it does make sense to buy a faster GPU and invest in AI upscaling (DLSS, XeSS, FSR4, PSSR).

I think PS6 will stick to some sort of 8-core Zen 5 or 6, with cut-down L3 cache and maybe cut-down AVX512 units (I sincerely hope not, since full fat AVX512 is a boon for PS3 emulation and Sony knows they desperately need to replace those decade-old PS3 server motherboards on PS Now cloud).

TBH, the reason we get more 60 fps games in the PS5/XSX era is because game devs cannot afford to max out graphics/eye candy without it taking a toll on them (ballooning AAA budgets + crunch).

Zen 2 may have helped a bit (probably not that much, since many people consider it "Jaguar Vol2"), but I believe AAA dev costs give a better explanation.

It was always possible to make 60 fps games from the get-go regardless of CPU horsepower (hell, it was possible back in the 80s with Motorola 68k, so why not with Jaguar?).

 

[Hero_Select]

Since it won't be better than that, I hope you find some other way to be happy

Handheld puts it on par of the steam deck already with these specs. Docked will be even better. I'll be happy.

 

[Interfectum]

Oof this thing is much weaker than I expected, it's likely worse than even the SD.

Switch 2 will probably run the same games better than SD due to the games being coded to run on Switch 2 specifically and the hardware based upscaling.

 

[Hero_Select]

Switch 2 will probably run the same games better than SD due to the games being coded to run on Switch 2 specifically and the hardware based upscaling.

And the more modern chips.

I think some people really just want to shit on it because console fanboys will fanboy

 

[LordOcidax]

Looks like DF is in line with my expectations.

 

[SonGoku]

If the rumors that we are bickering about are true, it means that NS2 would be about 10 times more powerful in handheld mode and 3-4 times in docked mode, before any other boosts mostly from dlss and ram.

Given that those titles like Zelda, Doom, Xenoblade, Witcher etc ran on .15tf without exploding, and NS2 has a baseline of 1.7 in handheld mode, we'd be unshackled from some royal jank.

Yeah that means the raw tf number is like a PS4. Doesn't mean it will actually run like a real PS4 or that the chip is nearly as flawed or bad as Jaguar.

With Switch I think even casual users were aware of the performance tradeoff and were just willing to make it. But with 2 I don't believe it will as apparent to begin with. Of course a console will be better but people won't be bothered to worry about it that much unless the Switch 2 encounters jank and it won't. It'll likely just have toned down resource hog effects that largely go unnoticed without comparing versions.

Based on the alleged leaks im afraid Switch 2 will be in a similar situation to the Switch1 when tasked with running games made for PS5/XS consoles
Its roughly half as powerful as a Series S with a much weaker CPU to boot

So expect similar downgrades and low resolutions/fps when compared to base consoles.

Nowhere close to being true, the difference between SW2 and modern consoles is enormous. XSS has been the red headed step child of the consoles all gen long and SW2 will be lucky to compete with that console

Based on the leaks its half as powerful as the Series S, so expect either halved fps or halved resolution or worse a combination of both with scaled back settings as seen on DF test downclocked RTX 2050 equivalent to the Switch GPU, quoting myself here:

Spoiler

So i finally watched the entire video and can say based on it that Series S settings are only viable halving the framerate or resolution and in some cases going even lower. For example a 30fps/1080 DLSS performance target is possible if the Series S is targeting 60 fps at 1080p as seen in Cyberpunk 2077 where Series S runs at 60fps on a 1080p target (800p lowest), on the DF test the RTX 2050 runs console settings at half the framerate: 30fps with 1080p DLSS performance (540p rendered resolution)

For games where Series S targets 30fps/1080p or very low resolutions at 60fps (540p to 720p) the switch 2 would have to scale back settings for a 1080p DLSS performance/balanced reconstruction. As is the case with A Plage Tale Requiem which targets similar SX/PS5 settings on Series S at 900p/30 fps and the RTX 2050 from DF targeted 1080p DLSS Balanced (626p) at the lowest possible settings with a shaky 30fps which even dropping to 900p DLSS Balanced (522p) could not lock despite only rendering 33% the pixels of the Series S at one step lower settings (low vs medium)

Besides CP the closest game to the Series S settings tested was control which on Series S runs at 900p/60fps and the RTX 2050 even on DLSS performance (540p) could not match Series S performance resulting mostly on 50 to 60 fps "that can go lower" while rendering 36% the pixels of the series s (900p vs 540p)

Fortnite again shows the Series S is twice as performant averaging 73% of 1080p while mantaining a locked 60fps
The RTX 2050 on the other hand targeted 1080p DLSS performance, rendering 50% the pixels of 1080p while targeting half the refresh rate at 30fps

1440p DLSS performance target seems largely unviable in anything but the less demanding games where Series S targets 1440P/60fps

Found interesting how the one PS4 optimized game engine tested (Death Stranding) showed comparable raw performance to the Base PS4 before DLSS kicks in, giving credence to the TPU relative performance charts i posted earlier that pegged the 7870 at 26% the raster performance of the RTX 3060

 

[Euler007]

Damn, I was hoping for at least PS4Pro performance docked. Hope the DLSS fanboys are right (doubtful).

