Forums - Nintendo Discussion - What do you want in a Switch 2?

Nu-13 said:
Cobretti2 said:

Again you throw out numbers from where? what is your basis point for this conclusion?

There is nothing that is a mobile chipset from Nvidia to suggest it will be 8x better than Switch from a 2021 design (Unless you think Nvidia are going to use a main PC GPU, not a mobile one) and shrink it so far that they will put it in a Switch.

What we have right now in 12nm is the basis. New and more advanced gpus built on 7nm will have the performance described above.

Yeah, sure they will bud. XBO X level performance in a mobile chip is just around the corner.



LTD: PS4 - 125m, Switch - 110m, XBO - 51m

2020: PS4 - 9m, Switch - 22.5m, XBO - 2.5m, PS5 - 4.5m, XBX - 2.8m

Around the Network

More power
Better battery
Most of all Stronger Digital - I only noticed one or 2 people mention it but Nintendo's digital is far from family friendly. We now have 3 switches in the house. I would like to see something like the way Sony handles it. I have my Primary PS4 downstairs hooked to the main TV, anyone with an account on that machine can play any game from my digital library. The other PS4 is upstairs in my office and I'm pretty much the only person that uses that one. On the switch if I buy a game digitally my profile is the only one that can play that game ... 5 people play Splatoon in the house, it would be nice if I could pay $60 once and all three play together vs $180 ( 3 carts) or $300 (5 digital) for us all to be able to play the game. That's crazy. For a family focused company they are really sticking it to families with the Switch.



EricHiggin said:

In another thread and with more research, is seems like Ryzen mobile 4000 GPU's are tied to RDNA to some extent. How much exactly we'll eventually find out. While the RDNA design has ties to GCN still, it looks as though, and based on the naming, that Ryzen mobile 4000 is still mostly Vega and GCN at it's core.

RDNA is based on Graphics Core Next, it shares the exact same instruction set.

Ryzen mobile 4000 series is based on Vega.
Ryzen mobile 3000 series is based on Vega.
Ryzen mobile 2000 series is based on Vega.

curl-6 said:

This. The current Switch's full potential hasn't been tapped out yet, we've yet to see for example what an open world 3D Zelda (BOTW2) built from the ground up for Switch can achieve, or what Metroid could look like, etc.

There is a very real chance that Breath of the Wild 2 will be utilizing Breath of the Wild 1's game engine and a bulk of it's assets, which was built for and optimized for the WiiU.
So it's not likely to show us what the Switch can do.




--::{PC Gaming Master Race}::--

Pemalite said:
EricHiggin said:

In another thread and with more research, is seems like Ryzen mobile 4000 GPU's are tied to RDNA to some extent. How much exactly we'll eventually find out. While the RDNA design has ties to GCN still, it looks as though, and based on the naming, that Ryzen mobile 4000 is still mostly Vega and GCN at it's core.

RDNA is based on Graphics Core Next, it shares the exact same instruction set.

Ryzen mobile 4000 series is based on Vega.
Ryzen mobile 3000 series is based on Vega.
Ryzen mobile 2000 series is based on Vega.

curl-6 said:

This. The current Switch's full potential hasn't been tapped out yet, we've yet to see for example what an open world 3D Zelda (BOTW2) built from the ground up for Switch can achieve, or what Metroid could look like, etc.

There is a very real chance that Breath of the Wild 2 will be utilizing Breath of the Wild 1's game engine and a bulk of it's assets, which was built for and optimized for the WiiU.
So it's not likely to show us what the Switch can do.


We know for a fact it is reusing many asstes and the engine has little to do with optimization. Botw was made for wii u and ported somewhat quickly for the switch. It's sequel is being made 100% for the switch, which means it will be optimized around it. We should expect better performance than botw.



Nu-13 said:

We know for a fact it is reusing many asstes and the engine has little to do with optimization. Botw was made for wii u and ported somewhat quickly for the switch. It's sequel is being made 100% for the switch, which means it will be optimized around it. We should expect better performance than botw.

The engine has everything to do with it.



--::{PC Gaming Master Race}::--

Around the Network
Pemalite said:
Nu-13 said:

We know for a fact it is reusing many asstes and the engine has little to do with optimization. Botw was made for wii u and ported somewhat quickly for the switch. It's sequel is being made 100% for the switch, which means it will be optimized around it. We should expect better performance than botw.

