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

Forums - Nintendo Discussion - How will be Switch 2 performance wise?

 

Which console will be close in performance?

XB1 13 8.78%
 
PS4 49 33.11%
 
PS4 pro 47 31.76%
 
XB1X 8 5.41%
 
XBox Series S 24 16.22%
 
PS5 3 2.03%
 
XBox Series X 4 2.70%
 
Total:148
LegitHyperbole said:
Conina said:

I tested the animated main menu of Ori 2 on my Steam Deck OLED with various settings.

...

So in the 10 - 13 watts tests, HDR only adds 0.5 - 0.9 watts, depending on the display brightness.
In the results of 17 watts and above, HDR adds 2.6 - 2.8 watts... that probably includes the higher fan speed for cooling.

Interesting. Well they definitely won't be using HDR then.

Interesting conclusion. Why is that definitive?

I also compared Horizon: Zero Dawn SDR (16 watts) and HDR (17.3 watts). Only 7.5% less battery life for much better contrasts:



Around the Network
Pemalite said:
Soundwave said:

Then you just re-download the game if your SD Card has an issue, it's not that big of a deal. You should be able to keep your save files on the main storage.

Downloading a Terabytes worth of data is not a 5 minute job.

Soundwave said:

You should be able to keep your save files on the main storage.

Or via Cloud... If it wasn't hidden behind a pay wall.

Soundwave said:

I've used SD Cards with the Switch and even prior to that for years and have never had a problem.

Anecdotal evidence is only evidence for anecdotes.
In short... Your argument here is completely irrelevant.

The electrical charge stored in NAND's cells discharge over time. This is a blatant fact, we are beholden to the laws of Physics, your anecdote cannot erase this fundamental fact.

Factors that accelerate the issue are: How often it's used/recharged, current wear rate, temperature it's stored at, silicon quality, geometry transistor size and more.

There is a reason -why- data centers don't use NAND Flash to store data for archival purposes, it's extremely unreliable... Anyone who argues otherwise literally has no idea.

It's also the reason why consoles like the WiiU will brick themselves if you don't use them.
https://www.techpowerup.com/305736/long-term-nintendo-wii-u-owners-experiencing-bricked-systems

Soundwave said:

This isn't just an issue for Switch 2, for PS5/XBox most people are already not keeping all their games actually downloaded all at once on their internal storage. 

Playstation 5 and Xbox Series has the option of augmenting their storage with non-NAND options.

Soundwave said:

It's simply the reality of an industry that's going all digital, you keep the games you play most on board, delete stuff you don't play as much in the moment, if you want to revisit those games you can always put it on cold storage or back up or redownload it. 

I was a PC gamer living in the digital-only world years before consoles went digital.

It's convenient having a wide-array of titles installed and updated and ready to play.

Again... I don't have the time nor care factor to install and update a title because I feel like playing it on a whim, that crap can take hours... I've literally turned my console off and jumped on my PC because of that inconvenience.

Soundwave said:

The important thing for Switch 2 is the main storage is large enough to handle any single kind of game, that way the publisher can port to the system and be assured a player if they really want to can play the digital only version of the game without needing an add-on SD Card or whatever. 

No. It's important to hold multiple large games. Not singular.

It's a portable device first and foremost, cellular data tends to be relatively expensive compared to other options, you aren't going to uninstall a 100GB+ game and download another 100GB+ game to play on the bus.

Not an issue if you can have both installed.

Chrkeller said:

But I get your point.  Based on rumors/leaks, the Deck 2 and Ally 2 will outclass the S2 with ease..  but neither of them will have Nintendo S2 1st party games.

You haven't been paying attention then. PC has been getting Switch exclusives... And sometimes even before release date on Switch.
Legalities are a little bit meh, but they are available.. And run and look better.

LegitHyperbole said:

I never realised it took more graphics power. Maybe they can personalise the screen to look similar like some TV's that have that fake HDR dynamic preset, have to assume they'll use OLED also. 

