By using this site, you agree to our Privacy Policy and our Terms of Use. Close

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

JRPGfan on 02 January 2020
Pemalite said:
JRPGfan said:

His point was it was more than 20 % in this case.
However flop effeciency while Archetecture dependent, is also card dependent.
Which he completely ignored.

He probably found one of the most extreme cases, when he compaired the 960 to the 7970.

Anyways its not always this big a differnce.

Ultimately it comes down to core design, of the graphics unit.
AMD leans way to heavy on the non purely- gameing related stuff, like gpu-compute.
Which does little for them (imo), I wish they would make slimmer design, thats more gameing focused like nvidia uses.


And yes, the 7970 didnt use colour compression, ect.
AMD was late to the party with that stuff.
(again this is probably one of the more extreme cases, of flop to flop)

All of this is slightly off topic though guys......

It's comparing AMD's Graphics Core Next 1.0 to nVidia's Maxwell.
Aka. Xbox One vs Switch.

It's why the Switch does as well as it does with it's ports despite significantly inferior hardware specifications on paper.

Supposedly its GCN gen2 inside the PS4.... which is the amd 250-290 line.
So if your gonna go arch to arch, lets atleast do that.

But again my point was, its more than just core arch vs core arch, not all cards are equally balanced ect.
So some cards in the line might be more effecient than others. (you just totally ignore this part both times)


Anyways heres the arch to arch thing you want so much:

A "R9 270x" is 2,560,  while a" Geforce 960" is 2,308 in Single precision flops.

Performance wise, theres like a ~13% differnce in favor of the 960.

2,560 / 2308 =  1,10%

So the R9 270x uses 10% more flops, and the 960 gets about 13% more performance.


110 x 113 = 124%.

a 24% better flop to performance ratio.

refernce:  Techpowerup.com
Search for any 960 review, and look at performance summery.

*edit: Permalite if your gonna quote me (this post), please dont mass quote 20 other people at the same time, makeing it impossible to reply to you via a quote.

Last edited by JRPGfan - on 02 January 2020

Around the Network
alfechagana on 02 January 2020

- I want it to play every PS5 - XBOX SE X game in 720P in portable mode and 900P-1080P docked.
- Bluetooth included fro earbuds
- Chat mode with friends
- At least 3 hours of battery life
- Better joy-con quality
Probably a release in 2023



Bofferbrauer2 on 02 January 2020
Cucumberry said:
Bofferbrauer2 said:

That's something I expect in an update to the Switch next year or in 2021. An expansion to 64 or 128GB internal memory instead of a pricecut. For a Switch 2 in 2024 I would rather expect 256-512GB of internal memory, though.

This gen I would be happy with a firmware(?) update adding external hard drive support in docked mode. No idea if it's even possible though. 

Well, there is an USB connector inside the dock, maybe it could be used for an external drive, or at least some USB Stick in the future. But I have my doubts that this is even possible.



The Nintendo eShop rating Thread: http://gamrconnect.vgchartz.com/thread.php?id=237454 List as Google Doc:  https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1aW2hXQT1TheElVS7z-F3pP-7nbqdrDqWNTxl6JoJWBY/edit?usp=sharing

The Steam/GOG key gifting thread: https://gamrconnect.vgchartz.com/thread/242024/the-steamgog-key-gifting-thread/1/ 

Free Pc Games thread: https://gamrconnect.vgchartz.com/thread/248138/free-pc-games/1/

Cobretti2 on 02 January 2020
JRPGfan said:
Pemalite said:

It's comparing AMD's Graphics Core Next 1.0 to nVidia's Maxwell.
Aka. Xbox One vs Switch.

It's why the Switch does as well as it does with it's ports despite significantly inferior hardware specifications on paper.

Supposedly its GCN gen2 inside the PS4.... which is the amd 250-290 line.
So if your gonna go arch to arch, lets atleast do that.

But again my point was, its more than just core arch vs core arch, not all cards are equally balanced ect.
So some cards in the line might be more effecient than others. (you just totally ignore this part both times)


Anyways heres the arch to arch thing you want so much:

A "R9 270x" is 2,560,  while a" Geforce 960" is 2,308 in Single precision flops.

Performance wise, theres like a ~13% differnce in favor of the 960.

2,560 / 2308 =  1,10%

So the R9 270x uses 10% more flops, and the 960 gets about 13% more performance.


110 x 113 = 124%.

a 24% better flop to performance ratio.

refernce:  Techpowerup.com
Search for any 960 review, and look at performance summery.

This 24% performance ratio that you calculated. Does this apply on average in general between all amd v nvidia in recent times? 

So using PS4 pro as an example, 4.2TFLOPs, If a switch 2 was to be close in performance to that, it would need to be about 3.2TFLOPS? 

