Arm A78C
Switch 2 Speculation
- Thread starter Goodtwin
- Start date
If it is the rumored custom T239, then it should be 8-core A78.
About features. As I know Tegra X1 in Switch work with shaders 6.0 and X1 PS4 have GPUs work with shaders 5.0. So at least in rhis Switch was more advanced. And Maxwell architecture were newer and more advanced overall, so maybe this is why on a less powerful Switch there are games what are with not so much worse graphics than they should be. Same could be on Switch 2. Power near PS4, graphics better than on PS4.
Yes. And still, games on the SD can look and play just as good as a PS4 game. Spiderman on the SD is looking better vs the PS4 version (running at a lower def of course). So it's not far fetched to see the SD as a PS4 equivalent (better on some aspect, worse on some)
Agree. It's just one other hint.
I agree. Still, good luck to console makers to sell a new machine with no perceived improvements. It's not because they can't do real generations updates anymore that they will successfully sell us "marginal updates". We're not supposed to be that stupid, not for something that's just entertainment.
Anyway, according to the rumors, T239 will likely use TSMC 4nm, which offer a nice bump vs 16nm (X1+) and even 7nm (Aerith) so all in all SD perfs into a Switch form factor is not a fantasy dream.
Isn't T239s (presumably close) relative, Orin, on Samsung 8nm? I wouldn't be surprised if T239 uses a Samsung process though the 8nm line hopefully is acknowledged as too old and too little an improvement over Mariko.
It's... complicated. The flow of rumors started with Samsung 8nm indeed. Samsung 5nm is still possible. But the general consensus is now more leaning towards TSMC 4nm for various reasons.
But for a complete history of T29 rumour mill, credit where credit's due: you should go check famiboard forum which is the best source of all things related to T239 (and most likely Switch 2 in general).
Has this been shared here? https://www.notebookcheck.net/Plaus...n-Foxconn-financial-news-report.732868.0.html
Pretty sure that's only while charging. Heaviest normal gaming loads is 12-15w.
So far, that's almost what PS5 and XBSeries have been. I'm surprised they managed to sell as much as they did with so few diferentiators.
I get it with respect to PS5 and XB Series S/X. To me, they lack value-added "upgrades" or differentiators from their predecessors aside from the SSD/fast storage. For the money, you simply aren't getting an appreciably different experience. If you had a PS4/Xbox One, the best value you get by upgrading at this point (beside the loading time) is access to newer games only produced for the current gen.
I do not believe the Switch and its successor are in a comparable position, even if the successor is merely a 5nm/4nm upgraded SoC without additional console functionality. The Switch is a cheaper device while enabling gaming anywhere -- not just the living room TV. When considering a purchase of the Switch, the (1) mobility of the device and (2) access to Nintendo first-party titles are the greatest justifications for the cost of entry.
Is a Switch 2 without an additional "gimmick" or "hook" worth another $300 to $400 if you already own a Switch? I think so. Unlike PS5 and XBox Series S/X, an upgraded SoC in a Switch 2 can reflect demonstrable image quality and performance improvements, roughly comparable to the improvements seen from PS3/XB360 to PS4/XBone. Imagine the "impossible Switch ports" analyzed by Digital Foundry (Witcher 3 comes to mind) on a Switch 2 with 2 to 3x CPU/GPU power and more RAM. Some of the more glaring cutbacks would not be needed, and the ports would not be so obviously compromised to fit onto the Switch. If you toss in DLSS or, at least, more modern upscaling, I expect most users would see immediate differences, as opposed to some of the cross-gen titles of the past 2 years.
Nintendo also needs to ensure the mobile experience remains as solid and convenient as Switch 1, if not improved (primarily battery life and screen quality). If, instead of pouring all the gains from a newer process node and more advanced CPU/GPU architectures into performance, Nintendo allocates some to additional power efficiency, I think the case for upgrading to a Switch 2 would be rather self-evident to potential buyers.
