How Will be Switch 2 Performance Wise?

[Kyuu]

Chrkeller said:

sc94597 said:

So it looks like for RE9:

Base PS5~ > SW2 > Series S when it comes to image quality, with SW2 upscaling from 540p but approximating the base PS5's 1080p + spatial upscale. 

PS5 has better graphics settings. Series S is closer to SW2 than PS5 in graphics settings. 

PS5 and Series S have mostly stable 60fps and SW2 hovers betweem 40-60fps with rare drops into the 30s. 

Would be interesting to see how SW2 would fare if Nintendo freed up some CPU resources. Looks like another CPU bottleneck in this case. 

I haven't seen a good video, but I read the S2 has hits to lighting, one of the areas where the ps5 has a large gain.  Digital Foundry has the ps5 pro version as running impressively well.  

Unless the image quality is night and day, I would go S over S2, take that stable fps.  Just my opinion, but unstable fps is awful and makes games painful. 

I might actually be able to run RE9 with path tracing, seems like it works quite well and doesn't entirely kill fps at 1440p, especially if medium to high settings (instead of max).  

DLSS (and the S's lack of good upscaling) is making a world of difference.  

Edit (pulled from DF)

What this means is that while the game arguably may look better than Xbox Series S, frame-rate is far more variable. Anything from circa 30fps to 60fps docked, dropping to a mid-20s nadir when running in portable mode.

Hopefully it can be patched, that is some fps variation, a bit much IMO.  I think stable 30 fps would be better than jumping around, or if the S2 supported VRR docked 40 fps at 120 hz.  

The question is why didn't base PS5 and Xbox versions of this and FF7 Rebirth use temporal upscaling like FSR2+ or TSR? I really want to know why they opted for spatial upscaling in these instances. Most AAA games including RE4 Remake used temporal upscalers.

This isn't just a case of DLSS (or PSSR) doing the heavy lifting. Other console versions are just gimped.