My uncle Marcel told me the NS is going to be weaker than a 2006 toaster.

540p GPU reqs are ~ a quarter of 1080p, ~ 1/16th of 4K

540p @ 30FPS needs half of 60FPS

Nintendo running a game at 30FPS, 540p native would require ~1/32 of 4K @ 60FPS.

Yup. And it would look like a game at 540p.

So long as the screen is 720p, most people will believe they're playing HD games even if it's only 540p upscaled. Especially given the small screen.

Worked fine last gen. It's probably going to happen again with '4K'. You'll only be playing 1.920K (1080p) on PS5/Scorpio but they'll upscale and everyone will think they're playing true 4K games.

I'm pretty sure that the words Nintendo Power is an oxymoron.

The only reason why Switch is considered powerful is because Wii U was pathetically underpowered. We shouldn't even have to be talking about Switch if Nintendo made a proper console to begin with. Instead they went weak and gimmicky and because of their mistakes we consumers are now stuck with a tablet.

Actually, correlation is not linear. 1080p to 2160p goes some 2-3x  in GPU power with same settings, I haven't seen any 540p to 1080p benchmarks, but given the same relative difference in pixels (4x), I'd say it's similar. Anandtech bench is good place for checking out how different cards perform at various resolutions.

I said CPU not full APU.

Let it please be at least half an Xbox One. Please.

And I meant the CPU within a full blown APU.

My thought is that the Switch has a Tegra X2 + an additional GeForce GPU.

For games that support it - in mobile mode it'll run just with the Tegra chip. When docked, the extra GeForce GPU kicks in everytime for full HD console support - but if a a game like Skyrim remastered couldn't run on just the Tegra alone, it could still use that extra GPU, but at the expense of shorter battery life.