By using this site, you agree to our Privacy Policy and our Terms of Use. Close
Soundwave on 22 May 2020
Edit Thread
curl-6 said:
Soundwave said:

Apple crossed/matched XBox One level performance two years ago with the Apple A12X chip ... Nvidia prior to that was fairly even with Apple's big ticket offerings, the Tegra X1 is pretty equivalent to the Apple A9X that launched that same year for example. Since then Nvidia has gone quiet on future Tegra X processors likely because Nintendo has asked them to as they are the main vendor for said chip and if Nvidia was talking years in advance about it everyone and their grandma on the internet would be saying it's the Switch 2 chip. 

By 2023 they should be able to do something in raw power that I think is beyond a PS4, the same way the Switch Tegra X1 is beyond a PS3/360 (especially docked). 

But when you factor in DLSS 2.0 or 3.0 ... that performance jumps massively, that is something that wasn't available in the past and means the same chip now only has to render like 1/4-1/8th the pixels or even less. That's a huge game changer. 

So suddenly a chip that's PS4+ becomes close to an actual PS5 in terms of the games it can run. 

Remember the Tegra X1 launch in May 2015, so that is 18 months after the PS4/XB1 and it is able to run PS4/XB1 games, and some pretty beefy ones at that ... Witcher 3 and DOOM are not low end PS4 titles. With no advantage of DLSS at all. 

PS5 in November 2020 versus a new Switch 2 in say summer/fall 2023 is actually a bigger time gap by over a year long than the gap between PS4 and Tegra X1. Nvidia has way better graphics engineers than AMD ... AMD can't even beat Nvidia's Turing architecture which is 2 years old now even on a smaller node (7nm vs. 12nm) which is sad.

DLSS can help with pixel fillrate but to be fair there is more to it than that; bandwith, CPU, SSD, etc.

I'm sure Switch 2 can exceed PS4 but I'm very skeptical of it getting "close to PS5."

Are you also skeptical that the current Switch can get "close to PS4"? Because it already does with games like Witcher 3 and DOOM. You can also see games like Resident Evil 3 Remake and Star Wars Battlefront are able to run on a portable GPD Win 2 which is not much better than an existing Switch. 

DLSS makes that far easier and it does impact your bandwidth when you only have to render at a fraction of the resolution to boot.

Arm A78 as a CPU core, which releases later this year will be comparable to Zen 2 AMD cores. By 2023 that CPU will be cheap. 

You also are underestimating that Switch 2 likely will be using a better architecture than the PS5's GPU. Switch 2 would likely be an Ampere or Orin-based part ... PS5 is RDNA2 ... RDNA2 can't even beat Nvidia's 2 year old Turing architecture. A *laptop* version (which is less powerful than the desktop version) of the RTX 2080 outperformed the PS5 on that much balley hooed Unreal Engine 5 test (40 fps vs 30 fps), lol. 

SSD is another overhyped thing, UFS 3.1 which is mobile flash storage can get up to 3GB/sec which is faster than what the XBox SX is using and Apple just flat out has been using NVMe drives in iPhones/iPads for 5 years now. 

If Nvidia gives Nintendo a Switch 2 chip that's akin to the Tegra X1 was for 2015, but in 2023, with DLSS, yes you are going to get PS5 level games. They may not render at anywhere close to the same resolution, but if your eyes can't tell the difference anyway, what does it matter? I mean shit, that 540p DLSS image on Control to me actually honestly looked sharper and cleaner than native 1080p. I've seen other tests where 576p was scaled up to 1440p and it looks very close. It's ridiculous. Even N64-era (1990s-era) resolutions like 512x288 look playable for an undocked mode if need be. 

Last edited by Soundwave - on 22 May 2020