The engine has everything to do with it.

3d zeldas up to skyward sword were using the oot engine. Didn't seem like a problem.



Pemalite said:
curl-6 said:

This. The current Switch's full potential hasn't been tapped out yet, we've yet to see for example what an open world 3D Zelda (BOTW2) built from the ground up for Switch can achieve, or what Metroid could look like, etc.

There is a very real chance that Breath of the Wild 2 will be utilizing Breath of the Wild 1's game engine and a bulk of it's assets, which was built for and optimized for the WiiU.
So it's not likely to show us what the Switch can do.

There should hopefully be some improvement though right; I mean they will have to make some new assets, and not having to budget for Wii U's CPU/GPU/RAM should mean they're less restricted in terms of stuff like scene complexity.



Nu-13 said:
Pemalite said:

The engine has everything to do with it.

3d zeldas up to skyward sword were using the oot engine..

Nope.

curl-6 said:

There should hopefully be some improvement though right; I mean they will have to make some new assets, and not having to budget for Wii U's CPU/GPU/RAM should mean they're less restricted in terms of stuff like scene complexity.

A game engine is a collection of smaller parts all working together to form a "game engine". - Nintendo is likely using the exact same graphics renderer as the original Breath of the Wild game.

That doesn't mean there can't be any visual improvements, but it's not going to be taking full advantage of the Switch's various hardware nuances to push things to the limit.
I would be very surprised if it leverages a greater degree of Tessellated surfaces for example that the Switch is capable of.

In saying that, Breath of the Wild wasn't a perfect experience on Switch anyway, there are framerate issues. (Although more pronounced on Wii U)
I would assume they would try to chase 720P/900P again on Switch, which does eat into the limited bandwidth the Switch has to offer.

But for all intents and purposes, I would not expect a big leap over the first game, not until there is a top-to-bottom engine rewrite, which will likely happen with the next game.

But let's be realistic, I didn't buy a Wii U or Switch for the graphics anyway, no one buys a Nintendo console for the graphics, as long as the game is artistically pleasing and fun to play, that's all that matters I guess.



--::{PC Gaming Master Race}::--

curl-6 said:
Pemalite said:

There is a very real chance that Breath of the Wild 2 will be utilizing Breath of the Wild 1's game engine and a bulk of it's assets, which was built for and optimized for the WiiU.
So it's not likely to show us what the Switch can do.

There should hopefully be some improvement though right; I mean they will have to make some new assets, and not having to budget for Wii U's CPU/GPU/RAM should mean they're less restricted in terms of stuff like scene complexity.

Yeah, I think that should be expected for most sequels. And especially from a developer of this caliber, I'm sure they'll make strides to move forward.
While the engine being built to accommodate for WiiU may prevent it from fully utilizing Switch's potential, there being no WiiU version to consider this time may result in more room for improvements than otherwise, like you said.



Every time I look at this thread, it is amazing how little people know of mobile hardware. AMD announced the CPU cores for the PS5 (FIVE, NOT FOUR) in a mobile chip, running at 1.8ghz, and it only uses 15 watts. The Ryzen 4800U. Even I was surprised.

https://www.amd.com/en/products/apu/amd-ryzen-7-4800u

That is what is possible in 2020 with a mobile CPU. And people wonder if the next Switch can equal the PS4? We can already put the PS5 CPU in a Switch (but not the GPU of course). It is up to Nintendo, and how much they want to charge for their next system. That's why I think Nintendo should make a $399 mobile system and really show what is possible in 2020 with mobile hardware.

The PS4 is nothing special in 2020. Even in 2019 we have the mobile version of the GTX 1650 from laptops running at half clock speed like the Switch (1ghz): it uses 20 watts on average and beats the PS4. Shrink that to 7nm and it is a piece of cake to beat the PS4 if Nintendo wants to do so. CPU and GPU.

The Snapdragon 865 will most likely beat the PS4's GPU, and the CPU by 4x... Let's not get started with the next iPad PRO which will have a CPU that will absolutely smoke the Ryzen 4800U and the PS4. Geekbench 5 scores will be over 1400 per core (14x faster than the Switch most likely).

Last edited by Alistair - on 19 January 2020