Lets move the DLSS 2.0 point to what a hypothetical PS5 to Switch 2 could very well be, because the advantages become far more apparent there. Lets say a game like Witcher 4 is on PS5. It's a pretty beefy game lets say and can't run at full 4K even on a PS5, it runs at 1800p. OK.
If they really wanted to, they could then run the Switch 2 version using DLSS 2.0 at
PS5 1800p = (5,760,000 pixels)
Switch 2 undocked 1080p " DLSSed" from 640x360 = (230,400 pixels)
Switch 2 docked 1440p "DLSSed" from 1024x576 = (589,824 pixels)
This is a freaking monstrous disparity, the PS5 has to render over 20x the resolution as the Switch 2 undocked now and 9x docked. Do you think the PS4 would be able to run the Switch version of Witcher 3 at 20x the undocked resolution? Or even docked at 9x the resolution? Not a chance.
Because the Switch 2 has such a resolution overhead advantage here it means now likely things like being able to increase the frame rate or bump effects settings from low to medium becomes much more feasible. Yes you can quibble that the image quality isn't quite 100% on (too sharp sometimes maybe), but it's still going to be a better image quality than the blur-fest of current Switch-PS4 ports with better graphics settings possible. How much can you really complain because you can't exactly put a PS5 in your coat pocket.
Regarding NVMe or UFS 3.1 ... I mean why doesn't Nintendo just source the same NVMe part as Apple? It must be mass produced at a huge level these days and Apple's been using those drives by 2023 for 8+ years. If not UFS 3.1 is still extremely fast, 3GB/sec is not a joke and by 2023 that will be common and widespread by hundreds of millions of Android devices, likely even faster UFS 4.0 is available by then. Nintendo will have options on this issue.
I'm still waiting you to explain if DLSS 2.0 is such a godsent how will they still convince people to buy 1000 USD cards when their 200 USD variation with DLSS 2.0 basically erases almost all differences from your own speculation.
Well DLSS 2.0 is only supported by RTX range cards, so you can't use this on a $200 card. Nvidia will probably then move up to DLSS 3.0 and simply state you must now have an Ampere based card (3060 or better) and so on and so on. So they can cover themselves that way.
But for enclosed software hardware ecosystem like the Switch is, Nintendo can simply just build it into every development kit so that it's used basically for every game. On a system like Switch there's no benefit to not using it most of the time.
As with most AI algorithms, they get better over time, Nvidia could quite possibly give Nintendo a custom solution that can construct a high resolution image from even lower resolutions than current DLSS 2.0 does, it could get ridiculously low. I doubt they put too much thought into the current DLSS implementation about using super low resolutions like 512x288, but it does work anyway.
Last edited by Soundwave - on 24 May 2020