How Will be Switch 2 Performance Wise?

[Chrkeller]

sc94597 said:

Chrkeller said:

Not sure what to tell you, the S2 is ps4/pro tier hardware.  DF does call that out, imo, quite clearly.  Plus other tech sites have it in that same tier as well.  You do cherry pick data.  You don't mention the significant hit to NPC density or how DF talks about the weakness of the CPU.  DF has the S2 on the ps4 tier.  

Also I have a Switch, S2, ps3, ps4, ps5, 3050. 4070, 5070ti and 4090.  After 50+ hours on the S2, I know where it sits...  the ps4/pro tier.  

Elden Ring on the ps4 is something like 900p/30fps...  the ps5 around 1800p/60fps.  The S2 is targeting 1080/30fps....  ps4 tier.  

I get it electronics is complicated. I get the S2 can do things the ps4 can't, but those things are minor and will not result in final moving picture fidelity that significantly looks above the ps4/pro.  The S2 is ps4 tier.

Again you're just reasserting your opinion without supporting it or addressing what was written. I already know you disagree, no point in disagreeing again, but this time harder. 

I also have a Switch 2 (and Switch), a PS5 Pro (and PS5), RTX 5090 (RTX 4090, RTX 5060, RTX 3080ti, and literally dozens of other Nvidia GPU's I use for deep-learning inference, but also tinker with for gaming), a PS4 Pro, Series X, etc. I would put the Switch 2 a half-tier below the Series S, but capable of playing the same set of titles as the Series S at playable resolutions and bare minimum (30fps) frame-rates. The PS4 Pro is also a half-tier below it if we are just comparing 8th Generation rasterization capabilities, but not always capable of playing the same games. My estimation on this has nothing to do with owning dozens of pieces of hardware, but actually thinking about what the respective hardware is capable of and what it means to support features in software on one platform that have been offloaded to dedicated hardware on another. 

Being able to actually run modern 9th Generation games with 9th Generation features versus not being able to is not minor. If one had a goal to port Alan Wake 2 or Indiana Jones to Switch 2 or PS4 Pro (hell, even if we somehow gave everyone an SSD in their Pro), it is clear which would be an easier task and for which platform it would require writing performance-killing software-based compilers or rebuilding lighting/mesh systems that might not even work at the end of the day. That is far more significant of an issue to deal with than saying, "Oh there is a CPU bottleneck? Do we want to optimize for a 40fps mode, lock it to 30fps, or do both?" 

And the whole context of Digital Foundry's statements are that they were disagreeing with a developer about a very subjective "it lies here" heuristic, so no not everyone agrees "PS4/Pro level." The context of much of this discussion (which Digital Foundry was using as a framing) was their response to this Virtous quote (a quote which isn't disagreeing much with what some other developers are saying too):

In terms of raw console performance, do you agree that the Switch 2 is closer to the Xbox Series S than it is to the PlayStation 4, making it easier for developers to port their current-gen games to the hardware?

Eoin: GPU-wise, the Switch 2 performs slightly below the Series S; this difference is more noticeable in handheld mode. However, the Series S does not support technologies like DLSS, which the Switch 2 does. This makes the GPU capabilities of the two consoles comparable overall.

CPU-wise, there is a clearer distinction between the two consoles. The Switch 2 is closer to the PlayStation (PS) 4 in this respect, having a CPU just a bit more powerful than the PS4’s. Since most games tend to be more GPU-bound than CPU-bound when well optimized, the impact of this difference largely depends on the specific game and its target frame rate. Any game shipping at 60 FPS on the Series S should easily port to the Switch 2. Likewise, a 30 FPS Series S game that’s GPU-bound should also port well. Games with complex physics, animations, or other CPU-intensive elements might incur additional challenges in reaching 30 or 60 FPS or require extra optimization during porting.

Umm, so are you.  You are saying the same things over and I already made it clear I don't agree.  S2 is ps4 tier like DF said and a few other sites. I don't know what to tell you.  I've played MKW and DK, they both look like ps4 games.  Powerwise the S2 is a ps4 with a handful of tricks.  And the differences are minor.  You think if you toss up a pic of ps4 cyber and S2 casual gamers would see a difference?

And half tiers, frankly, seems silly.  It almost comes off as though people think a ps4 that fits in one's pocket is an insult, for some odd reason.  Personally I find it to be a compliment, given I remember where we came from with the OG GB.

At the end of the day is the S2 is 30% above the ps4 and the ps5 is 600%....  what tier is the S2 on?  Ps4/pro.

And with that many GPUs you should know as well as I do, raw power makes up for fancy new chipsets.  Would you trade your 3080ti for a 5060?  The 5060 has the new fancy bells and whistles.  Personally I'd keep the 3080ti, older chipset but has the raw power to easily overtake the 5060.  Raw power is being underrated in this discussion.  

But we have highlighted the main disagreement.  You want way more tiers than I do.  I don't think half tiers makes sense.  Classification is about buckets not splitting hairs.  

Last edited by Chrkeller - on 14 August 2025