Nah I don't want any excuse. You will also buy FFXVI. Period. /just kidding (but you will think about it ok ?)

Why exaggerate mate?

No one expects it to match PS5's visuals. Series S is the absolute best case sceneario (too optimistic), PS5 is effectively 4-5 times more capable than Series S. Switch 2 aint matching the PS5.

Will it beat the SteamDeck? Absolutely and by a wide margin. The SteamDeck is relatively old, and Nintendo is at a position where they can make better deals with chip makers than Valve. Not beating the SteamDeck would have been an embarrassment.

Yeah before this leak

Oh you might want to check out another thread.  Soundwave thinks the switch 2 will run FFVII Remake like the ps5.  When I asked why nobody else is using the chipset other than Nintendo his answer was nVidia doesn't want to play with small players.  People believe it.

And isn't the entire thread based on the premise the switch 2 behind closed door had visuals that rivals the ps5 and series x?  

"The demo is said to have been running using Nvidia’s DLSS upscaling technology, with advanced ray tracing enabled and visuals comparable to Sony‘s and Microsoft’s current-gen consoles"

So how am I exaggerating when the entire thread is literally about matching the ps5 in visual fidelity?

Except you realize the Switch 2 is probably running this Matrix demo at maybe 1/9th the resolution? Maybe even less than that? 

Asus can make a console with a Tegra processor in it ... but who's going to make games for it? Asus? You? 

Steam Deck type devices are using AMD CPU + GPU x86 chips because 1) AMD is desperate for cash and willing to sell those chips cheap 2) they have an x86 CPU which means it's a PC, which means no game development is required as it'll run hundreds/thousands of games from the word go. The downside is the battery performance and efficiency of these devices is going to be a bit assy. 

CVG has a good track record and there's good precident for this, when Nvidia showed the Tegra X1 in 2015, they used the Unreal Engine 4 Elemental Demo to show off the chip ... using The Matrix Awakens, it lines up exactly as something Nvidia would probably do.

I also wonder if there are some "off the books" features DLSS 3.0+ has that they don't advertise or want known for the PC. Like as in it can resolve images from even lower resolutions than what Super Performance Mode DLSS 2.2 did. If it could do something like take 360p and go to 1440p or even 4K ... because DLSS 1.0 to 2.2 made massive improvements here and AI models tend to get better. 

Though if that was possible I can see why Nvidia wouldn't advertise it or make it officially available (because why buy like a 40 series card if you the DLSS feature is getting that good). 

A PS5 is nowhere near 5 times more capable than a Series S. 

It would have to be like 20 teraflops to be that 5x more than the Series ... it's about half that, lol. 

PS5 has 36 CUs (graphics units) and the XBox Series S has 20 CUs, but the PS5 CUs are clocked higher. 

Matrix Awakens demo also runs on Series S.

But it's not hybrid mate. I did comment this earlier, but I still predict $400 with Series S level spec. I was just asking a question if these leaks are true, it wouldn't be a surprise if it costs $500. 

It should achieve "comparable" visuals at 1/4th~ the native resolution, and probably only for games that aren't particularly heavy on the CPU. This doesn't make comparable to the PS5 in the sense that matters. There is no such thing as "PS5 visuals" anyway, some games are much more demanding than others. FF7 Intergrade is technically an enhanced PS4 game. You can argue that even PS4 can run it at a fairly comparable visual fidelity to PS5.

I don't buy the theoretical nonsense. PS5's real world (effective) results are typically 3-5 times better than Series S. Games often run at more than 2x or 3x the resolution + higher framerates + higher settings. Real world results decide the effective power. PS5 demolishes the S and trades blows with the "more powerful" X.

Given what we might expect from the Switch 2's hardware (Ampere-based mobile GPU), it isn't too surprising. Here is the demo running on an RTX 3050 laptop dGPU. With some closed-platform optimizations, an internal resolution of say 720p (instead of 1080p in the video), and maybe more available video-memory a lower powered Orin chip (cut from the same die) probably could do similar.