If that is correct then as my original post I am not sure what tech the others think a mobile chip that runs at 10watts could be released in the next 2 years to even come close to that. I mean the tech available it may be able to run in portable mode at 720p?

PS5 is rumored to be 9.2 TFLOPS. Even if Nintendo managed to make a system like that with 3.2TFLOPS, it will struggle to get ports and the effort to port down is far more costly than porting the game to three platforms with similar performance.

I just can't see how Nintendo will bring this raw power game in the next 10-20 years if they continue down the switch approach. 

unless, have 3rd party developer tools become so good and versatile that they can simply scale down 4K to 720p gfx easily for portable mode? Granted lighting effects would be reduced etc but if this can be done with say a months work, then ports make be cost effective. If it takes a year to port the game to Switch 2, then devs will most likely skip.



 

 

JRPGfan on 02 January 2020
Cobretti2 said:
JRPGfan said:

Supposedly its GCN gen2 inside the PS4.... which is the amd 250-290 line.
So if your gonna go arch to arch, lets atleast do that.

But again my point was, its more than just core arch vs core arch, not all cards are equally balanced ect.
So some cards in the line might be more effecient than others. (you just totally ignore this part both times)


Anyways heres the arch to arch thing you want so much:

A "R9 270x" is 2,560,  while a" Geforce 960" is 2,308 in Single precision flops.

Performance wise, theres like a ~13% differnce in favor of the 960.

2,560 / 2308 =  1,10%

So the R9 270x uses 10% more flops, and the 960 gets about 13% more performance.


110 x 113 = 124%.

a 24% better flop to performance ratio.

refernce:  Techpowerup.com
Search for any 960 review, and look at performance summery.

This 24% performance ratio that you calculated. Does this apply on average in general between all amd v nvidia in recent times? 

So using PS4 pro as an example, 4.2TFLOPs, If a switch 2 was to be close in performance to that, it would need to be about 3.2TFLOPS? 

If that is correct then as my original post I am not sure what tech the others think a mobile chip that runs at 10watts could be released in the next 2 years to even come close to that. I mean the tech available it may be able to run in portable mode at 720p?

PS5 is rumored to be 9.2 TFLOPS. Even if Nintendo managed to make a system like that with 3.2TFLOPS, it will struggle to get ports and the effort to port down is far more costly than porting the game to three platforms with similar performance.

I just can't see how Nintendo will bring this raw power game in the next 10-20 years if they continue down the switch approach. 

unless, have 3rd party developer tools become so good and versatile that they can simply scale down 4K to 720p gfx easily for portable mode? Granted lighting effects would be reduced etc but if this can be done with say a months work, then ports make be cost effective. If it takes a year to port the game to Switch 2, then devs will most likely skip.

It changes based on newer/better technologies and designs.
And it even varies from card to card (with same arch), depending on how balanced the card is.

But yes, if Nvidia used the same technology, it did in the Switch, for the Switch 2.... it would be to be around 3,4 Tflops, to match the GPU compute the PS4pro can do. (3,4 Tflops x 1.24 = 4,2 Tflops of the PS4pro)

The current Switch is 393 Gflops docked.
To go from 393 Gflops to 3,4 Tflops is a jump of about 8,6x.

Thats just not gonna happend imo.
Its not possible at all, in handheld form.



"PS5 is rumored to be 9.2 TFLOPS. Even if Nintendo managed to make a system like that with 3.2TFLOPS, it will struggle to get ports and the effort to port down is far more costly than porting the game to three platforms with similar performance."

That "flops arnt just flops" thingy, PS5 will be a newer Arch design and thus likely more effecient than the PS4pro was.
Alot of things are possible if your willing to sacrifice enough in terms of graphics to get things running.


"unless, have 3rd party developer tools become so good and versatile that they can simply scale down 4K to 720p gfx easily for portable mode? Granted lighting effects would be reduced etc but if this can be done with say a months work, then ports make be cost effective. If it takes a year to port the game to Switch 2, then devs will most likely skip."

Theres gonna be more issues than just scaleing resolutions of the game, and textures down.
The way data is streamed, is a big thing next gen, where seamlessly things will just load as you play and you wont need to wait on loading screens.
That stuff, likely has some hardware behinde it to make it work, so the Switch would need something like that too, or they would have to redesign the game with sections + loading screens ect.  Same with texture sizes,.... I suspect alot assests would need to be reworked / shrunk, to run on a handheld.

Then theres engine choices, ones that can make use of such techniques, and ray traceing, certainly wont run on the current Switch.
PS5 / XBSX is a cut off point, it ll likely be too expensive to port multiplats to it, and they wont run or look as they should even if they spent tons doing so.

A Switch 2, could be strong enough, that like the current switch it could get some multiplats.
Ofc, ray traceing would be gone, and resolutions and textured ect likewise dropped.... end of the day its a handheld.