It does. It's why Microsoft increased the clockrates on the Xbox One S over the base Xbox One.

Oneeee-Chan!!! said:

If Nintendo and Nvidia are going to use 4nm, it would be wise for them to adopt Lovelace as is rather than go through the trouble and port the Samsung Ampere to tsmc.

Honestly, I am okay with Ampere, it's capable with the features like Ray Tracing.
I just want more Ram to let the current hypothetical ampere-based GPU breathe.

And going Ampere would certainly be a cost-cutting measure as it's not the latest and greatest nVidia has to offer, so Nintendo likely got a good deal on the SoC's.

You are talking to someone that only cares about Nintendo Dominating the market and will make any excuse for them. 



Conina said:
LegitHyperbole said:

Interesting. Well they definitely won't be using HDR then.

Interesting conclusion. Why is that definitive?

I also compared Horizon: Zero Dawn SDR (16 watts) and HDR (17.3 watts). Only 7.5% less battery life for much better contrasts:

Perhaps I read your stats wrong but I thought I seen double the wattage in some tests, 10 watts to 20 for HDR....?



LegitHyperbole said:
Conina said:

Interesting conclusion. Why is that definitive?

I also compared Horizon: Zero Dawn SDR (16 watts) and HDR (17.3 watts). Only 7.5% less battery life for much better contrasts:

Perhaps I read your stats wrong but I thought I seen double the wattage in some tests, 10 watts to 20 for HDR....?

Then you read it wrong, indeed.

~10 watts was the game running with 45 fps, both for HDR on and HDR off.

17 - 20 watts the game running with 90 fps.



Pemalite said:
sc94597 said:

I also think we're only scratching the surface of Deep Learning enhanced graphics with current DLSS.

I would argue Unreal Engines TSR offers the better option currently.

XESS has made massive gains... And FSR is still... Well. FSR.
But these technologies are still in their infancy relatively, give them a few more years and it will look even more interesting.

sc94597 said:

But yeah, I think the 10th Generation will be a much larger leap than the 9th mostly because I think Deep Learning aided graphics will balloon in scope and applications.  

It's a good idea to watch the PC space as that is where the innovation is occurring on this front, with A.I being the hot buzz word, Intel and AMD rolling out A.I capabilities in their CPU's, we are in for an interesting few years.

And honestly, I don't think it's going to fizzle out like with the 3D fad, it's being baked into hardware and software at every level.

I've been tracking Nvidia's white-papers (and the research in general), and there are a lot of features of Visual Deep-Learning that they haven't yet added to current "DLSS" versions, but they're being developing in the field. 

For example, this paper where they introduce compact-NGP, which is an even more efficient NGP (Neural Graphics Primitives) model than Instant NGP. 

https://research.nvidia.com/labs/toronto-ai/compact-ngp/

NGPs can eventually be used for better ray-construction and lighting in general, dynamic real-time asset generation, efficient physics simulations, smoother animations, etc. In the paper they're initially using them for less-lossy texture-compression, which can make LOD-management even more seamless, but the possibilities are pretty diverse. 

"Compact neural graphics primitives (Ours) have an inherently small size across a variety of use cases with automatically chosen hyperparameters. In contrast to similarly compressed representations like JPEG for images (top) and masked wavelet representations [Rho et al. 2023] for NeRFs [Mildenhall et al. 2020] (bottom), our representation neither uses quantization nor coding, and hence can be queried without a dedicated decompression step. This is essential for level of detail streaming and working-memory-constrained environments such as video game texture compression. The compression artifacts of our method are easy on the eye: there is less ringing than in JPEG and less blur than in Rho et al. (though more noise). Compact neural graphics primitives are also fast: training is only 1.2-2.6x slower (depending on compression settings) and inference is faster than Instant NGP because our significantly reduced file size fits better into caches."

Here is another paper (not from Nvidia) that goes through the details of how NeRF's (which NGPs are a generalization of) can be used in rasterization pipelines. There are some example assets on their website. 

https://mobile-nerf.github.io/



Around the Network
zeldaring said:

You are talking to someone that only cares about Nintendo Dominating the market and will make any excuse for them. 