 

[Self High Five]

It WILL be better than the Steamdeck, though. You’re getting games designed for and optimized for the Switch 2. Steamdeck runs games not designed for the hardware

Those games are optimized for $70 full priced titles that will only release a few times a year. Besides the backwards compatibility of switch games and a few SNES and N64 titles for a monthly fee, the value proposition in 2025 is completely antiquated

100k games available on Steam with the vast majority compatible with Steam OS with the option to emulate most Switch games and every other Nintendo console for free.

 

[BlackTron]

Based on the alleged leaks im afraid Switch 2 will be in a similar situation to the Switch1 when tasked with running games made for PS5/XS consoles
Its roughly half as powerful as a Series S with a much weaker CPU to boot

So expect similar downgrades and low resolutions/fps when compared to base consoles.

Based on the leaks its half as powerful as the Series S, so expect either halved fps or halved resolution or worse a combination of both with scaled back settings as seen on DF test downclocked RTX 2050 equivalent to the Switch GPU, quoting myself here:

I completely understand the reason this seems likely, which is the raw number to number comparisons. I realize we don't know anything for sure but I still can't agree.

Series S is an AMD console with FSR. Switch 2 has less raw TF OF COURSE, but newer nvidia tech and DLSS. The Series S is using too much of its power throwing pixels. I frankly don't know exactly (how could I), but once you deduct the perf bump from DLSS, the two systems may be trading blows, especially since NS2 has a non-shit RAM setup.

I'm optimistic and want to wait and see here, it's too early to just say "we already know it's half XSS end of story".

 

[SonGoku]

I completely understand the reason this seems likely, which is the raw number to number comparisons. I realize we don't know anything for sure but I still can't agree.

Series S is an AMD console with FSR. Switch 2 has less raw TF OF COURSE, but newer nvidia tech and DLSS. The Series S is using too much of its power throwing pixels. I frankly don't know exactly (how could I), but once you deduct the perf bump from DLSS, the two systems may be trading blows, especially since NS2 has a non-shit RAM setup.

I'm optimistic and want to wait and see here, it's too early to just say "we already know it's half XSS end of story".

Im not comparing raw numbers or TF figures rather relative performance benchmarks from TPU and Digital Foundry own test bench which used a GPU equivalent to the rumored Switch 2 GPU

The results are in line with TPU relative performance benchmarks: The equivalent Switch2 GPU is half the performance of the Series S and not the Series S is not wasting power throwing pixels its already relegated to lower resolutions on the more demanding games with a 1080p/900p target than can slip to 800/540p in dynamic resolution

As seen on DF video it does not have nowhere near the AI grunt to make up for the performance delta with DLSS
A game that runs 1080p/900p native on Series S would run on the equivalent Switch GPU at DLSS performance (540p) with either halved framerate if Series S is targeting 60fps or scaled back settings in case the Series S is already targeting 30 fps

I'm optimistic and want to wait and see here, it's too early to just say "we already know it's half XSS end of story".

That is right, the leaks could very well be wrong, my assessment is based on the assumption the leaks are real.

 

[BlackTron]

Im not comparing raw numbers or TF figures rather relative performance benchmarks from TPU and Digital Foundry own test bench which used a GPU equivalent to the rumored Switch 2 GPUhttps://www.neogaf.com/threads/swit...-for-the-cpu-is-hopium.1679615/post-270013005

Sorry, in the post before you said "Switch" instead of "Switch 2" so I overlooked it, should have noticed you weren't wasting my time though lol.

The results are in line with TPU relative performance benchmarks: The equivalent Switch2 GPU is half the performance of the Series S and not the Series S is not wasting power throwing pixels its already relegated to lower resolutions on the more demanding games with a 1080p/900p target than can slip to 800/540p in dynamic resolution

As seen on DF video it does not have nowhere near the AI grunt to make up for the performance delta with DLSS
A game that runs 1080p/900p native on Series S would run on the equivalent Switch GPU at DLSS performance (540p) with either halved framerate if Series S is targeting 60fps or scaled back settings in case the Series S is already targeting 30 fps

That is right, the leaks could very well be wrong, my assessment is based assuming the leaks are real

I don't mean that Series S is "wasting" power throwing pixels, just that a greater proportion of it is being used on that task compared to NS2. And I've already said, I expect games to appear samey, with reduced effects that can be resource hogs. In the end, we arrive at the same destination.