My name is Father_Murphy, and that's what I want in a Switch 2.....
I do not believe the Switch and its successor are in a comparable position, even if the successor is merely a 5nm/4nm upgraded SoC without additional console functionality. The Switch is a cheaper device while enabling gaming anywhere -- not just the living room TV. When considering a purchase of the Switch, the (1) mobility of the device and (2) access to Nintendo first-party titles are the greatest justifications for the cost of entry.
Is a Switch 2 without an additional "gimmick" or "hook" worth another $300 to $400 if you already own a Switch? I think so. Unlike PS5 and XBox Series S/X, an upgraded SoC in a Switch 2 can reflect demonstrable image quality and performance improvements, roughly comparable to the improvements seen from PS3/XB360 to PS4/XBone. Imagine the "impossible Switch ports" analyzed by Digital Foundry (Witcher 3 comes to mind) on a Switch 2 with 2 to 3x CPU/GPU power and more RAM. Some of the more glaring cutbacks would not be needed, and the ports would not be so obviously compromised to fit onto the Switch. If you toss in DLSS or, at least, more modern upscaling, I expect most users would see immediate differences, as opposed to some of the cross-gen titles of the past 2 years.
Nintendo also needs to ensure the mobile experience remains as solid and convenient as Switch 1, if not improved (primarily battery life and screen quality). If, instead of pouring all the gains from a newer process node and more advanced CPU/GPU architectures into performance, Nintendo allocates some to additional power efficiency, I think the case for upgrading to a Switch 2 would be rather self-evident to potential buyers.
My name is Father_Murphy, and that's what I want in a Switch 2.....
Frenetic Pony
Veteran
Graphics and gameplay have to wait as a thing for the new consoles. Gameplay in part because giant triple a gamedevs have grown into absolute suck. Assassin's Creed is literally less interactive in its latest iterations than 2, for one example. Not because people don't appreciate gameplay innovation, Breath of the Wild and Tears of the Kingdom both sold on that and are 2 of the top selling games of all time, but because these publishers just plain suck and the only thing the execs can envision is "better graphics" and "how can we turn this into an infinite revenue stream" and so that's the only people they promote internally. That and sexual harassers.
But! But if you pay attention not only does Star Citizen appear to be an actual game that might come out (they have $500 million in the bank or some ludicrous shit) but it appears they're taking so long because they're actually making that "space game" that everyone that thinks they want to be a gamedev one day imagines they want. Totally seamless open travel between planet sized (well, planet feeling sized) planets, in an MMO that actually has tech advancements for an MMO like persistent almost everything down to being able to put a gun down on a mountain on a planet and another player being able to and get it later, all the way up to player created bases. To call this a challenge in terms of tech is to vastly undersell it, literally no one's ever actually been able to do this before at full practical scales despite being the obvious dream (there have been small steps towards it, like Death Stranding). But it looks like they might be able to pull it off, and clearly this game isn't going to run on Switch or even PS4.
As for graphics, clearly A Plague Tale sequel was better looking than the quite good looking already first one, but that was a blip one off until this holiday season. Immortals of Aveum doesn't look original or maybe even fun, but it even more clearly demonstrates that at least you're getting better visuals with these new consoles. Almost too much on occasion, like with this opening vista where the screen is filled with so much detail and particle fx and shite that's hard to actually pick out or appreciate anything:
But is that enough for Nintendo fans? Maybe not, they're Nintendo fans, not Sony or PC or Xbox fans. I'd imagine there'll definitely be things other than just "CPU/GPU/Storage" updrages, likely something very tangible and immediate in terms of gameplay, likely a controller thing they'll sell you on. Better tracking, imagine bringing back Wiimote style stuff but now that tracking actually feels appreciably good, and maybe the neat stuff from Sony's Dualsense (if youv'e never tried it, adaptive triggers and much more nuanced force feedback are actually pretty cool in the tiny handful of games that support them) seem like the obvious things.