Around the Network
tripenfall on 02 January 2020

A Tegra 2 processor with 8GB GDDR5 RAM and a memory bandwidth of 150GB/SEC. A 1080p screen handheld with 4K support docked. It should put out about 2 Teraflops so that games currently on PS4/XBONE can be ported no problem. The cart sizes should be increased to 64GB, the console should have a proper D Pad. The system should be fully compatible with all Switch titles. Battery life should remain the same. The online should be beefed up dramatically. The console should retail for $399...



Nu-13 on 02 January 2020
alfechagana said:
- I want it to play every PS5 - XBOX SE X game in 720P in portable mode and 900P-1080P docked.
- Bluetooth included fro earbuds
- Chat mode with friends
- At least 3 hours of battery life
- Better joy-con quality
Probably a release in 2023

I think you meant multiplats. We won't get all  but those should run in 900-1080p portable and 1440-1600p docked.

Cobretti2 said:
JRPGfan said:

Supposedly its GCN gen2 inside the PS4.... which is the amd 250-290 line.
So if your gonna go arch to arch, lets atleast do that.

But again my point was, its more than just core arch vs core arch, not all cards are equally balanced ect.
So some cards in the line might be more effecient than others. (you just totally ignore this part both times)


Anyways heres the arch to arch thing you want so much:

A "R9 270x" is 2,560,  while a" Geforce 960" is 2,308 in Single precision flops.

Performance wise, theres like a ~13% differnce in favor of the 960.

2,560 / 2308 =  1,10%

So the R9 270x uses 10% more flops, and the 960 gets about 13% more performance.


110 x 113 = 124%.

a 24% better flop to performance ratio.

refernce:  Techpowerup.com
Search for any 960 review, and look at performance summery.

This 24% performance ratio that you calculated. Does this apply on average in general between all amd v nvidia in recent times? 

So using PS4 pro as an example, 4.2TFLOPs, If a switch 2 was to be close in performance to that, it would need to be about 3.2TFLOPS? 

If that is correct then as my original post I am not sure what tech the others think a mobile chip that runs at 10watts could be released in the next 2 years to even come close to that. I mean the tech available it may be able to run in portable mode at 720p?

PS5 is rumored to be 9.2 TFLOPS. Even if Nintendo managed to make a system like that with 3.2TFLOPS, it will struggle to get ports and the effort to port down is far more costly than porting the game to three platforms with similar performance.

I just can't see how Nintendo will bring this raw power game in the next 10-20 years if they continue down the switch approach. 

unless, have 3rd party developer tools become so good and versatile that they can simply scale down 4K to 720p gfx easily for portable mode? Granted lighting effects would be reduced etc but if this can be done with say a months work, then ports make be cost effective. If it takes a year to port the game to Switch 2, then devs will most likely skip.

Of course it doesn't.

That hypothetical 3.2 tflop gpu would be closer to the x1x gpu power and is perfectly possible for 2021. Remember the ones we have right now aren't using 7/8nm process yet. The next set of mobile gpus from nvidea will have a sizeable jump.

How exactly can you not see nintendo bringing this raw power with the switch aproach? This is EXACTLY in line with the switch aproach. We never had a ps3 pro or an xbox 360 x but if we had, the switch's gpu performance would be in between those while having more ram and much better cpu.



Cobretti2 on 02 January 2020
Nu-13 said:
alfechagana said:
- I want it to play every PS5 - XBOX SE X game in 720P in portable mode and 900P-1080P docked.
- Bluetooth included fro earbuds
- Chat mode with friends
- At least 3 hours of battery life
- Better joy-con quality
Probably a release in 2023

I think you meant multiplats. We won't get all  but those should run in 900-1080p portable and 1440-1600p docked.

Cobretti2 said:

This 24% performance ratio that you calculated. Does this apply on average in general between all amd v nvidia in recent times? 

So using PS4 pro as an example, 4.2TFLOPs, If a switch 2 was to be close in performance to that, it would need to be about 3.2TFLOPS? 

If that is correct then as my original post I am not sure what tech the others think a mobile chip that runs at 10watts could be released in the next 2 years to even come close to that. I mean the tech available it may be able to run in portable mode at 720p?

PS5 is rumored to be 9.2 TFLOPS. Even if Nintendo managed to make a system like that with 3.2TFLOPS, it will struggle to get ports and the effort to port down is far more costly than porting the game to three platforms with similar performance.

I just can't see how Nintendo will bring this raw power game in the next 10-20 years if they continue down the switch approach. 

unless, have 3rd party developer tools become so good and versatile that they can simply scale down 4K to 720p gfx easily for portable mode? Granted lighting effects would be reduced etc but if this can be done with say a months work, then ports make be cost effective. If it takes a year to port the game to Switch 2, then devs will most likely skip.

Of course it doesn't.

