Switch Pro definitely only needs to happen when Nvidia can get the next Tegra down to a small enough power draw but still powerful enough to be a extremely significant jump over the current Switch. The closer Nintendo can get Switch to current PS4 and XbOne performance the better.

Every successful Nintendo system ever has had at least one hardware revision, and the Switch's design is more open to such revisions than some of those that did.

I have almost zero expectations of a power boosted Switch, like 5% or less. Maybe something incredibly minor, but nothing that would be a cause of a separate Dev fork for games in optimizations.

I have a 95% expectation that they're going to make a Switch Mini though.

5" display, die shrink, integrated controls, still compatible with external joycons, no dock included, dongle only for HDMI, perhaps with a kickstand type chunk of plastic in place of a dock (some type of smart design that could fold one way to cover screen for pocketable traveling, fold another way to serve as stand while 'docked', and which could simply fold flush to the rear while in handheld usage.

. $199 or less, no later than fall 2019. Existing Switch will remain available.

What would be point of 480p display if games work at 240p?

With that logic I'm not sure why Switch has a 720p screen. Wolfenstein 2 is playable at 360p... *trollface.jpg*

I was actually suggesting New 3DS supported games actually run games at native 480p. Perhaps even patch some old 1st party games IF POSSIBLE.

What you wrote don't have anything with my logic, 3DS has 240p resolution and games are made to work in that resolution, Switch has 720p resolution and games are made to work at 720p or lower resolution, dont forget that majority of all Switch games in portable mode actually runs at 720p.

Thats a point, in that way Nintendo and 3rd party would need to patch every game to work at higher resolution if that is actually possible (because maybe even New 3DS doesn't have enough strength to run games at 480p).

I elaborated in previous posts. The New 3DS was underpowered, it was a missed opportunity.

"I'm critical of the New 3DS for two reasons. The resolution should have been increased, make it a glorious 480p platform. Also, the GPU/CPU should have seen a significant boost, so it could easily handle some Wii ports. Maybe that would have also meant more support."

I'm saying the New 3DS should have been equipped with a more powerful GPU/CPU capable of running 480p. For example, Xenoblade on New 3DS has a lower resolution and scaled back visuals. If the new 3DS could do 480p and had more power, it could have been able to run the game at par with Wii.

For comparison sake, I'm saying the New 3DS (Nintendo's 2015 portable specs) should have been closer to a Vita (Sony's 2011 portable specs). For something called new... it felt old at launch.

Upscaling.
It also reduces the fly-screen effect thanks to the low resolution display.

Games are not obligated to meet their displayed resolution to still see benefits, that works in both directions, downscaling and upscaling.

That is the Akitio Thunder2.
It is not using a derivative of USB, it is using dual Thunderbolt 2 ports which piggy back off PCI-Express.

https://www.anandtech.com/show/7049/intel-thunderbolt-2-everything-you-need-to-know
https://www.amazon.com/Akitio-Thunder2-PCIe-Box-intended/dp/B00LTAUTHE

The device itself was actually never designed for graphics cards anyway... And there is a performance penalty and is pretty low-latency.

But it is certainly higher bandwidth and lower latency than the Switch's USB port.

Well... The extra GPU would mostly be used to drive improved visuals, so the CPU shouldn't be anymore limiting than it is currently.
nVidia in theory could leverage it's "Optimus" technology and allow any GPU to work, it isn't hard to beat the Switch's GPU capabilities, even the Geforce 1030 is faster.