Says the person hellbent on dooming them because no GTA.



LegitHyperbole said:
JRPGfan said:

However its slightly more demanding on the gpu (HDR tonemapping), and on the screen (monitor/tv) it usually uses more power than a screen without.
*edit:  They keep makeing advances in technology.... a few years ago, there was a bigger differnce between HDR use and not for powerconsumption, than today.

I never realised it took more graphics power.

It doesn't (or the additional power it is so negligible, it is not measurable).

I tested it with the in-game benchmark of "Marvel's Guardian of the Galaxy" on my Steam Deck OLED.
The darker screenshots are with "HDR on".

"low" preset: both 45 fps on average, "HDR on" with a very tiny performance advantage (0.1 milliseconds CPU frametimes + 0.1 milliseconds GPU frametimes), "HDR on" rendered 2 more frames (0.1%):

"high" preset: both 40 fps on average, "HDR off" with a very tiny performance advantage (0.2 milliseconds CPU frametimes, 0.1 milliseconds GPU frametimes), "HDR off" rendered 5 more frames (0.2%):



Phenomajp13 said:
zeldaring said:

You are talking to someone that only cares about Nintendo Dominating the market and will make any excuse for them. 

Says the person hellbent on dooming them because no GTA.

I never doomed them at all i said it might slow down switch 2 sales and hype down  a bit, but that's for another thread. He makes a excuse for everything 256gb is not enough space for something expected higher then ps4 level graphics, especially when permalite gives him great reasons as to why people will end up with games that don't even work in the far future. 



zeldaring said:
Phenomajp13 said:

Says the person hellbent on dooming them because no GTA.

I never doomed them at all i said it might slow down switch 2 sales and hype down  a bit, but that's for another thread. He makes a excuse for everything 256gb is not enough space for something expected higher then ps4 level graphics, especially when permalite gives him great reasons as to why people will end up with games that don't even work in the far future. 

He doesn't make excuses at all because that is his opinion. I share the same, I absolutely do not keep all of my games downloaded and I also doubt millions of other consumers do as well. It's nice and all that Permalite is worried about his physical games in the future and it's unfortunate but it doesn't mean I expect Nintendo to put as much storage in the console as possible because they absolutely will upcharge us. Permalite is right about us as consumers should want as much as possible for our money but we live in the real world where corporate greed will take precedence. What type of prices are you and/or Permalite expecting for Switch 2? What device delivers 256 GB of on board storage with all the other stuff we expect from Switch 2 with a dock for 399.99? Steam Deck 256 GB with LCD and no dock is 399.99. Do you think Nintendo should aim for 399.99 or less if possible? Or should they aim higher and put in more storage?



Oneeee-Chan!!! said:

If Nintendo and Nvidia are going to use 4nm, it would be wise for them to adopt Lovelace as is rather than go through the trouble and port the Samsung Ampere to tsmc.

The main gain from Lovelace is the die shrink from 8nm to 5nm (it's listed as TSMC 4N, but this is actually 5nm), so if you're doing the die shrink anyway, you're getting most of the benefit of Lovelace. 

We know the Switch 2 has some Lovelace features because it was in the T239 leak (I forgot what it was), so they did take a few things from the Lovelace chips. 

The other thing I believe Lovelace has is Frame Generation, but it's kinda pointless for Nintendo because Nvidia frame generation doesn't really run well unless you are getting 60 fps, so it's only useful for frame rates above 60, which most televisions don't support and who knows if the Switch 2 screen is even higher than 60 Hz. Ray reconstruction is still supported by Ampere chips if Nintendo ever wants to use that. 

My guess is if the chip is 5nm Ampere shrink may have saved a few bucks, not go all the way with a Lovelace chip if you're not using the Frame Generation functionality anyway. 

Last edited by Soundwave - on 26 May 2024