By using this site, you agree to our Privacy Policy and our Terms of Use. Close

Forums - Nintendo - How Will be Switch 2 Performance Wise?

 

Switch 2 is out! How you classify?

Terribly outdated! 3 4.55%
 
Outdated 1 1.52%
 
Slightly outdated 16 24.24%
 
On point 37 56.06%
 
High tech! 7 10.61%
 
A mixed bag 2 3.03%
 
Total:66
Vodacixi said:

They should aim for 40FPS more often. It doesn't seem much of a difference on paper over 30FPS, but it's actually quite the upgrade for not much of an impact on hardware.

They should or just allow a 40cap whenever they have a dodgy 60fps mode.

The reality is though most TVs in peoples houses are not 120hz capable and don't support 40fps. I'm sure the number are increasing but for any TV bought prior to 2022 it was an uncommon feature. Hell my $800 OLED LG from 2021 doesn't feature it and I thought it was one of the best reviewed TVs from its year.

And I probably won't be able to justify upgrading my TV til the end of the decade, so no 40fps mode for me :( 

Last edited by Otter - 7 hours ago

Around the Network
sc94597 said:

If they were to lock the framerate they should do 40fps. The people who care about this will have 120Hz displays. 

The game is >40fps the overwhelming majority of the time from the DF (and other's) footage. It seems to drop into the 30's in one area really. 

I think Nintendo really needs to 1. Enable VRR in docked mode like Sony did mid-gen, 2. Free up the CPU resources that are being wasted. 

I don't think many people would have bought their current gen TVs around the idea of getting 40fps,  it was simply not a thing in the console space back when PS5/Series X launched. Even by end of 2021 only Insomniac had dabbled in it and its still uncommon today.

People would of got a 120hz TVs for 120fps experiences but that was/is way more niche in appreciation and reserved a lot for competitive games. Comparably I think the average gamer does notice and care about wild fluctuations (40-60fps).

In other words I think there are a lot of people who do care about relative smoothness but don't have 120hz displays.





Last edited by Otter - 7 hours ago

Otter said:
sc94597 said:

If they were to lock the framerate they should do 40fps. The people who care about this will have 120Hz displays. 

The game is >40fps the overwhelming majority of the time from the DF (and other's) footage. It seems to drop into the 30's in one area really. 

I think Nintendo really needs to 1. Enable VRR in docked mode like Sony did mid-gen, 2. Free up the CPU resources that are being wasted. 

I don't think many people would have bought their current gen TVs around the idea of getting 40fps,  it was simply not a thing in the console space back when PS5/Series X launched. Even by end of 2021 only Insomniac had dabbled in it and its still uncommon today.

People would of got a 120hz TVs for 120fps experiences but that was/is way more niche in appreciation and reserved a lot for competitive games. Comparably I think the average gamer does notice and care about wild fluctuations (40-60fps).

In other words I think there are a lot of people who do care about relative smoothness but don't have 120hz displays.





I disagree. Most TVs that supported VRR in 2021 also supported 120Hz, and VRR was a big selling point for console gamers with the new generation. I purchased my living room TV (a QLED VA panel) that year and specifically aimed for one with VRR (and HDMI 2.1) support. 120Hz was a nice addition on top of that. This has become even more true as half a decade has passed. It is really difficult to find a medium-budget or higher TV these days that only supports 60hz. 

Last edited by sc94597 - 6 hours ago

It wouldn't be difficult to have a 30-fps cap and a 40-fps cap, hardware should auto detect which to use based on display panel. Either way, the framerate should be capped, jumping all over the place, especially in a horror game isn't good. As much as i love high fps, stability is key, it can't jump constantly.

edit

Assuming Capcom doesn't patch the game later and get a pretty consistent framerate.  

Last edited by Chrkeller - 6 hours ago

“Consoles are great… if you like paying extra for features PCs had in 2005.”
sc94597 said:
Otter said:

I don't think many people would have bought their current gen TVs around the idea of getting 40fps,  it was simply not a thing in the console space back when PS5/Series X launched. Even by end of 2021 only Insomniac had dabbled in it and its still uncommon today.

People would of got a 120hz TVs for 120fps experiences but that was/is way more niche in appreciation and reserved a lot for competitive games. Comparably I think the average gamer does notice and care about wild fluctuations (40-60fps).

