The pixel disparity between the Switch 2 and PS5 could be potentially enormous.

Take an average PS5 game at 2560x1440 resolution x 60 fps = 221,184,000 pixels per second of stress put on the system

If you want 4K x 30 fps, it's a little more = 248,832,00 pixels per second

A Switch 2 game could be very likely 720p x 30 fps = 27,648,000 pixels. Then you use DLSS to take that image up to 1440p or 4K or whatever.

That it almost a 9x-10x gap in pixels both systems have to push.

Compare to PS4 vs Switch 1, on a game like Witcher 3 (approximately):

PS4 runs it at 1080p x 30 fps = 62,208,000 pixels
Switch runs docked at 720p x 30 fps = 27,648,000 pixels

So like the disparity here is not nearly as large, and that is bad for the Switch 1, you want the Switch 1 to be pushing as low of a number of pixels as possible vs the PS4 to make it easier on the system, to get those "impossible" ports to run, since it has nothing like DLSS it has to use up a lot of its horsepower just rendering at a resolution close to the PS4.

30 fps is awful. I'm avoiding FF16 till square figures out how to develop.  If the switch 2 runs most games at 30 fps that will be a massive disappointment for me.

Like lol, ok. 

It's a mass market machine that has to be usable portably. Like what do you suggest? Carrying a PS5 in your pants instead? 

If you guys are this picky about this stuff, you should play exclusively on PC, because 120 fps kicks the shit out of 60 fps if you're that attuned to frame rate and you can crank actual ray tracing. Why bother with any of this console shit, put on some big boy pants and graduate up. Get some 8K DLSS while you're at it. 

Sony/MS/Nintendo consoles are made for regular people, not tech enthusiasts. It's like having a food critic walk into an In N' Out Burger and complain that there's no wine menu and the food is not being served on china plates. 

Square-Enix makes terrible engines ... another tell tale sign Japanese 3rd party devs are way out of their element spending tons of money making these shit engines when they should just use Unreal Engine and move on. FF16 doesn't look much better than 15 yet they bombs performance wise on the PS5. 

I play my Switch exclusively docked.  I don't care what the switch 2 does in portable mode.  But I want docked 60 fps on 1st party games.  Anything less is a disappointment.

All my ps5 games are 60 fps and I'm building a rig at the moment.  Likely going with a i7 and 4070 so I can get 120 fps.

30 fps is antiquated and needs to go away.  

Nintendo 1st party games and plenty of 3rd party stuff will be 60 fps if the Tegra T239 is indeed what it has been leaked to be. 

It's almost comical how powerful it will be for Nintendo games, especially with that more cartoony aesthetic. They're going to be able to make some remarkable games on it. 

PS5 is pointless if you have a top end PC, basically the only thing keeping it relevant is Sony's exclusives and more and more of them are moving to PC or come there eventually. I don't need to play Spider-Man 2 immediately, I can wait for a PC port that will have better resolution anyway. I haven't even bothered with a PS5, I borrowed my brother's for a couple of months, it was alright. My 3080 runs games better than it does and has GamePass. 

PC + Switch is basically all I need. I wanted to be wowwed by the PS5, it just didn't do it, just not necessary if you have a good PC. 

My guess is for AAA 3rd party titles most Switch 2 games will target the same framerates as Series S titles (with exceptions where it just can't do it because of a CPU bottleneck), but with lower internal resolutions (partly, but not wholly offeet by dlss), and maybe sometimes better effects (ray-tracing support is where it can come ahead, being an Nvidia chip.)

If on a 4 nm node clocked at over 1Ghz, one would expect Switch 2 to be within raw performance of about 75%-80% of the Series S (Switch 2 in between 1650 and 1650s versus the Series S being in between 1650s and 1660.) 

This might actually be good news for Series S owners as well. There were major concerns that developers would deprioritize the Series S when it comes to optimization. But if Switch 2 is included as well, they can share similar optimization targets. 

Basically you have four tiers of optimization/profiling: 

1. High-end PC 

2. Mid-end PC, Series X, PS5

3. Series S, Low-end PC and Switch 2 docked

4. Steam Deck and Switch 2 mobile

Sony doesn't make money on hardware but on software.  I think their PC ports are just thr beginning.  I see them embracing PC like MS does.  It is one of the reasons I'm building a rig.  It will eventually be effectively a xbox, Playstation, PC and retro gaming device in one.

Don't get me wrong my ps5 isn't going anywhere since I'm already vested via ps4 and ps5 games.  I'm not re-buying 80 games.  However ps6 maybe the first Sony console I don't buy.

I kinda of realized Spider-Man and Uncharted are really the only Sony exclusives I really, really like. They have some other good games, but I'm not going to die without like ... Horizon.

Think developers are also learning it's not 1999 anymore. Doing the whole "Playstation exclusive" thing is just stupid in this day and age, every big ticket 3rd party game is expected to be multi-platform, if it's not it just doesn't feel like an event launch. Diablo IV completely overshadowed FF16's launch. 

Resident Evil 4 Remake, Resident Evil Village, and Assassin's Creed Mirage coming to iPhone 15 Pro ... yes the iPhone (not just iPad). Ray tracing support announced for iPhone 15 as well. 

Watch more and more console games coming to iPad/iPhone in the next few years and tons of games to be on the M-series chips too. Apple is making some big moves. 

Why should I give a fuck what Apple does?