Switch 2 Speculation

I didn't remembered the T239 leak.
At the moment the closest model is Orin NX with thermal between 10W and 25W. I don't know if they are counting memory consumption too.
Remove half the ram.
Remove all the automotive specific stuff.
Move from sam 8nm to tsmc 7nm++ and gain 30% just from this.
It's in the switch range but still too much.


Aaaaaaaaaanyway... Why are we all supposing that it will just be exactly like the switch but faster?
Because switch is winning formula for them. The only reason to bring out a new system is to refresh the machine with newer tech. They reasonably can't make another type of system anyway because they fused their development company for their handhelds and console into one. The switch concept of a machine that does both is the final conclusion of Nintendo hardware as a concept
 
Smartphones are already reaching PS4 level of graphic prowess.

The newest Snapdragon 8 Gen2 (4nm) and iPhone 14 GPU (iPhone 14 Pro has the same GPU) are quite capable. Xiaomi 13 Pro can run Genshin Impact at 1440p60fps but needs more than passive cooling at 12W power consumption. They even run it at 4K and still get 30fps.
That's true, but Nintendo never goes for new hardware these days under any circumstances. So it's not much use
 
Smartphones are already reaching PS4 level of graphic prowess.

The newest Snapdragon 8 Gen2 (4nm) and iPhone 14 GPU (iPhone 14 Pro has the same GPU) are quite capable. Xiaomi 13 Pro can run Genshin Impact at 1440p60fps but needs more than passive cooling at 12W power consumption. They even run it at 4K and still get 30fps.
The Xiaomi 13 Pro is a $900 device.

The Switch is a $300 device, and that price includes two detachable Joycons, a dock, and cartridge slot, and the margins need to amortize R&D costs that I would think are higher than a cookie-cutter cellphone. I wouldn't be surprised if the BOM budget for the SoC in a Switch is 4-5x lower than that in a high-end smartphone.
 
Aaaaaaaaaanyway... Why are we all supposing that it will just be exactly like the switch but faster?
There will probably be some sort of unique features, but because of the success, and continued success its very likely the successor will be fairly straight forward. The current CEO at Nintendo is not the creative type like Iwata was. I find it very unlikely someone who is more business oriented will decide to go a completely different direction after the success of the Switch.

Yes, but still switch is dominating with specs that at the time of launch were already comparable to a low end phone.
The Tegra X1 was not low end in 2017. This is a common misconception because the Tegra X1 was on the market for nearly two years when Switch released, but its graphics performance was still very competitive in 2017 compared to other mobile SOC's in 2017

Here is a low end phone:

Capture.PNG

Here is a high end phone:
Capture2.PNG
 
The Xiaomi 13 Pro is a $900 device.

The Switch is a $300 device, and that price includes two detachable Joycons, a dock, and cartridge slot, and the margins need to amortize R&D costs that I would think are higher than a cookie-cutter cellphone. I wouldn't be surprised if the BOM budget for the SoC in a Switch is 4-5x lower than that in a high-end smartphone.
I'm guessing the Snapdragon 8 Gen2 isn't the most expensive part of the bill of materials (BOM), yes?
 
There will probably be some sort of unique features, but because of the success, and continued success its very likely the successor will be fairly straight forward. The current CEO at Nintendo is not the creative type like Iwata was. I find it very unlikely someone who is more business oriented will decide to go a completely different direction after the success of the Switch.


The Tegra X1 was not low end in 2017. This is a common misconception because the Tegra X1 was on the market for nearly two years when Switch released, but its graphics performance was still very competitive in 2017 compared to other mobile SOC's in 2017

Here is a low end phone:

View attachment 8166

Here is a high end phone:
View attachment 8167

True, but the switch version was underclocked vs the shield tv version, right ?

Having say that, i don't like the comparaison vs other SoC running only android for gaming, since I guess the Nintendo/nVidia os is much more tunned for gaming. I remember when DF tested the nvidia game on the shield tv, it was kind of a mess despite the good hardware.

Anyway, I believe the switch 2 will not sell as well as the first one. The first one was innovative and without opponent. Now, they will have to fight against, well, the switch one, and things like steam deck... I don't know... I hope one day Nintendo devs will have the chance to explore powerful hardware again...
 
True, but the switch version was underclocked vs the shield tv version, right ?

Having say that, i don't like the comparaison vs other SoC running only android for gaming, since I guess the Nintendo/nVidia os is much more tunned for gaming. I remember when DF tested the nvidia game on the shield tv, it was kind of a mess despite the good hardware.

Anyway, I believe the switch 2 will not sell as well as the first one. The first one was innovative and without opponent. Now, they will have to fight against, well, the switch one, and things like steam deck... I don't know... I hope one day Nintendo devs will have the chance to explore powerful hardware again...
They will retire the switch fast so there's no need to worry about competing with previous hw.
 