 

[SonGoku]

Sorry, in the post before you said "Switch" instead of "Switch 2" so I overlooked it, should have noticed you weren't wasting my time though lol.

Maybe i forgot to add a 2 here and there but the gist of what i was trying to say is that the Switch 2 will be in a similar situation the first Switch was when running current gen games. Similar cutbacks to make the ports happen

I don't mean that Series S is "wasting" power throwing pixels, just that a greater proportion of it is being used on that task compared to NS2. And I've already said, I expect games to appear samey, with reduced effects that can be resource hogs. In the end, we arrive at the same destination.

But as you can see on DF test bench even when the equivalent Switch 2 GPU (downclocked RTX 2050) is rendering only 25 to 30% the pixels the Series S is, its still doing so at either half the framerate or with cut back settings across the board, DLSS is not making up for the power delta and its not free either specially with such a low amount of Tensor cores

and comparing native 1080p/900p to DLSS perfomance (540p) and even Balanced (626p) is definitely noticeable image quality drop. I say this from experience using DLSS on a 1080p monitor. DLSS Quality looks good, DLSS balanced is a noticeable hit in IQ but looks acceptable still and performance is ugly

 

[GoldenEye98]

It's nowhere close to being literally true, but I'm saying that I think it's close to being practically true.

Of course NS2 won't compete with PS5 in real TF numbers. It'll just compete with it in terms of what non-forum people see on the screen and can be arsed to care about.

Average Joe ate up Switch 1 while perceiving the power gap, more as time went on. On NS2 the line will be blurred. Yes there will be a difference, but we aren't talking Mario vs Sonic 1 here.

People take "It's a PS4!" or "It's not as good as Series S!" too literally. Switch 2's chip isn't as strong in TF as that in XSS. But the overall NS2 vs XSS should be comparable in real life use in the end, with a level of caveats we're unsure of yet-for reasons I've stated directly to you too many times to repeat again. The proof will be games coming out on time. I don't think they would have needed to delay BG3 for it, or remove the 2 player. We are talking in leapfrogged tech features it's not a 1:1 this better than that situation.

Leapfrog in tech features? It's based on Ampere which came out in 2020.

Games are essentially optimized around portable mode on Switch. And the raw power of portable mode of Switch 2 is quite a bit less than XSS.

I'm not saying that PS4 gen games won't run decently...but there would be more compromises to get recent AAA games running on it than XSS. I guess an 8" display could hide some of the ugliness better though...

 

[Ozriel]

Those games are optimized for $70 full priced titles that will only release a few times a year. Besides the backwards compatibility of switch games and a few SNES and N64 titles for a monthly fee, the value proposition in 2025 is completely antiquated

100k games available on Steam with the vast majority compatible with Steam OS with the option to emulate most Switch games and every other Nintendo console for free.

I think you’ll see for yourself when Switch 2 releases how it stacks up. It’ll most certainly play AAA games better than the Deck, which is already struggling at this point.

The Deck struggles to emulate demanding Switch games, and will not be able to play Switch 2 titles.

For sure the Deck will be better if you want an emulation device or intend to play older PC games.

 

[Self High Five]

I think you’ll see for yourself when Switch 2 releases how it stacks up. It’ll most certainly play AAA games better than the Deck, which is already struggling at this point.

The Deck struggles to emulate demanding Switch games, and will not be able to play Switch 2 titles.

For sure the Deck will be better if you want an emulation device or intend to play older PC games.

Steam Deck can already play some of the most popular Switch games at better resolution and framerates due to mods but the Steam Deck was released years ago.

There have been several PC hand held devices since that can keep up with AAA games with much deeper libraries and options (portable xbox or PS if you wish + 100k steam games).

The value proposition for a closed dedicated Nintendo handheld device with a limited library is so antiquated in 2025. What made the Switch special was the lack of competition for a comparable device in 2017. CES 2025 had better devices than what was shown in their reveal.

 

[LordOcidax]

Steam Deck can already play some of the most popular Switch games at better resolution and framerates due to mods but the Steam Deck was released years ago.

There have been several PC hand held devices since that can keep up with AAA games with much deeper libraries and options (portable xbox or PS if you wish + 100k steam games).

The value proposition for a closed dedicated Nintendo handheld device with a limited library is so antiquated in 2025. What made the Switch special was the lack of competition for a comparable device in 2017. CES 2025 had better devices than what was shown in their reveal.

Even in 2025 the Switch 1 still selling more than the best selling PC Handheld + Every other PC Handheld combined, the Switch 2 is going to surpass the entire pc handheld market lifetime sales in the first 6 months or less like is nothing.

 

[Ozriel]

Steam Deck can already play some of the most popular Switch games at better resolution and framerates due to mods but the Steam Deck was released years ago.

