yes I've heard Xess can be used on hardware not based on intel graphics but never seen how that works. I know XeSS is a lot better than FSR 3.2 or earlier but not sure how it compares to FSR 4 on the higher end AMD graphics cards that support it. DLSS seems to be better though but XeSS sits in the middle between FSR and DLSS it seems. Seems strange that Intel would offer their upscaling to other platforms. I've just had a look at Cyberpunk on XeSS on steamdeck and the video I watched showed it superior to FSR but the frame rates were much lower, so much more CPU intensive it seems. However the graphics looked excellent. I googled whether XeSS can upscale from a very low resolution like 360p like the Switch does and it says yes but I can't find any examples of XeSS upscaling from lets say 360p to 1080p to see how well it works. It would be interesting to see how the Steam deck performs with XeSS upscaling from 360p to its native resolution of 720p. You would think with its more powerful hardware and only having a 720p screen it could do a good job with that beating the Switch 2 for visual quality at least on the OLED version.

It feels like the best alternative to the Switch 2 would be a reasonable entry level gaming laptop based on a Nvidia chipset that can also make use of DLSS. 

This one seems to have about twice the performance of Switch 2 and based on very similar architecture. Strangely it has the same memory 12GB (8GB for system and 4GB for graphics) but can easily be upgraded to 32GB of system memory.

https://www.amazon.co.uk/Acer-Nitro-ANV15-51-Gaming-Laptop/dp/B0D2374GYB?source=ps-sl-shoppingads-lpcontext&ref_=fplfs&smid=A3P5ROKL5A1OLE&th=1

That is a 599 pound laptop. So similar to the Switch 2 mario kart bundle with an extra controller and software title.

https://www.techpowerup.com/gpu-specs/geforce-rtx-2050-mobile.c3859

The Nvidia T239 appears to be an inferior version of the RTX 2050 with about half the performance (according to that recent Switch 2 PCB analysis), it has much lower memory bandwidth on Switch 2 and also shared memory rather than the dedicated memory of the RTX2050 mobile chip. As you can see the RTX 2050 is about 5 Teraflops of performance. Similar to a RX 480-580.

The CPU performance of the laptop is of course massively superior to the T239's CPU performance especially at the clocks in the Switch 2. You get a 144Hz screen.

It feels like you are getting a lot of superior technology for comparable money but of course not as portable and no Nintendo games except for emulation. It will likely emulate Switch at enhanced resolution though and of course any Nintendo console before it.

You wonder how much Acer pays for its Nvidia RX 2050 chipset in that laptop and how much less Nintendo pays for the T239 chip. Both appear to be based on the Samsung 10/8Nm fabrication process. 

I assume this laptop could also render at 360p and upscale to the 1080p screen with frame generation too using DLSS.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5sU8BOUjX0E

This is true, but when I try XeSS 1.3 Balanced @1080p on Cyberpunk 2077 with Steam Deck preset on my Z1E Rog Ally there are frame drops to 25-27fps every 20 seconds or so even in the 30W mode, but especially at 25W or below.

XeSS 1.3 Balanced @ 900p (or XeSS 1.3 Performance @ 1080p) are pretty stable though and looks better than the default FSR 2.1 Balanced @ 1080p. 

None are close to DLSS.

The problem with the RTX 2050 is that it is memory capacity starved. Sure it has system ram to swap from, but that comes with its own problems. Especially with these entry level laptops that tend to come with only one relatively low-clocked (4800Mhz) 8GB SODIMM ( in single-channel.) 

So while a Switch 2 docked mode is about 60% the performance of a top TDP RTX 2050 and 80% of the performance of a low-end TDP RTX 2050 I suspect it will be able to achieve a bit more and have longer longevity. 

The build quality of these entry level gaming laptops are pretty lackluster too, whereas the Switch 2's build quality has been described as "premium."

Yeah, some folks don't seem to understand how much of a hog Windows is. When the game is running on other OS, not natively, but through compatibility layer, and still outperforms Windows on the same hardware by that much (in that video, CP2077 by 28%, which is, in modern times, whole GPU generation uplift), there is a big red flashing light (not to mention massively better battery life under same load). From my POV, MS is currently more worried about SteamOS, than anything happening in console market.

Tied to the topic, dedicated console with good OS will always beat that same hardware with bloated general purpose OS, especially since there is only one kind of hardware your optimizing for, compared to general approach with PC ports. That said, all "consoles are punching above their weight" compared to PCs due to being dedicated hardware with optimized software, Switch 2 being nothing more or less, despite some folks, who really need to curb their enthusiasm and their overblown statements (or maybe even check their eyesight) thinking otherwise - SW2 performs exactly as expected for level of hardware it is made of, everything else is up to developers.

Yeah, the only thing holding me back from switching to Steam OS (or Bazitte) on my Rog Ally is the non-Steam launchers are hassle to get working and no Game Pass.

I gave my partner (who is just starting out with gaming) my Steam Deck for this reason.

Nvidia's lackluster linux drivers are what hold me back on my main laptop.  

If Valve figures these out then the only time I'll use Windows would probably be for work and Power BI (although PowerBI runs pretty decently on my M4 Macbook with parallels.)

