In case you missed it, the XBox Series S (Lockhart) has basically been confirmed. Product packaging for the next gen XBox controller leaked and sure enough it says the controller is for XBox Series X + S.

But this could also be suddenly I think a very nice situation for the Switch 2 because it means a lot of devs are going to be making games on the lower end Series S XBox model, which is supposedly about 1/3-1/4 the power of a Series X. 

Suddenly the power gap really isn't large at all, with DLSS in fact the Switch 2 may actually be more powerful than the Series S. If MS had a Series S equivalent for the current XBox One, it would've been basically 400 gigaflops ... which is the same as the Switch docked.

And if there are now suddenly two major platforms (XBox Series S and Switch 2) that can share this performance envelope I think for a lot of third parties this suddenly becomes a bigger option they have to pay attention to. It's not longer just Nintendo with and their "wacky handheld" that can be brushed off when XBox also has a similar performance envelope for one of their current cycle systems. 

It means that there likely will be XBox Series S versions of games like Madden NFL, GTAVI (gulp), Resident Evil 8/9/etc. just sitting there, and those will indeed probably be very easy to port to a Switch 2. Not only that the other significant thing about this is these versions could also come day and date for Switch 2 owners instead of the "well wait 1-2 years and maybe we'll have a Switch version for you".

This and DLSS are very significant changes for the Switch 2 versus what the current Switch has to deal with. 

I agree with you, the series S may help with 3rd party switch ports in the future but......

Wat.

I doubt it. I agree on the GPU, it is quite possible that Switch 2 can deliver a "minimally comparable" GPU, but what about the CPU !?
I find it very difficult for nintendo to make a Console/Handheld with GPU and CPU comparable to the "series S" rumored specs and, at the same time, maintain portability and low price (both characteristics of Nintendo's most successful consoles)

The biggest gains next gen are from the CPU, don't forget that.

8-core Ryzen processors is difficult to downscale to an ARM SoC for mobile.

You mean like the Xbox One S?
Xbox Series S  >>> Xbox One S.
Xbox Series X >>> Xbox One X.

Seeing a pattern there...

DLSS is just a "tool" that can be leveraged to increase efficiency, if the Switch 2 lacks fundamental technologies like high-speed SSD's, Hardware Ray Tracing and so forth, then it's going to be at a hardware disadvantage that may drive away ports anyway... And DLSS won't save it.

Arm A78 in a 8 core config isn't actually that far off from the CPU inside the XBox Series S. 

GPU performance is far more important for ports. 

High speed storage isn't magically exclusive to consoles (no matter how much Sony kool-aid you drink). There are already mobile devices like iPhones that have had NVMe storage for years now. Android phones have NFS 3.0, but in a few years even faster NFS 4.0 will be available which will be as fast or faster than the XBox's drive. The world doesn't revolve around game consoles. 

Ray tracing ... please go ahead MS and Sony, pretty please. Please do push Ray tracing. It will cripple both the lukewarm RDNA 1.5 GPUs in those machines (and a no-go on Series S entirely) in performance faster than you can say "I want a Nvidia 3080". The PS5 in particular will struggle with even PS4+ range graphics when you start introducing legit ray tracing elements into a game. 

DLSS is a game changer for performance, the simple fact of the matter is it's much easier for any GPU to run a game at say 540p than 1800p or 4K. That's not some magical rule that applies only to Nintendo is specialized situations. There just was no great way in the past to be able to get the nice picture quality from higher resolutions without actually rendering the higher resolutions. DLSS changes that.  

Bench pressing 150 pounds will always be easier than benching 250. That's basically what DLSS does for a GPU it lets it give the appearance of "benching 250" when in fact the processor is really only lifting 100 pounds. 

The Switch can't run GTA Online (well enough) where Take 2 makes the majority of their revenue from. That's the problem there. 

Fact of the matter is though if Switch had even 50%-60% of the multiplatform 3rd party titles that the XBox gets that the Switch doesn't, that would be quite significant. Go ahead and just randomly pick 6/10 series' that aren't on Switch from a list:

Madden NFL, Star Wars Jedi: Fallen Order, Street Fighter VI, NHL series, Grand Theft Auto, Call of Duty, Far Cry, Battlefield, Resident Evil, Soul Calibur, Tekken, Devil May Cry, Red Dead Redemption, Final Fantasy (mainline), Assassin's Creed (mainline), Cyberpunk 2077, Final Fantasy VIIR (series) etc.

If XBox Series S helps flip even 4-5 major IP onto the Switch 2 that weren't maybe going to be there otherwise, Nintendo owes MS a beer. 

Wait till you see the new Apple chips that are coming, there's a reason why they're ditching Intel for straight up mobile components even in their Pro laptop and desktop lines. 

Mobile CPUs are no joke. There's also the ARM X1 core that is coming that could be a possibility for Switch 2 if Nintendo really wanted to go pound for pound, but I don't think honestly despite all the hype that CPU's will be maxxed out by games anytime soon. Game development is way more focused on GPU for a long time and it will remain that way because many devs simply don't want to think outside of the box. That and there's still a crap ton of PC gamers with old ass legacy Intel CPUs that they want to support.