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?

o1. Great Nintendo games
o2. Weaker than the PS4
o3. Better build quality
o4. Better motion controls
o5. 1080p screen
o6. $300 launch



Around the Network
EricHiggin said:
Alistair said:
Another quick note is most people have no idea how far AMD has come. The OG Switch's APU consumed 15 watts. AMD just announced an 8 core 16 thread Ryzen 3000 APU for laptops that is also only 15 watts. It runs at 1.8 Ghz all cores (4.2 Ghz boost) and only 15 watts. Intel just launched their 10th gen 6 core 15 watts chip, 1.1 Ghz.

AMD has 2 more cores, and 64 percent higher clock speed and performance than Intel right now in the same power consumption... It's pretty astonishing. Not that they will (because the CPU will cost more than the Switch) but thermally they could actually stick the 8 core CPU in the PS5 in a Switch. GPU would be massively reduced of course.

I'm actually wondering if PS5 and maybe XBSX have similar Ryzen mobile cores in them. The U or H part anyway. Jaguar was mobile as well, and it would allow for much more GPU performance. Those Ryzen mobile cores will still decimate the Jaguar cores.

A Ryzen 3400G desktop APU is 12nm, has 4c/8t CPU, and 11CU GPU. It's basically PS4 level of performance at 65w. The Ryzen 4800 mobile APU is 7nm, has 8c/16t CPU, and 8CU GPU. It's GPU is clocked much higher than the 3400G though, and the Vega arch has been significantly optimized in the 4800 APU.

The Ryzen mobile 4800U should be right around PS4 performance at just 15w, and doable in a handheld. That's x86. With an Nvidia ARM CPU, they should be able to do the same below 10w.

For sure the PS5 and XBSX will have the mobile version of Ryzen 3000 in them minus the integrated GPU part. These are all 7nm monolithic dies for low power consumption, more expensive to make, but reasonable at lower core counts (Ryzen 3000 was architected for up to 64 cores being affordable). There's no 14nm IO die etc. in the mobile parts.

It only takes 2 Ryzen cores to beat the PS4's CPU, the PS5 will have 4x power with 8 cores. As for the GPU, the Ryzen mobile GPU is completely unrelated to the PS5's GPU.



Alistair said:
EricHiggin said:

I'm actually wondering if PS5 and maybe XBSX have similar Ryzen mobile cores in them. The U or H part anyway. Jaguar was mobile as well, and it would allow for much more GPU performance. Those Ryzen mobile cores will still decimate the Jaguar cores.

A Ryzen 3400G desktop APU is 12nm, has 4c/8t CPU, and 11CU GPU. It's basically PS4 level of performance at 65w. The Ryzen 4800 mobile APU is 7nm, has 8c/16t CPU, and 8CU GPU. It's GPU is clocked much higher than the 3400G though, and the Vega arch has been significantly optimized in the 4800 APU.

The Ryzen mobile 4800U should be right around PS4 performance at just 15w, and doable in a handheld. That's x86. With an Nvidia ARM CPU, they should be able to do the same below 10w.

For sure the PS5 and XBSX will have the mobile version of Ryzen 3000 in them minus the integrated GPU part. These are all 7nm monolithic dies for low power consumption, more expensive to make, but reasonable at lower core counts (Ryzen 3000 was architected for up to 64 cores being affordable). There's no 14nm IO die etc. in the mobile parts.

It only takes 2 Ryzen cores to beat the PS4's CPU, the PS5 will have 4x power with 8 cores. As for the GPU, the Ryzen mobile GPU is completely unrelated to the PS5's GPU.

Well Ryzen mobile 3000 is Zen+ isn't it? Ryzen mobile 4000 is Zen 2 which is confirmed for the consoles. 

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.

While I don't see Nin ever having a GeForce based Switch then Radeon based Switch, it would be cool to see a new PS handheld/hybrid with this tech.



RolStoppable said:
p0isonparadise said:
o1. Great Nintendo games
o2. Weaker than the PS4
o3. Better build quality
o4. Better motion controls
o5. 1080p screen
o6. $300 launch

All good points, except the second one. By 2025 or later a portable chipset can very well outdo the PS4, so it won't be detrimental to the launch price.

We don't need Switch 2 anytime sooner.

A portable chipset nearly outdoes the ps4 right now and switch 2 is going to use something better.