It might come as single channel with just a single 8GB on the motherboard but they normally have a spare sodimm socket to go to dual channel and a single 8GB sodimm would be cheap, sometimes these laptops have dual sodimm sockets which I assume this has if it can be upgraded to 32GB i.e dual 16GB sodimms. I would say the RTX 2050 was more powerful than you have stated and Vulcan provides good optimisation. Windows like Enterprise LTSC Iot is very light on resources compared to regular Windows and also we do know the Switch 2 is using a lot of resources for its operating system and gamechat etc. There is a lot more memory bandwidth all around on the laptop. Yes 4GB dedicated video memory is not amazing but for the 1080p visuals you would expect from this laptop for intensive games it should be fine and for upscaled 1440p and 4K graphics should be fine too. I'll admit not so great for native 1440p and 4K though but the same issue with the Switch 2. I think build quality definitely varies by laptop brand but fan noise is something that can be bad on some models when gaming for longer periods. Battery life may not be amazing either but it should comfortably outperform the Switch 2 which only has 2 hours minimum runtime for this first generation model. The TDP of the RTX 2050 mobile varies from 30-45W although Mhz doesn't vary that much and its on exactly the same fabrication process as Switch 2 and that is given a TDP for its complete circuitry including the SOC of 4-6W.

It only has a 20Wh battery so 10Wh for each hour and the screen will take about half of that. So it has 4-6W where as this laptop has 30-45W. Again these are peak figures I'm sure just like the Switch 2 figures from that analysis. Realistic figures for both will be lower but a lot, lot lower for Switch 2 as it has so little battery power to play with. A gaming laptop battery is typically 50-90Wh. However obviously the bigger screen needs more power of a laptop but it remains the same in ratio to the size so maybe 8-12W for a larger laptop screen.

Sure, if you open up the laptop and add another $25 stick (not hard, but also not something an entry-level buyer might know they even should do), if you have the right Windows installation, if you make sure you bought a laptop with the right RTX 2050 configuration (remember not all RTX 2050 laptops hit the max TGP and the lowest TGP is 83% the performance of the highest) it would outclass the Switch 2 pretty healthily, but by that point you're in the budget range for a much better gaming laptop, about $100-$150 more expensive than the Switch 2 and you had to do work to achieve it. 

Personally if I were a low budget gamer looking for an entry level gaming laptop I would look into a 4050 laptop for $60-$120 more than the 2050 laptops. At least then you get frame generation and 6GB of VRAM. During sale events entry-level 4050 models can be found for $550-$700.There are open box ones on ebay for $570 and new ones for $650-$700.

That gives you about 2.5 to 3 times the Switch 2's performance for 1.3 to 1.5 times the price. 

After the 4050, the 6GB RTX 3050 laptops probably are the best models in that price range. Anything 4GB won't last for even upscaled 1080p imo, unless you want to run on the lowest settings.

Edit: You're also not considering the CPU consumption in your battery life estimates. These laptops typically run total power profiles of 50-70W when including CPU + GPU + ancillary power consumption. With a 50WH battery that would mean less than an hour battery life, and with a 90WH battery a little bit more than an hour to almost two.  

Consoles are more efficient ... no kidding. Factor in on top of that consoles get specific developer side attention whereas PCs don't and there will always be a sizable gap. That's been the case for 40+ years. 

People can and should be enthusiastic about the Switch 2, the boo birds here have been trying to talk down the system for 1-2 years here and its turns out the system actually has pretty decent performance (cue the folks lecturing everyone like know it alls that the system would be a PS4 at best because "they know Nintendo" ... these people don't know shit, they think it's still 2006 when Nintendo was operating in a vastly different environment with a totally different leadership structure). 

For $450 and a profit required to be made, given also tarrifs, I don't think anyone for June 2025 would be able to make a system with all the other spec features (8 inch reasonably good quality display, 256GB fast UFS 3.1 storage, disconnecting controllers x2, dock with TV output have to come in the package) I don't think anyone right now could offer something vastly better given those requirements. 

Could it be a bit better? Sure, but it's not like the Wii or DS or something where it's vastly underpowered, it's above par for what's available today at that price, which is good enough. Companies don't owe it to you to take a $50-$100 loss per unit, that's a stupid business model that Microsoft tried to push and it got them no where in this business. We can see even from Sony they generally will not take a loss on hardware anymore and you don't get big fat price cuts either, you want something nowadays you have to pay for it and fair enough. 

The Steam Deck is $400 for the base model still and that has a smaller 7 inch display, less hardware performance, no TV dock, no Joycon detachable controllers, and the screen only has a  60 Hz refresh rate whereas Switch 2 has 120 Hz. It's also a significantly bulkier, less portable device. Other models of today like the Steam Deck OLED (which Switch 2 will also outperform) and ROG Ally are $550-$650+, so significantly more expensive, while also far less portable.

Okay here is a very clean version I was able to get on the Rog Ally experimenting with Xess 1.3 performance mode at 1080p (internal 960 x 540.) Uses the Steam Deck preset. I am able to get a constant 30fps lock. I resized the image, but you should be able to right-click -> view for the full 1080p. 

vs. Switch 2

Personally wish they dialed down a bit with the motion blur and DoF in the Switch 2 version, but otherwise it looks a lot better.

There's enthusiasm, there's realism and then there's "Switch 2 looks better than PS5 Pro here" level of nonsense.