I thought he meant, will people upgrade to Switch2 if they already have the first one?
If the switch 2 offers full BC with performance improvements for older titles (e.g. 60fps Botw, Astral Chain) then I will definitely upgrade. There’s also the potential for last-gen (PS4) ports, although the Deck has tempered some of that excitement.
 
They will if Nintendo stops releasing games for it, which is inevitable.

Nintendo might do that, but I compare the Switch more to DS et al, so I assume it will be similar.

If the switch 2 offers full BC with performance improvements for older titles (e.g. 60fps Botw, Astral Chain) then I will definitely upgrade. There’s also the potential for last-gen (PS4) ports, although the Deck has tempered some of that excitement.

Sure, but how many kids are in that frame of mind and can get their parents to splash on a new one. Then again I have no idea about the breakdown of the demographics of the switch user base.
 
Modern Vintage Gamer released a new video about the topic of BC for the next Switch console.


I think games would be required to be patched, and Nintendo will patch all their first party software to work with the new hardware, and 3rd parties will also add compatibility to many of their titles. BUT.. ensuring that there's compatibility with the old cartridges could throw a bit of a wrench in that idea.

IMO it would be a massive mistake for Nintendo to just ignore BC and not do anything to bring people's libraries ahead with them. I wouldn't put it past Nintendo though. They might try to use a new proprietary cartridge format and use that as a reason why they can't do BC at a hardware level.

With Nintendo, things could go any direction. But who knows, maybe Nvidia and Nintendo have some elegant solution in software?
 
Modern Vintage Gamer released a new video about the topic of BC for the next Switch console.


I think games would be required to be patched, and Nintendo will patch all their first party software to work with the new hardware, and 3rd parties will also add compatibility to many of their titles. BUT.. ensuring that there's compatibility with the old cartridges could throw a bit of a wrench in that idea.

IMO it would be a massive mistake for Nintendo to just ignore BC and not do anything to bring people's libraries ahead with them. I wouldn't put it past Nintendo though. They might try to use a new proprietary cartridge format and use that as a reason why they can't do BC at a hardware level.

With Nintendo, things could go any direction. But who knows, maybe Nvidia and Nintendo have some elegant solution in software?
This video started a lot of debate for sure. Like most people, I think it is a given that Switch 2 will have to have proper BC to be successful. And I can't think of any technical difficulties Nintendo/NVidia could not overcome.

On the tech specs front, it seems we got 0 real leak since a long time, and that most people take for granted that it will be T239 based. And, well, let's assume it will be the case.
What's unknown is the fab process (Samsung 8? Samsung 5? TSMC 4?), and tied to that, the all important frequencies.
But regardless of what the chip is, there is no black magic. And the "portable console" constraints are still there. The device must be small, cheap and powerful.
Best case scenario will be more or less a smaller SteamDeck with equivalent performances. More than that is just wishful thinking IMO.
So... I'm fully prepared for "super low" CPU freqs: ~1.3Ghz. Same for GPU ~650/1300Mhz mobile/docked. Anything above that would be pleasant news to me.

So let's assume it's just that: a Switch with ~PS4 level of performances... will it be enough? Many call this a generational update, but, Idk, it seems to me that's a very small "genarational" jump.
I'm wondering if the better option would not be to wait two to three years more so we really get to enjoy a generational leap.
 
This video started a lot of debate for sure. Like most people, I think it is a given that Switch 2 will have to have proper BC to be successful. And I can't think of any technical difficulties Nintendo/NVidia could not overcome.

On the tech specs front, it seems we got 0 real leak since a long time, and that most people take for granted that it will be T239 based. And, well, let's assume it will be the case.
What's unknown is the fab process (Samsung 8? Samsung 5? TSMC 4?), and tied to that, the all important frequencies.
But regardless of what the chip is, there is no black magic. And the "portable console" constraints are still there. The device must be small, cheap and powerful.
Best case scenario will be more or less a smaller SteamDeck with equivalent performances. More than that is just wishful thinking IMO.
So... I'm fully prepared for "super low" CPU freqs: ~1.3Ghz. Same for GPU ~650/1300Mhz mobile/docked. Anything above that would be pleasant news to me.

So let's assume it's just that: a Switch with ~PS4 level of performances... will it be enough? Many call this a generational update, but, Idk, it seems to me that's a very small "genarational" jump.
I'm wondering if the better option would not be to wait two to three years more so we really get to enjoy a generational leap.
Switch is closer to 360 and PS3 than PS4 and Xbox one. Just getting certain games from the 7th gen working on switch is considered a "miracle port". PS4 level GPU power is without a doubt a generational leap. And in addition we can't forget that it would probably be pretty hard to be weaker than the jaguar CPU inside those machines. It's fully possible the CPU is stronger which would make the jump even more dramatic
 
This thread is finally moving again, still catching up but had a couple posts I wanted to comment on from Page 28.
Lots of speculation going around.