In other words I think there are a lot of people who do care about relative smoothness but don't have 120hz displays.





I disagree. Most TVs that supported VRR in 2021 also supported 120Hz, and VRR was a big selling point for console gamers with the new generation. I purchased my living room TV (a QLED VA panel) that year and specifically aimed for one with VRR (and HDMI 2.1) support. 120Hz was a nice addition on top of that. This has become even more true as half a decade has passed. It is really difficult to find a medium-budget or higher TV these days that only supports 60hz. 

PS5 didn't even support VRR in 2021. I think you're just more clued up then most (and I presume also a PC gamer)

None the less I will just regurgitate the ai answer lol. 

" While 120Hz TVs existed, they were far from the majority of TVs sold to the general public in 2021, making the percentage of TVs supporting a specific 40fps/120Hz mode a small, premium segment of the market at that time."

Now I'd agree it's common (2025/2026), but I think a huge portion of the market haven't actually bought a new TV in the last few years and probably will not. They're intended to be decade long investments and the 4k/Oled wave was at the end of last decade/beginning of this one (2020s)

Last edited by Otter - 6 hours ago

Around the Network
curl-6 said:

I also took Village for a spin; as an older crossgen game it holds up really well on Switch 2.

As you'd expect, image quality is a lot sharper than Requiem and framerate is more consistent. Where Requiem looks like a very competent but downgraded port, Village feels like a "full fat" experience free of obvious compromise.

Village is an older game, should be easy to run.  Have you played it?  I feel like an outlier, because I actually think it is my favorite RE game.  I really loved that game.  



“Consoles are great… if you like paying extra for features PCs had in 2005.”
Otter said:
sc94597 said:

I disagree. Most TVs that supported VRR in 2021 also supported 120Hz, and VRR was a big selling point for console gamers with the new generation. I purchased my living room TV (a QLED VA panel) that year and specifically aimed for one with VRR (and HDMI 2.1) support. 120Hz was a nice addition on top of that. This has become even more true as half a decade has passed. It is really difficult to find a medium-budget or higher TV these days that only supports 60hz. 

PS5 didn't even support VRR in 2021. I think you're just more clued up then most (and I presume also a PC gamer)

None the less I will just regurgitate the ai answer lol. 

" While 120Hz TVs existed, they were far from the majority of TVs sold to the general public in 2021, making the percentage of TVs supporting a specific 40fps/120Hz mode a small, premium segment of the market at that time."

Now I'd agree it's common (2025/2026), but I think a huge portion of the market haven't actually bought a new TV in the last few years and probably will not. They're intended to be decade long investments and the 4k/Oled wave was at the end of last decade/beginning of this one (2020s)

I actually wasn't that well informed then. It had been years since I had bought a television and I always bought entry-level TVs until then. Mostly just researched what the best TV's were for games and usually the top of the list recommended as expansive VRR support as possible. The PS5 didn't support VRR yet, but the Series X did and support eventually did come to the PS5. If VRR weren't a selling point, Sony wouldn't have pushed to support it on PS5. 

Also the TV I am talking about was barely over $1200 in 2021, and that was the 75 inch model. The 55 inch model was around $650. "Premium" is stretching it. It was an upper-mid range model, at best.

TV sales have been stable YoY. 

My general point of course is that most people playing games don't even know anything about framerates and likely don't notice variable framerates unless the game has sudden drops or spikes (which isn't the same thing as there being a broad range of frame-rates.)  Those who do notice and care, tend to intersect with people who purchase upper-midrange to enthusiast displays anyway.

There of course are exceptions, but these things tend to go hand in hand.



sc94597 said:

My general point of course is that most people playing games don't even know anything about framerates and likely don't notice variable framerates unless the game has sudden drops or spikes (which isn't the same thing as there being a broad range of frame-rates.)  Those who do notice and care, tend to intersect with people who purchase upper-midrange to enthusiast displays anyway.

You're probably right, the majority don't even realize or care. But a sudden change in frame rate is very noticeable. 



Based on a few videos I watched, indoors seems fairly stable, the S2 struggles outdoors and especially with fires. so limited, but still very noticeable. still, the hardware is mobile, so yeah, very good.



“Consoles are great… if you like paying extra for features PCs had in 2005.”