That hypothetical 3.2 tflop gpu would be closer to the x1x gpu power and is perfectly possible for 2021. Remember the ones we have right now aren't using 7/8nm process yet. The next set of mobile gpus from nvidea will have a sizeable jump.

How exactly can you not see nintendo bringing this raw power with the switch aproach? This is EXACTLY in line with the switch aproach. We never had a ps3 pro or an xbox 360 x but if we had, the switch's gpu performance would be in between those while having more ram and much better cpu.

I cant see it because they have to pack 3.2 tflops (based on the formula JRPGfan posted) into 10W. This is just to get PS4pro games running. 

The issue I have is PS5/XBSX will be so far ahead that it won't be worth a 3rd party porting a game, with JRPGfan confirmed. Therefore Nintendo will need 3rd parties maing exclusives for the system

Can they port PS4 games? probably but who wants to play something they played 5 years ago again?

So my question is valid, how will Nintendo bridge the raw power gap quick enough between each generation using the switch portable console approach?  Switch 2 with a Xavier chipset will not even come close to PS5/XBSX.

Unless Nintendo and Nvidia start planning for the future and find some way, the gap will keep increasing between each gen.

This is why I cannot see Switch lasting more than two generations. Eventually Nintendo will have to do a full blown console to match the power. Or they will have to concede that their console is a handheld device that connects to a TV and any games we get on it won't be what traditional consoles and PC gamers get from 3rd parties. 



 

 

Nu-13 on 02 January 2020
Cobretti2 said:
Nu-13 said:

I think you meant multiplats. We won't get all  but those should run in 900-1080p portable and 1440-1600p docked.

Of course it doesn't.

That hypothetical 3.2 tflop gpu would be closer to the x1x gpu power and is perfectly possible for 2021. Remember the ones we have right now aren't using 7/8nm process yet. The next set of mobile gpus from nvidea will have a sizeable jump.

How exactly can you not see nintendo bringing this raw power with the switch aproach? This is EXACTLY in line with the switch aproach. We never had a ps3 pro or an xbox 360 x but if we had, the switch's gpu performance would be in between those while having more ram and much better cpu.

I cant see it because they have to pack 3.2 tflops (based on the formula JRPGfan posted) into 10W. This is just to get PS4pro games running. 

The issue I have is PS5/XBSX will be so far ahead that it won't be worth a 3rd party porting a game, with JRPGfan confirmed. Therefore Nintendo will need 3rd parties maing exclusives for the system

Can they port PS4 games? probably but who wants to play something they played 5 years ago again?

So my question is valid, how will Nintendo bridge the raw power gap quick enough between each generation using the switch portable console approach?  Switch 2 with a Xavier chipset will not even come close to PS5/XBSX.

Unless Nintendo and Nvidia start planning for the future and find some way, the gap will keep increasing between each gen.

This is why I cannot see Switch lasting more than two generations. Eventually Nintendo will have to do a full blown console to match the power. Or they will have to concede that their console is a handheld device that connects to a TV and any games we get on it won't be what traditional consoles and PC gamers get from 3rd parties. 

Ps4pro has no games. jrpgfan confirmed absolutely nothing. Put this in your head: THE. SWITCH. 2. IS. NOT. GOING. TO. USE. XAVIER. It's gpu is yet to be released. But speaking of xavier as a base, this new gpu only needs a little over 2x more performance than it to be in between ps4 pro and x1x GPU (closer to or even matching the latter). An easy task for something coming years later and with a die shrink.

The last paragraph is so much I don't even know how to begin. I don't know where all this misinformation coming since the situation is the opposite of what you say. The gap between mobile and stationary chipsets is either decreasing or stationary, not increasing. The switch is way more capable than a ps3 or x360 in every department, so why this denial about the switch 2 not doing the same compared to a ps4?

Last edited by Nu-13 - on 02 January 2020

Doctor_MG on 02 January 2020
JRPGfan said:

It changes based on newer/better technologies and designs.
And it even varies from card to card (with same arch), depending on how balanced the card is.

But yes, if Nvidia used the same technology, it did in the Switch, for the Switch 2.... it would be to be around 3,4 Tflops, to match the GPU compute the PS4pro can do. (3,4 Tflops x 1.24 = 4,2 Tflops of the PS4pro)

The current Switch is 393 Gflops docked.
To go from 393 Gflops to 3,4 Tflops is a jump of about 8,6x.

Thats just not gonna happend imo.
Its not possible at all, in handheld form.

Why not? An 8x jump in power would be fine for a hardware generation. The Xbox One will supposedly go from 1.3 TFLOPS to 12TFLOPS, which is a 9.2x increase in power based on TFLOPS alone. The PS3 to the PS4 was a 8x increase in power. Heck, Sony claimed that the PS3 was a 40x increase over the PS2 in processing power. I'm not sure why you are thinking it's impossible three years from now.