Some are saying the canceled md-generation Switch upgrade model was the hardware that housed the Nvidia Drake SoC.
This is unlikely. Drake completed final silicon in August last year, after the supposed model was canceled. Linux work continues on it, and it's Ampere/A78, basically Orin, so no actual point in existing if not for some custom work, as Orin NX is very similar in spec, and already in production.
That's one thing the Nvidia hack didn't show us. But I'm extremely confident that it'll be either lpddr5 8GB or 12GB, both with 102GB/s of bandwidth when docked. There's still a chance they could use the lpddr5x, which could increase the bandwidth to ~133GB/s (or they could choose to lower the clocks a bit to consume less power).

I believe this T239 using TSMC N4 node (the same node from current Nvidia GPUs) could hit 2TF in handheld and 3.5TF docked, with the same battery life of 2017 switch. But that's too much for me to dream about lol
Reading through this, you are actually spot on with a find in the Nvidia hack, a DLSS test found inside NVN, using an Ampere GPU that has 3 different clocks, all named after power consumptions:
660MHz called 4.2w, 1.125GHz called 9.3w and 1.38GHz called 12w... What I find interesting about this, is that it's about half the power consumption you get with 12SM on 8nm Ampere, suggesting a more advance node... It' also lines up with what one would expect of a Handheld mode, Docked mode and Stress test, and would give similar power consumption to the original Switch, of ~8w in handheld for the entire system. Why I highlighted this post of yours from a couple months ago, is because this lines up with 2TF in handheld, 3.456TFLOPs docked, and a 4.24TF stress test (still just speculation, but why call these Ampere clocks by power consumptions if these power consumptions are impossible on 8nm Ampere?).

The solid argument against this, is that the test is run natively inside of Windows, meaning this GPU is connected to X86, but could they have tested the GPU separately from the CPU? My thinking here is that when testing components for Wii U's MCM, they had them separately tested, and each team had to figure out problems their components were causing... Of course with Nvidia's SoC, this is all built together, so would they test the GPU inside of Windows, connected directly to an X86 CPU to check DLSS performance? It could also just be simple targets for Drake, done in Ampere 8nm on any Desktop card, since the specific card isn't identified, and these are just what Nvidia would expect and wanted to get some performance numbers so they could plan DLSS' usability.
 
Ok, all caught up, we know that if Switch 2 launches in 2023 or 2024, it will be T239, because 12 months ago, Nvidia was hacked and NVN files (up to date from Feb 2022) only supported 3 SoCs, T210 (Erista), T214 (Mariko), T239 (Drake). There is no other hardware as of 13 months ago, that this updated custom Nvidia API for Nintendo was being built around. Switch 2 was also shown by public files to have engineer samples out in April 2022 and final Silicon in August 2022, through the linux Kernel, we also know the hardware is still being worked on, which wouldn't be the case for canceled hardware, it also wouldn't make sense for Nvidia to continue to build T239 as a product if it wasn't a custom part for millions of devices, which realistically only Nintendo is even being hinted at. We also have job postings at both Nvidia and Nintendo from 2020 through 2023, that mention DLSS, next gen console, and AI work...
This video started a lot of debate for sure. Like most people, I think it is a given that Switch 2 will have to have proper BC to be successful. And I can't think of any technical difficulties Nintendo/NVidia could not overcome.

On the tech specs front, it seems we got 0 real leak since a long time, and that most people take for granted that it will be T239 based. And, well, let's assume it will be the case.
What's unknown is the fab process (Samsung 8? Samsung 5? TSMC 4?), and tied to that, the all important frequencies.
But regardless of what the chip is, there is no black magic. And the "portable console" constraints are still there. The device must be small, cheap and powerful.
Best case scenario will be more or less a smaller SteamDeck with equivalent performances. More than that is just wishful thinking IMO.
So... I'm fully prepared for "super low" CPU freqs: ~1.3Ghz. Same for GPU ~650/1300Mhz mobile/docked. Anything above that would be pleasant news to me.

