If you are familiar with Elden Ring on other platforms, From Software doesnt really make profiles with a target framerate in mind. They just unlock the framerate above 30fps and have different graphics settings.

When I say 30-50fps, and 40-60fps, that corresponds to the quality and performance modes on other platforms. 

Basically From Software sets a DRS and the DRS never really achieves a solid 60fps. 

The PS4 (and XB ONE) is different from the other versions in that it is locked to 30fps (although even it drops.)

Also the game has motion vectors to support its TAAU implementation, so it is pretty trivial to add DLSS (which is why a mod implemented it in the PC version.)

I love From Software, but they seem to be held to a different standard compared to other developers because their games are so good. 

You see another developer that struggles (Bethesda), but at least they try to improve things over the course of the release, and they get a lot more flak than FS. Mostly because their recent games have been mediocre.

But is S2's CPU 2x better? For example the PS4 Pro 33% CPU advantage compared to the base system led some developers to allow a performance modes which kept the PS4's HD output but used the extra CPU power for frame rate and most of these games run like crap (Ala FFXV mostly in mid 40s)

Essentially I'm not sure why people are expecting 2x the real world performance on PS4 Ports, if they are at least keeping parity with PS4 feature wise. The only way that would come around is with bespoke ports that specifically set 60fps as the ambition and cut down on things below even the PS4. Or if the game is so strictly GPU bound that a lower res + DLSS creates the 2x leap.  

I think you're right in that badwidth is of course a bottle neck and one of the weaker aspects of the S2, but specifically in relation to hitting 60fps in a game like Elden Ring, I'm not sure that is specifically the *only* thing holding it back. As that is what a bottle neck implies.

Well I'm not expecting it.  I said almost two years ago the S2 would sit between the ps4 and pro. 

And I didn't expect 60 fps elden bit I wasnt expecting mid teens during boss fights vis handheld either.  

I guess what I'm saying is I did expect a locked 30 fps for elden, but no, I was not expecting 60 fps.  

And if people want the CPU to be a bottleneck in addition to the bandwidth, fair enough.  I'm just not buying the argument the bandwidth isn't a bottleneck.

The reason why bandwidth shouldn't be a bottleneck is that internal resolution isn't really a choice of discrete values that need to scale well to output anymore. You can arbitrarily set the internal resolution or use (a good implementation of) DRS to have it scale to the appropriate value where memory bandwidth is no longer a bottleneck. 

The memory bandwidth of Switch 2 docked and handheld is roughly in line with the measured optimum of about 33 GBps/TFLOP for Ampere chips. So compute capabilities and memory bandwidth likely are well-aligned on the T239 if the developer actually scales workloads appropriately. This isn't like a Rog Ally situation where the paper compute (excessive of the Series S) is heavily limited by not having enough bandwidth. 

Likewise, if Nintendo fixes their VRR, framerates shouldn't necessarily be discrete either and it is probably that reason why Switch 2 could have higher unlocked framerates than a console that doesn't support VRR at all (i.e PS4.) If Nintendo fixes VRR, it might not make sense to lock to 30fps in many instances because the people who care a lot about performance likely have VRR-capable displays, and the people who don't might not notice screen-tearing and other issues. So long as there aren't very sharp drops, of course.

I think the main culprit here is From Software - as good as they are in making great experiences, they are very limited when it comes to technical aspects.

Yes, it's all just FromSoft being incompetent. They got the game running on 9 year old hardware (at time of Elden ring release) with a playable enough framerate, but they are just too incompetent to do the same for Switch 2 which is brand new. 

Best running souls game is demon remake.... because From didn't develop it.

Curious if it just me or does the S2 have way better surround than the S1? I swear the the audio sounds way more discrete via 5.1 and the audio is way more full. S1 felt weak via audio, while I'm quite pleased with the S2. I don't think it is my imagination, thus curious what others thought.

Dark Souls Remastered is also decent... because From didn't made it.

What people dislike is some graphical changes they made but the game itself runs fine and is not a technical mess.