| Chrkeller said: You are fighting an argument nobody made. We weren't talking about internal storage nor upgrading internal storage. We were talking about expandable storage, e.g. secondary storage. If the limitation is hot swap and not heat, fair enough. But calling me a liar when you didn't even know the basis of the discussion was wrong on your part. A mod should do better. And I was right per the actual topic. Portables use SD slots for secondary storage, not M2... just like I said. As for the CoGs of going 12 gb to 16 gb, I have no idea what the S2 is targeting in costs already, nobody does. So, it is hard to comment on what Nintendo could have done differently. Nothing is even confirmed at this point. My only point is Nintendo has to cut costs somewhere. |
No you are missing the point.
SSD's in M.2 or nVME are not designed to be hot-swappable commodity items you can drop into a backpack, they are naked pieces of hardware prone to forces like bending, static and more which can destroy them... They were never designed to act like an SD card or USB flash drive.
All these PORTABLE DEVICES devices use M.2 which was the original argument and obviously HEAT is not an issue.
This is your quote exactly:
| Chrkeller said: Fast memory is super expensive. I think I spent $300 for my PC M2 drive and M2 won't work with portables, gets way too hot. |
So don't bend and twist the narrative.
So no. "It wasn't just like you said" as you never made that distinction to start with. Aka. Your original statement was a lie, your amended statement is more factually correct.
| Chrkeller said: As for the CoGs of going 12 gb to 16 gb, I have no idea what the S2 is targeting in costs already, nobody does. So, it is hard to comment on what Nintendo could have done differently. Nothing is even confirmed at this point. My only point is Nintendo has to cut costs somewhere. |
Then why the hell would you claim it's going to be $600 with those hardware improvements that I outlined? You nor anyone else has a clue on costings.
Or do I need to quote that statement as well?
| LegitHyperbole said: If it's as good as ps4 it'll be darn impressive. Some of the later ps4 exclusives excluded cause they were miracles, mid gen ps4 third party is what I would imagine. The thing that interests me is if they focus on battery life more as well as new features like HDR and some form of DLSS and other ai features we've not yet seen. |
It's going to have aspects where it will fall short of a Playstation 4, Graphics Core Next was extremely proficient with asynchronous compute... And can leverage bandwidth extremely effectively.
However... The Switch 2.0 is going to be a vastly more efficient chip that can deploy more advanced, more modern effects with a much smaller impact to hardware resources... Provided it has the memory to leverage it. (Think: DLSS which needs extra Ram as does Ray Tracing.)
And this is normal, as every year nVidia, Intel and AMD release new GPU's which are more efficient than the last, it's normal progress and has been happening for decades.
HDR shouldn't be an issue, even cheap LCD's can manage it now with moderate results, but if they bake it in from the start and release an OLED model later, then the OLED console would benefit greatly from day 1.
I would expect things like textures and lighting to be better on the Switch 2.0 than a Playstation 4, but it would likely be at a lower resolution and have cutbacks to shader effects.
| JRPGfan said: HDR on a handheld? that should be left for docked/tv mode only atleast. |
HDR isn't about sheer brightness of an entire image.
If that's your interpretation of one of the most impactful display technologies... Then you probably should do some research, or I can educate you, either/or.
--::{PC Gaming Master Race}::--