RolStoppable said:
p0isonparadise said:
o1. Great Nintendo games
o2. Weaker than the PS4
o3. Better build quality
o4. Better motion controls
o5. 1080p screen
o6. $300 launch

All good points, except the second one. By 2025 or later a portable chipset can very well outdo the PS4, so it won't be detrimental to the launch price.

We don't need Switch 2 anytime sooner.

Yeah all that except #2. Switch 2 will certainly be stronger than the PS4, but 2023 is a more reasonable launch date. 2025 release date would probably mean any XBSeries/PS5 game could get ported to Switch 2. Which would be nice but they aren't gonna wait 8 years to release a new system.



Around the Network

Nintendo should handle Switch like they handled the Game Boy. Give it a long life as it's the only viable hybrid console for the foreseeable future, so competition isn't a worry.

More sequels, new games and even create new games for some dormant IPs.

Mario Odyssey 2
Splatoon 3
Mario Kart 9
Pokemon (D/P remakes, Gen 9)
2D Mario
2D Zelda
2D Metroid
Tomodachi Life
Pikmin 4
Animal Crossing spin-off
Splatoon spin-off

I could go on.





RolStoppable said:
Slownenberg said:

Yeah all that except #2. Switch 2 will certainly be stronger than the PS4, but 2023 is a more reasonable launch date. 2025 release date would probably mean any XBSeries/PS5 game could get ported to Switch 2. Which would be nice but they aren't gonna wait 8 years to release a new system.

It's a depressing thought that Nintendo is going to turn stupid again.

What about not waiting 8 years to release a new console is stupid? That would mean all the companies have always been stupid because the only system that has lasted 8 years or more before being replaced is game boy (and I'd argue it lasted that long only because GB had zero real competition but also portable gaming wasn't a huge thing until Pokemon hit and Nintendo realized handhelds could be huge business).

It WOULD however be pretty stupid to let Switch sales die off for a couple years while Nintendo sits on its hands without doing an easy direct sequel to the Switch.



Switch 2 Lite (portable-only):
- 2 tflops

Switch 2 Hybrid (portable/home):
- 2 tflops undocked
- 3/4 tflops docked

Switch 2 Tv (home-only):
- 6 tflops

By 2023/2024 those performance should be possible for an handheld / hybrid system.

Last edited by JimmyFantasy - on 10 January 2020

What's the reason the Switch 1 and Switch 2 couldn't co-exist for multiple years?

Switch 2 is probably going to raise the price up to $349.99 to start as that's a more lucrative price position, something like the Switch Lite at least will be like $149.99-$169.99 by then ... they would be serving completely different parts of the market by then.

Nintendo is not going to abandon the upscale $300+ market, that part of the market makes a lot of money and that consumer buys a lot of games, you lose that upper end market to people who aren't 11 years old and eventually get tired of a very dated product to other game platforms if you don't keep your product line fresh. 



RolStoppable said:
Soundwave said:

What's the reason the Switch 1 and Switch 2 couldn't co-exist for multiple years?

Switch 2 is probably going to raise the price up to $349.99 to start as that's a more lucrative price position, something like the Switch Lite at least will be like $149.99-$169.99 by then ... they would be serving completely different parts of the market by then.

Nintendo is not going to abandon the upscale $300+ market, that part of the market makes a lot of money and that consumer buys a lot of games, you lose that upper end market to people who aren't 11 years old and eventually get tired of a very tired product to other game platforms if you don't keep your product line fresh. 

That's why Switch Plus SKUs will launch between late 2021 and late 2022. They'll allow Nintendo to keep selling at high prices.

People are not stupid, they're not going to keep paying $300-$350 just for something that is a small upgrade indefinitely. New 3DS really didn't do that much for 3DS sales that type of an upgrade simply isn't very exciting. 

Those people in that price category (willing to spend $300-$400+) will spend that money most likely on PS5 or XBXS instead as those companies will aggressively court that audience's spending power. 

So yeah if you want just rinky dink kiddie audience that doesn't care for graphics fine, but you don't get to have it both ways and think you're not going to lose a lot of the higher end Switch demo that drove the install base in its first 3 years and simply gets tired of a very dated product. They're gonna start bailing out of the platform in 2022, 2023, no one's going to give that much of a shit that you're releasing like the 5th Mario platformer on the same dated hardware that was running Odyssey by that point. 

You can't have a boring party that's starting to fizzle out by 12:00 AM and ask people to stay until 3 AM when there's much more livelier party going on next door. People are going to want to leave. 

Last edited by Soundwave - on 10 January 2020