So let's assume it's just that: a Switch with ~PS4 level of performances... will it be enough? Many call this a generational update, but, Idk, it seems to me that's a very small "genarational" jump.
I'm wondering if the better option would not be to wait two to three years more so we really get to enjoy a generational leap.
5nm Samsung is the worst node that Nvidia would go with if end of this year or early next year, because 8nm is already winding down production lines from what I've been hearing, and Nintendo was kicked off 20nm and had to move to 12nm around 4 years after 20nm was introduced. Exynos 980 was introduced September 2019 and was the first 8nm chip from Samsung, and 8nm is an enhanced process node of Samsung's ancient 10nm technology, so releasing at the end of 2023 or in 2024, 5nm Samsung is pretty much the oldest chip Nvidia would be able to produce without having to shrink it right away and have a new version out the following year at the absolute latest, which makes it far too costly to go with 8nm, also 5nm Samsung recently massively improved production failure rates, making it cheaper than Drake on 8nm would be, in the end we are also talking about something like ~150-190mm^2 which is reasonable at 5nm, but would be twice that on 8nm, and completely unrealistic in terms of cost.

I said that to say that your CPU clocks are too low, Nintendo used just under 2 watts for the original Switch's CPU, Drake's CPU is going to also use around 2 watts, this is pretty clear IMO, because DLSS benefits the GPU's power consumption so much that they can get away with a "higher" CPU ratio, ~2w on Samsung 5nm should give around 2GHz for the 8 core A78C, which is the most efficient modern ARM CPU atm anyways. 2GHz on 7 cores for gaming, should offer something around 70-85% of Steam Deck's CPU, because that Ryzen 2 CPU while clocked higher, only has 4 physical cores, though 8 threads, much like A78C's 8 cores 8 threads. A78C at 2GHz should offer around 66% of Ryzen 2 core at 3.5GHz, which is where I ultimately get these numbers from, it's of course not exact science, and custom, closed environments like the Switch, do benefit from efficiency gains thanks to task focus and native ports directly to the system, being able to code closer to the "metal" and what not, so that 70-85% number seems pretty safe.

Your GPU frequencies are about what I've been expecting for a long time, somewhere between 600-700MHz for the GPU in handheld and 1.1-1.2GHz docked, that is why that DLSS NVN test is so interesting to me, it fits with the original Switch's power consumption, 4.2w for 660MHz (2.05TFLOPs) + ~2w for the CPU, and 2-3w for the rest of the system, falls right inside the original Switch's ~5.5w TX1 SoC and 1.6-3.5w (screen really sucked power) for the rest of the system. This left the Original Switch with 7.1w - 9w power consumption based on minimal / maximum brightness and other connectivity settings found in original Switch menu from launch while playing botw. The above power consumption for Drake would be around 8w and maybe go as high as 10w, which OG Switch does hit in handheld mode with more demanding games.

Ampere's flops are inflated, mainly because Int cores from Turing architecture, were expanded in Ampere to run FP32 cuda core code. This allows for much higher paper stats, but those int cores did do int work, and these expanded FP32 cores do have to now do int work too, so it's not 2TFLOPs in handheld, it's 1TFLOPs dedicated FP32 + 1TFLOPs of FP32/Int cuda core work, which will always involve some Int work outside of synthetic benchmarks, having said that, these numbers basically would give us:

Handheld
CPU
70-85% of Steam Deck / >50% of PS5's CPU performance
GPU (2TFLOPs) Greater than Steam Deck / PS4, before DLSS is used to free up performance, pushing handheld performance up, maybe around 680M native resolution performance? (hard to say, but could have trade offs against PS4 pro, though screen resolution might be fairly limited, the small screen would also allow for lower graphical fidelity to not matter as much, much like when Steam Deck lacks in some settings.

Docked
CPU
Same CPU clocks/performance as handheld.
GPU (3.456TFLOPs) I think it makes the most sense to compare this with XBSS, it will have less raw flops available, especially after Int performance is drawn from the same Flops pool, however thanks to DLSS's superior reconstruction, it should match up fairly well with XBSS, and does offer some RT support with 12 RT cores, allowing it to have similar RT performance to the bigger brother consoles in PS5 and XBSX, it really depends on the bottleneck here, because it could have superior RT performance, especially thanks to DLSS' help with RT performance drops.

Switch 2 launching next year, would be in Switch's 8th year on the market, the oldest console Nintendo will have ever replaced by that point, and I don't expect them to stop selling Switch, since this new hardware is unlikely to be below $399, they will keep the V2 redbox/non OLED model on the market at $249 like the new mario bundle without a mario game would indicate (reports are that OLED models are slowing production, and the new bundle is a 2019 Mariko redbox model, not OLED), and Switch LIte or a replacement Switch Mini at $149 (sort of like how New 2DS XL launched at $149 4 months after Switch, in July 2017).

This isn't a super powerful console, but it's a nice increase from Switch, especially on the CPU side, but this comes from higher clocks and core count matching modern development (of the last decade), and DLSS' black magic reconstruction tech, without it, it would fall behind XBSS pretty easily, I'd say at best it would match PS4 Pro on that front without DLSS, but could even exceed XBSS given a low enough render resolution, compromising some IQ.
 
Back
Top