The only thing that Nintendo should be concerned with in regards to "power" is making sure that Unreal Engine 5 can comfortably run on Switch 2. They need to do nothing else beyond that. Whatever that requires should be our realistic expectation.

I feel like if Nintendo have gone for a relatively cheap Samsung 8Nm fabrication process its clear they are looking to get a very good manufacturing price and if the fabrication process is a bit cheaper and slightly inferior technology then the console will create more heat and be more power hungry so to offset that lower clocks seem more logical to me so I'm expecting around 3x power boost for the Switch 2 with about 400-800 Gflops in portable mode and around 1.2-1.6 Teraflops in docked mode. Of course being later technology with clever upscaling it will punch above its weight in graphic performance. I really can't see it offering 3 Teraflops of performance in docked mode. People are always overly optimistic about Nintendo hardware performance but normally within a few months reality starts leaking out. If Nintendo keeps to lower speeds then chip yields are higher and prices are lower and Nintendo makes more profit on the hardware. Nintendo delivers great performance with standard Switch hardware and I feel with 3x the raw power or maybe 4-5x the actual power using more efficient technology is enough to feel like a huge generational leap. I'll be happy to be proved wrong though. I feel the world economy is not in a great state and we are in uncertain times so hardware that can start at a high retail price but drop hugely and still be profitable in a market downturn is probably the wisest path to take.

So 400-600 Gflops would imply clock speeds of 130-195 Mhz if the Switch 2 has a T239. 

Ampere chips idle at about 210 Mhz. The lowest active power-state clock rate of any Ampere chip is the RTX  a2000 at 562Mhz. 

According to the SDK leak from a few days ago the Switch 2 is at 561 Mhz in handheld mode and 1007.25Mhz in docked mode.

That'd align with the a2000 having a 562 Mhz base clock. 

So unless the Switch 2 isn't using a T239, but a smaller chip with fewer cores (very unlikely) flops as low as you're suggesting aren't possible. 400Gflops-600Gflops at single-precision would imply sub-idle frequencies, and nearly half of what the Switch 1 was able to achieve in its lowest handheld mode setting on the Maxwell architecture. GPU's have minimum voltages (and therefore frequencies) that they have to be at to even work properly. 

It'll be a bit better than that given the leaked clock speeds but I get what you're saying.

It has been almost 25 years since the GameCube and people are still huffing the sweet spice of expecting competitive performance when it comes to new Nintendo console hardware.

They've given up on that race long, long ago and have focused on amazing gaming experiences to great success ever since.

I'm thinking well under 1000 Cuda Cores maybe 700-800 I really don't think the Switch 2 will just have a stock T239 and doesn't even that have variable Cuda cores maybe related to yields. Why do you think its very unlikely it will have less cores? It's a small chip and its going to need extra space for Switch compatibility, encryption routines, uncompressing and compressing functionality and other logic Nintendo wants in that chip. Maybe development kits had full T239 chipsets but I suspect the final retail model will be very cut down in comparison. However I'll admit I'm only guessing based on Nintendo's past behaviour. Also that glimpse of Mariokart has been analysed and its not that impressive visually. Yes I know you can't base anything on that glimpse of the game but presumably Nintendo believes that is close to the product that will be shipped. I would expect much more from a 3 Teraflop games console. However I don't want to be Mr Negative in this thread and I still think it will be an amazing console but yes I'm pegging the performance right at the lowest end of expectations.

I'm expecting it to have far less Cuda cores in the finished customised chipset. Maybe this view isn't realistic based on the leaks which I'll admit I haven't followed religiously so maybe I'm out of touch with what has been discovered so far. Is there any actual reason it couldn't ship with 700 cuda cores for example?

The T239 is a custom chip designed specifically for the Switch 2. I very much doubt they're going to have dev kits with 12SM (and design a chip around having that many cores) and reduce the real core-count by half. That would make it very hard for developers to optimize their games given that the real chips only have half the performance. It would also be a waste of R&D on Nvidia and Nintendo's part. 

Why do I think the 1,536 core-count (12SM) is accurate?

• The T239 is a custom design for the Switch 2. It is not designed for anything else. 
  
  
• It's been confirmed through multiple leaks, including the Nvidia leak, but multiple times afterwards. To the point that the likes of Digital Foundry/Eurogamer treat it as all but confirmed. 
• The GPU clock rates make sense, given the core-count/SMs (they match peak efficiency for handheld mode and aren't too inefficient for docked mode.) 
  
  
• A 1.7 TFLOP Handheld/3.1 TFLOP Docked chip isn't that powerful. It is roughly the mid-end of current gaming PC-handhelds and would be towards the lower-end when Switch 2 releases (we'll have Z2E chips in a hypothetical Rog Ally 2 by then.) That makes sense given that the original Switch fit that same performance slot, or even exceeded it when it released. 

I wouldn't be surprised if Mario Kart 9 (or whatever it is called) is cross-gen so I wouldn't base much off of it, but even if it weren't Mario Kart games haven't been top-of-the-line in terms of graphics for a system since the Gamecube or NDS. 

Technically it does have 768 cores already... it's just that Nvidia counts them differently since Ampere for marketing purposes.

Besides, we do know the die size of the finished chipset already, and 200-ish mm² is more than enough for 8 cortex cores plus this GPU. This is already a really tiny processor, smaller than the smallest commercially available Ampere! No need to make it even smaller.

Nanotechnology confirmed!

The video shows a digital update caused not only the details and molecular makeup of the Switch to transform, but also a notable increase in the mass of the device - if you're confused about how they achieve this, Einstein's energy to mass conversion equations are your friend! Joycons also get a life of their own... which indicates AI control - while AI is relatively new to the world of language models,  video games have had it since the 1950s!
I think the real question is, did Nintendo program the Switch 2 to destroy other video game consoles? Because I think it will destroy the competition.

I think Digital Foundry used a RTX 2050.
Console wise, I think if the 3.09 Tflops of compute is true, it'll be around what a PS4pro was in terms of performance.
(however DLSS > checker-boarding technique (in terms of image quality))

I expect Nintendo will have its some of it's own games upscale to 1440p.
Supposedly Mario Odyssey ran at 720-900p docked, on the switch. And often at the lower parts of that range.
Going from that, to next gen, maybe upwards of 1440p is going to be massive for image clarity.
3rd Party,.... I expect most will just upscale to 1080p.

(3rd party games on the PS5/XSX, could probably see ports, and just run lower resolutions on the Switch2)