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?

 

Your expectations on performance...

Ridiculously below this g... 1 1.47%
 
Way below this gen: Some ... 18 26.47%
 
Slightly below this gen: ... 34 50.00%
 
On pair with this gen: AA... 15 22.06%
 
Total:68
Zippy6 6 days ago
Biggerboat1 said:

Also, does the dock have more going on that we think? Isn't Nintendo selling it on it's own for $110? Either there's more tech in there than we think or Nintendo really are going full Apple with accessory/component pricing. Maybe removing the dock from the equation would save more money that we're assuming?

Nah it's just overpriced. The Switch 1 dock cost $90 or £80 for one separately when that first launched. The new dock has a fan in it but that's not expensive. The official steam deck dock is also overpriced at $90.



Around the Network
Biggerboat1 6 days ago
curl-6 said:

I can see more of an incentive for a Switch 2 home than for the first Switch as it would be a way to get a cheaper SKU on the market, I just don't expect they'd increase clock speeds, as either you'd have to optimize for an extra performance profile in games, or if you didn't and it just held to its resolution/fps targets more closely, then I don't think they'd go to all the trouble.

As someone who doesn't use his Switch in portable mode, a home only version would be great for me, and I do think it's more likely this time around, graphics just aren't Nintendo's priority and haven't been for nearly two decades.

Yeah, I sorta a agree about them not fully unleashing the 'Home' chip, another example of Nintendo being stubborn & not giving the fans what they want haha.

If they could use the extra headroom just to stabilize frame rates and potentially even drive DLSS up to 4K that'd still be a win in my book.

It could do what PS5 Pro is doing, drive games at 'Performance' frame rates at 'Quality' resolutions (Nintendo seem to be offering these options in at least some of their games on S2). In my admittedly limited technical knowledge this seems relatively straight-forward if there was enough processing headroom.



Otter 6 days ago
Biggerboat1 said:

They could offer a non-controller option as the Switch 1 pro controller is compatible with S2 I believe & also I could see a lot of people double dipping who already own a Switch 2 (or the inevitable Switch 2 Lite) due to the higher performance of a fully clocked 'Home'.

You're prob right that $100 is too low but I could see a controller-less version being financially plausible at $150 to $200 if they were to sell at cost.

Unfortunately we'll likely never find out as all of the reasons to do this also applied to the OG Switch & it never happened...

I just don't think Nintendo was in a situation where they needed this. They would need to have data to suggest that the cost point of the regular switch was a boundary to a notable amount of people, otherwise they can continue to sell the hybrid (maintain value perception) and reap the benefits of its being a hybrid (personal ownership=multiple per house, portable means more opportunity to play games = more spending on games, more cohesive branding). The truth is they will not sell a Switch TV for especially cheap even if they could because that undervalues the Switch brand as a whole. 

I'm sure it's been on the cards but unlike Switch Lite which is especially friendly to a younger demographic or lends itself especially well as secondary system in the house, Switch TV doesn't introduce a new demo or give the system new purpose.  Just a slightly cheaper entry point ($229?) for a system that is already considered cheap. And if you want your Switch in another room, just buy another dock and HMDI for $69



Biggerboat1 6 days ago
Otter said:
Biggerboat1 said:

They could offer a non-controller option as the Switch 1 pro controller is compatible with S2 I believe & also I could see a lot of people double dipping who already own a Switch 2 (or the inevitable Switch 2 Lite) due to the higher performance of a fully clocked 'Home'.

You're prob right that $100 is too low but I could see a controller-less version being financially plausible at $150 to $200 if they were to sell at cost.

Unfortunately we'll likely never find out as all of the reasons to do this also applied to the OG Switch & it never happened...

I just don't think Nintendo was in a situation where they needed this. They would need to have data to suggest that the cost point of the regular switch was a boundary to a notable amount of people, otherwise they can continue to sell the hybrid (maintain value perception) and reap the benefits of its being a hybrid (personal ownership=multiple per house, portable means more opportunity to play games = more spending on games, more cohesive branding). The truth is they will not sell a Switch TV for especially cheap even if they could because that undervalues the Switch brand as a whole. 