There have been several PC hand held devices since that can keep up with AAA games with much deeper libraries and options (portable xbox or PS if you wish + 100k steam games).

The value proposition for a closed dedicated Nintendo handheld device with a limited library is so antiquated in 2025. What made the Switch special was the lack of competition for a comparable device in 2017. CES 2025 had better devices than what was shown in their reveal.

Let me break it to you as gently as possible.

In the first three months of sale alone, the Switch 2 will likely outsell all the PC handheld devices combined. Deck + Ally + Legion Go + MSI Claw + all the Aya Neo stuff.

 

[Edmund]

Is Nintengod the Senjutsu Sage of Nintendo?

 

[S0ULZB0URNE]

Is Nintengod the Senjutsu Sage of Nintendo?

He would be but seems to lack intelligence.

 

[HogIsland]

Let me break it to you as gently as possible.

In the first three months of sale alone, the Switch 2 will likely outsell all the PC handheld devices combined. Deck + Ally + Legion Go + MSI Claw + all the Aya Neo stuff.

It will be selling primarily to people who own a Switch 1, which doesn't grow Nintendo's audience. PC handhelds are additive to the worldwide install base of gaming-capable PCs. There's one big addressable audience playing on all kinds of hardware. Even if a developer never designs their game to be played on a Legion Go, it will work for the Legion Go player.

 

[llien]

. It almost bankrupted AMD because it was so bad. Jaguar

FOR FUCKS SAKE.

Just how f*cking detached from reality can a take be?

My freaking god.

In the failed Buldozer times, Bobcat and later Jaguar (not just notebooks, but all those console wins) was one of the things that kept the underdog (that today costs more than Intel) afloat.

"Could not compete with Atom" BS, my god.
Newer Atom was faster (Jaguar is the AMD A4-5000), check where the older Atom is.:

Bot Jaguar and Atom are from the same very low power, high perf/$ market, direct competitors.

In that area AMD could at least punch back. Things were much worse in the bigger CPU space.

 

[Ozriel]

It will be selling primarily to people who own a Switch 1, which doesn't grow Nintendo's audience. PC handhelds are additive to the worldwide install base of gaming-capable PCs. There's one big addressable audience playing on all kinds of hardware. Even if a developer never designs their game to be played on a Legion Go, it will work for the Legion Go player.

PC handhelds are probably even less additive than the Switch 2 would be. The Deck is the frontrunner and it was only sold on Steam, with the faithful ordering it for portability. The likes of the ROG Ally and Legion Go are even more niche.

And even if Switch 2 is selling mainly to the 150 million strong market, that’s a significant market indeed.

 

[FireFly]

It will be selling primarily to people who own a Switch 1, which doesn't grow Nintendo's audience. PC handhelds are additive to the worldwide install base of gaming-capable PCs. There's one big addressable audience playing on all kinds of hardware. Even if a developer never designs their game to be played on a Legion Go, it will work for the Legion Go player.

I am sure Nintendo will be fine selling to the almost 150M people who bought the Switch 1.

 

[Negotiator]

Personally, I don't even care about power efficiency (Ampere 8nm) or lack of OLED, since I plan to used it in docked mode.

Nintendo is determined to release the best hybrid console they can at $399.

Would you like it if it had OLED, but the SoC was a lot slower?

People need to understand that the baseline SoC (nVidia T239) will carry us for the next 7-8 years.

A weaker SoC cannot be remedied with a new SKU, since games have to be developed for the old SoC too.

A weak LCD screen can be remedied with a new OLED SKU without affecting game development at all.

I'm sure it will be a beast for 1st party Nintendo games and if you care about maxing out graphics in 3rd party games, PCMR (RTX 5090) is for you. Neither Nintendo, nor Sony/MS.

 

[Parazels]

Steam Deck can basically run all AAA games. So long as the Switch 2 is better than that then I'm happy

The Switch 2 can have a short term advantage today, however:
1) Steam Deck & Co (Valve, Asus, Lenovo) release better models every year (!) with no problems with compatibility, optimization ets.
2) Steam Deck & Co already run the huge library of modern games, which have yet to be ported on Switch 2 (certainly, not all of them).

 

[Hero_Select]

The Switch 2 can have a short term advantage today, however:
1) Steam Deck & Co (Valve, Asus, Lenovo) release better models every year (!) with no problems with compatibility, optimization ets.
2) Steam Deck & Co already run the huge library of modern games, which have yet to be ported on Switch 2 (certainly, not all of them).

They're PC handhelds, of course they run more games. I was only making the comparison on power because everyone is obsessed with it. If the steam deck can run new games like Kingdom Come Deliverance 2 then I fully expect the Switch 2 to be able to as well so if (hopefully) companies decide to port over more games to the Switch 2 as well.