Currently Online 
bonzobanana said:
I don't think it is fair to just say 'personal preference' when the controller on Switch 2 is massively inferior for racing games and many others. You wouldn't want to drive a real car with a throttle that was either full on or off, analogue triggers do add a huge amount of enhanced gameplay to the game and it is available on Switch 2 if you pay the huge amount for the official Gamecube controller, it certainly isn't off-topic and it comes up many times for racing games, not just me mentioning either but a huge amount of people disappointed with Switch and Switch 2 controls. You seem to have completely ignored the actual resolutions of Switch 2 in portable mode and lack of graphic features present in portable mode. I really don't know what people expect from 8 A78 CPU cores at 1 Ghz these are well known processors and because the Switch 2 is on a mainly dated fabrication process they have reduced cache. They deliver a passmark score of about 2000 however 1 core is taken for gamechat, 1 core is taken for the OS and for a game like this they will also need to process network data if it had network functionality. I've never seen anyone argue that Switch 2 has good CPU performance. Also lets not forget the ARM A78 was designed for 5 and 6Nm nodes not 10Nm. Most of the benefits of the ARM A78 require those nodes. You can't claim the ARM A78 is better and then build it on a 10Nm fabrication meaning its speed and efficiency is massively restricted. I have a Teclast T50 mini tablet and that has a passmark score of 4500 and I know that because I've actually tested it myself. It has a Helio G99 processor on 6Nm. I'm certainly not saying anything controversial, Virtuos stated the CPU performance is at PS4 level (not pro) for the Switch 2. I'm actually stating going by the passmark score of 2000 that it is slightly above that as PS4 scores around 1700. Maybe with reduced cache it scores a bit less than 2000 because that benchmark was on 5Nm but I wouldn't of thought much less myself as they are only run at 1Ghz anyway and normally ARM A78s can go up to 3Ghz on 5Nm. The Switch 2 has very low CPU resources just like the Switch 1 did when it was launched. The wii u launched long after the 360 and PS3 but had significantly less CPU resources than those consoles. Often games that ran on all three consoles had inferior graphics on wii u and a frame rate that would tank much easier, dare I mention it too that those games played better too as they had analogue triggers so different weapons felt different, some had a light trigger, some had a full trigger etc with better recoil effects. I'm just making the point Nintendo does not prioritise CPU performance and lack of CPU performance on Switch 2 will be an issue for many games. |
This is a thread about performance, not controllers.
The graphics mode on Switch 2 is the only one that's logical to compare to PS4, as the others are all either run at a higher framerate than PS4 or are aimed at saving battery life which isn't a logical comparison for obvious reasons. Graphics mode targets 1080p in portable mode, same as PS4. Volumetric lighting and shadow animations are disabled, but reflections are 30fps rather than 15fps on PS4. That's not "massively scaled back" at all.
And you're misquoting Virtuos, they said the CPU was slightly better than PS4, not on par.