I'm sure it's been on the cards but unlike Switch Lite which is especially friendly to a younger demographic or lends itself as secondary system, Switch TV doesn't introduce a new demo or give the system new purpose. Just a slightly cheaper entry point ($229?) for a system that is already considered cheap. 

Companies make bone-headed moves all the time so I'm not going to assume that Nintendo have 100% accurate projections that show it wouldn't be advantageous.

If the S2 Home was $229 that'd be half the price...

The new demographic that you'd appeal to would be folk that are willing to spend $229 but not $450. Take any product and cut it's price in half & see what happens.

What Tesla model sells by far and away the most? Did the Model Y cheapen the Tesla brand or propel it to the most valuable car manufacturer on the planet? (I detest Elon btw). What GPU sells the most units? Which of Apple's laptops sell the most? Does the MBA cheapen Apple's brand?

Price is a massive differentiator.



curl-6 6 days ago

On balance, Switch 2 is the most competitive Nintendo have been since the Gamecube.

While the handheld form factor brings with it inherent physical limitations, the power gap vs the competition hasn't been this small in twenty years.



Around the Network
Slownenberg 6 days ago
curl-6 said:

On balance, Switch 2 is the most competitive Nintendo have been since the Gamecube.

While the handheld form factor brings with it inherent physical limitations, the power gap vs the competition hasn't been this small in twenty years.

Absolutely. This is the first time since they went with the less powerful strategy starting with the Wii that Nintendo is actually coming out with a legit powerful system. Very impressive system. Of course they threw away affordability which is gonna make the Switch 2 less competitive in terms of sales.



h2ohno 6 days ago

If they release a Switch 2 sku that only does 1 thing it'll be another 'lite' that is handheld only.



Biggerboat1 6 days ago
h2ohno said:

If they release a Switch 2 sku that only does 1 thing it'll be another 'lite' that is handheld only.

I agree, but I think they're being dumb...



Otter 6 days ago
Biggerboat1 said:

Companies make bone-headed moves all the time so I'm not going to assume that Nintendo have 100% accurate projections that show it wouldn't be advantageous.

If the S2 Home was $229 that'd be half the price...

The new demographic that you'd appeal to would be folk that are willing to spend $229 but not $450. Take any product and cut it's price in half & see what happens.

What Tesla model sells by far and away the most? Did the Model Y cheapen the Tesla brand or propel it to the most valuable car manufacturer on the planet? (I detest Elon btw). What GPU sells the most units? Which of Apple's laptops sell the most? Does the MBA cheapen Apple's brand?

Price is a massive differentiator.

Oh I was referring to Switch 1 lol 

Again regarding price perception, why would Nintendo introduce an appealing Switch home (potentially even lower profit margin to hit this price), If they can continue sell a very similar amount of hardware at $299 (base)-$349 (Oled). I do not think $229 is the price point where many just gets an extra Switch just because, especially if it is less functional then their hybrid. I do think there is a market for it, and I don't think its off the table. Just don't think it's especially appealing to them since they saw no shortage of people picking up Switches late in life. They do not necessarily want to offer an ultra cheap system. The same way they won't discount first party games that aren't selling much anymore (Pikmin 4 for example)



Biggerboat1 6 days ago
Conina said:
Biggerboat1 said:

I guess the proof would be in the pudding, but can you seriously see a souped up 'Switch 2 Home' costing a fraction of the base console not selling at least 20+ million units? What was that stat that was knocking around a while back about the number of Switch owners playing exclusively docked? Was it not around a third?

$450 will give a lot of people pause. $100 / $150 / $200 is much more in the 'why the hell not' territory.

I doubt that they would sell it for $100 - $200.

$299 - $349 would be much more realistic. Display + battery + docking station won't save them THAT much in production costs.

They would still have to add a controller to the home package, either the Joy-Con-2 controller + chargeable grip or a Switch-2- pro controller.

Just to circle back to this, a Series S retails for $299.99, you don't think a S2 Home could come in lower than this? Surely the CPU/GPU/PSU would all cost more in the Series S?

This is before considering the scale of economy advantage that Switch 2 will have over Series S. Nintendo will be buying it's component in vastly larger quantities than MS is with Series S & can negotiate better prices accordingly.