What do you want in a Switch 2?

[Alistair]

EricHiggin said:

Alistair said:
Another quick note is most people have no idea how far AMD has come. The OG Switch's APU consumed 15 watts. AMD just announced an 8 core 16 thread Ryzen 3000 APU for laptops that is also only 15 watts. It runs at 1.8 Ghz all cores (4.2 Ghz boost) and only 15 watts. Intel just launched their 10th gen 6 core 15 watts chip, 1.1 Ghz.

AMD has 2 more cores, and 64 percent higher clock speed and performance than Intel right now in the same power consumption... It's pretty astonishing. Not that they will (because the CPU will cost more than the Switch) but thermally they could actually stick the 8 core CPU in the PS5 in a Switch. GPU would be massively reduced of course.

I'm actually wondering if PS5 and maybe XBSX have similar Ryzen mobile cores in them. The U or H part anyway. Jaguar was mobile as well, and it would allow for much more GPU performance. Those Ryzen mobile cores will still decimate the Jaguar cores.

A Ryzen 3400G desktop APU is 12nm, has 4c/8t CPU, and 11CU GPU. It's basically PS4 level of performance at 65w. The Ryzen 4800 mobile APU is 7nm, has 8c/16t CPU, and 8CU GPU. It's GPU is clocked much higher than the 3400G though, and the Vega arch has been significantly optimized in the 4800 APU.

The Ryzen mobile 4800U should be right around PS4 performance at just 15w, and doable in a handheld. That's x86. With an Nvidia ARM CPU, they should be able to do the same below 10w.

For sure the PS5 and XBSX will have the mobile version of Ryzen 3000 in them minus the integrated GPU part. These are all 7nm monolithic dies for low power consumption, more expensive to make, but reasonable at lower core counts (Ryzen 3000 was architected for up to 64 cores being affordable). There's no 14nm IO die etc. in the mobile parts.

It only takes 2 Ryzen cores to beat the PS4's CPU, the PS5 will have 4x power with 8 cores. As for the GPU, the Ryzen mobile GPU is completely unrelated to the PS5's GPU.