I kind of agree. Well, maybe not on the XBSeries since they don't seem to sell that good...
But the first games truly designed with this gen in mind are coming now, and yes, the jump in quality will be very "noticeable". So I guess people simply bought those machines knowing the games would eventually arrive...
Yet the target demographic of those consoles is definitely more tech oriented (not to say brainwashed by the "everything not 4K/120FPS is ugly and unplayable" marketing bullshit some are pushing)
I guess part of the Switch user base has likely aged and may fit into this group of people now. Question is: how many of them will switch to PS/XB instead of staying with the "inferior" Switch 2?
And part of the Switch user base simply can't tell (or don't care about) the difference between 720p/1080p or 4k content...
No matter what, this transition will be complex for Nintendo, and I can see the Switch 2 having a modest success "only".
On another note, we're past mid July now. I think even the most believers have abandoned their hopes for a 2023 release.
I'm still expecting a late March 2024 release, with a low clocked T239 and a concept that is near-indentical to the Switch1. But I'm also amazed we have basically 0 leak outside of some vague declarations from CEOs.
How is it possible to become that good at preventing leaks when you failed miserably for all previous consoles?
Well the gaming experience is more than just the graphics. As you said, playing a game like SF6 on the PS5 is so much better than on the PS4 for the loading times alone. And that must not be understated. It really is a game changer. The graphics are not though, and it's clear that between the 4K resolution eating up a lot of power, and the law of diminishing returns regarding all the visual fidelity stuff, it will be very hard to sell new consoles based on power alone (except to a niche of people I described above
)Maybe the Switch 2 hardware could deliver a jump comparable to the one we get from the PS3 to the PS4. But maybe it will not be perceived as such on that many games. All the Mario games (Odyssey, kart, 2D, 23/3D, sports) are beautiful on the Switch. And the Mario games are the one that sell a Nintendo machine.
Maybe you're right when you say Nintendo should primarily focus on battery life, but that will come at the expense of power. That's the pb with the Switch form factor... we can't have it all.
My personal wish would be for Nintendo to go as hard as they can on the power side for the first revision of the Switch 2 (keeping the battery life to around 2h30-3h30). This leaves room for later more energy efficient revisions and may future proof the thing enough to make a pro revision useless (I'm not a fan of pro revisions... it just make the OG model seems weak and push people to buy the new one, which means more e waste for nothing)
Sources: Nintendo targets 2024 with next-gen console | VGC
Key partners have development kits ahead of a planned launch…
www.videogameschronicle.com
So sounds like there is some corroboration around 8" LCD and 512GB internal storage
So what are we thinking for cartridges?
SD Express?
This could grant 1GB/s+ of read bandwidth that will help it stay within a similar relative distance to the XSX/PS5 for I/O capabilities, while also retaining backwards compatibility.
Or would 'new format' mean a truly different format, with Nintendo perhaps using a secondary SD card slot for backwards compatibility purposes?
SD Express?
This could grant 1GB/s+ of read bandwidth that will help it stay within a similar relative distance to the XSX/PS5 for I/O capabilities, while also retaining backwards compatibility.
Or would 'new format' mean a truly different format, with Nintendo perhaps using a secondary SD card slot for backwards compatibility purposes?
I really doubt it. The cost is just too much.So what are we thinking for cartridges?
SD Express?
This could grant 1GB/s+ of read bandwidth that will help it stay within a similar relative distance to the XSX/PS5 for I/O capabilities, while also retaining backwards compatibility.
Or would 'new format' mean a truly different format, with Nintendo perhaps using a secondary SD card slot for backwards compatibility purposes?
cheapchips
Veteran
Carts won't be SD cards. It's likely to be the newer version of whatever Macronix provides for the Switch.
Then eMMC and still SD cards for storage? Works for the deck.
Then eMMC and still SD cards for storage? Works for the deck.
