I'm not getting why there being better looking games than CP2077 on the PS5/Series X means that they'd be better looking on S2...

A game having to be cut way back to squeeze on to a system doesn't mean it'll look good, look at hogwarts on S1.

What open world games do people consider on PS5/Series X out right now that look better than CP2077? Key words. Open world and out right now.

HZ FW Burning shores.

No one is saying that, no one is expecting that. That's nonsense. 

People can be reasonably excited for a portable Nintendo system that has reasonably good modern performance and also has a form factor considerably better than any other mobile gaming product on the market. This is significantly thinner and wll be easier and more appealing to take outside the house than a brick thick Steam Deck or ROG Ally as well, that's not a small bullet point either. I got to borrow a Steam Deck for a while and the thing is so freaking chunky you really have no desire to ever take it out of the house let alone pack it for a flight, which kind of defeats the purpose in a lot of ways. 

Enthusiasm is fully warranted, after 18 months of listening to a bunch of shit about "dur hur, mesa knowsa Nintendos!!!! It's gonna be super duper under powered jusa lika WIIII YYYYOUUUUU". The actual reality is Nintendo has a completely different management today, Switch has very different brand demographics as well, just like Yamauchi's era where the Super NES, N64, GameCube were significantly more powerful than their most comparable consoles. 

Wii/DS/Wii U/3DS era is most certainly over and it was always temporary (something some people apparently didn't get the memo on). Nintendo is moving more upmarket and more into the premium market because it makes sense to do so, they have brand power to do it with (XBox brand also sinking), but I've always viewed it as more of a return to their actual original console roots. The NES, SNES, N64, GCN despite some cry babies that always need to nit pick hardware by general market consensus were always reasonably good hardware, Switch looks like a return to that given the realistic constraints of a hybrid form factor (which IMO will eventually eat traditional consoles' lunch). 

"Switch 2 looks better than PS5 Pro here" - mate, you literally said that very nonsense:

https://gamrconnect.vgchartz.com/post.php?id=9591916

And no less in the scene that has some of the worst artifacts, if not THE worst, of everything shown up to date on Switch 2.

It's ok to be enthusiastic about something, but it's ok to take a step back and curb your enthusiasm when thinking about posting such nonsense, and to rethink with clear head whether something that is 1/7th as powerful as PS5 Pro can actually look better.

SW2 is fine piece of hardware, but miracle it is not.

Yeah, HZ FW looks better than CP2077, but it's more to do with extremely clever combo of tech and art, than pure tech - HZ FW is not using any RT at all and it is much lighter in load on GPUs than CP2077.

That said, I'm not sure if Star Wars Outcast looks better per se, even with everything turned on, though there are certainly things that look better than CP2077, but it definitively is more demanding than CP2077.

This will be interesting to see on SW2, since Ubisoft games generally tend to run better on AMD GPUs, which are in PS5/XBOX.

Very different aesthetic & game but Avatar is the more feature rich and cutting edge console experience. RT GI & Reflections in all modes as well which is very impressive 

Laptops definitely have longer runtime than that but then like most mobile devices they don't deliver the performance and clock rates they claim, they give peak figures in the spec but try to conserve power when possible. However it's really down to the laptop design. The RTX 3050 mobile is on the same dated fabrication process as the RTX 2050 mobile and Switch 2 but the RTX 4050 mobile has an improved 5Nm fabrication process by TSMC rather than Samsung's much inferior fabrication process. My point is the RTX 3050 mobile would be even more power inefficient with the added performance. I don't have a gaming laptop myself except I do use a basic Celeron laptop for portable use and do game on it but older titles of course. I get up to 18 hours runtime on it, on eco power settings and reduced brightness. HP claim up to 16 hours but I debloated the operating system and use Enterprise LTSC so less processes going on. However on full performance and high brightness gaming I get about 4-6 hours on a tiny battery. 

However I'm not sure I want to argue against your laptop battery runtime estimates because if anything they reinforce my view that the Switch 2 either will have far lower performance than stated in portable mode or much shorter battery runtime. If the RTX 2050 mobile only gets lets say 90 minutes battery runtime out of 70Wh then using the same fabrication process how low does the Switch 2 have to go to get 2 hours minimum out of 20Wh? I remember when modders/hackers claimed in a forum that the Switch was dropping to 90-140 Gflops based on its reduced power consumption when portable compared to peak power. That gives an average of about 115 Gflops when the maximum potential performance of the Switch when portable is 236 Gflops so roughly twice as fast as reality. Surely the Switch 2 will be doing the same with a sub 1 Teraflop gflops figure, probably 600-800 Gflops in reality in portable mode. Switch 2 has a maximum 6.5hours runtime so with reduced brightness that still only leaves 1-2 watts per hour. 20W shared by 6.5 is only 3W and at that point the screen is probably needing more power than the SOC. I really can't see how the figures given for portable performance of the Switch 2 stack up. Where is it getting all the additional power to deliver such performance. I think we will see a huge difference this time around between portable and docked performance maybe 3-4x the power.

It's a low cost, low power chipset from 2020/2021 using a fabrication process from that time and yet we are currently comparing it to PS5 and Xbox Series X in performance. My Doogee T30 Pro tablet has a 32Wh battery and a 6Nm fabrication process. It only has a GPU of about 280 Gflops but with a really intensive android game or something like emulation I can exhaust the battery in about 2-2.5hrs. However for general light use I can get over 10hrs or more. It's an 11" 1440p screen with good brightness though. It's powerful enough to emulate some lighter Switch games at full speed not that I've ever done that myself but have seen the videos on youtube showing the same chipset doing it. I've seen more ambitious Switch games emulated but just below normal frame rates. It's on a far superior fabrication process with a far weaker GPU. 

https://www.gsmarena.com/doogee_t30_pro-12370.php

I just can't see where the Switch is getting the power to deliver the quoted portable performance levels.

It will be interesting to see how the final product compares to the footage we have seen from development units.

What you are missing (or ignoring) is that the Switch 2 doesn't have an underclocked GA107. The T239 is a chip designed for a 5-20W power curve. It is like saying, how could they fit 4.3 TFLOPs of performance in a 30W profile (RTX 2050) when an RTX 3090 (on the same manufacturing node and general micro-architecture) consumes 350W to achieve 35.58 TFLOPs? Shouldn't it be only 3 TFLOPs not 4.3 TFLOPs, if linearly scaled per watt? 

Well chip design matters and this power-scaling isn't linear. 

Even on the same node and architecture different chips have different power efficiencies at different watt ranges. Nodes mature over time. Professional versions of these chip families (which the T239 is closer to in terms of SOC architecture) tend to consume less power than consumer versions for the same performance even if manufactured on the same node. For example, and a500 Mobile (professional RTX 2050 equivalent) achieves 6 TFLOPs @30W vs. 4.3 TFLOPs @30W for the 2050.

Also the CPU in the Switch 2 is a very low powered ARM CPU, nowhere near as power-ineficient (especially at low sub-10W consumption) as the Raptor Lake Intel chip in the laptop you shared, and about half of the battery consumption there,  is because of the CPU.

You sure, the water animation alone is amazing.



Tech + Art seems to me to be more challenging than just using RT ;) This doesn't look easy on GPUs at all either, but more in the RAM (speed) required department than RT power. Best looking water imo, running at 60fps.