Sounds good. Hope that is the consumer model and not just the dev kit. 120GB per second is great!

Looks good. On paper, It may be above PS4, but Nintendo still needs to deal with battery life and cooling.
It will be priced $399 and will deliver something around OG PS4 - PS4 pro.

I think people better brace for more than $399.99.

12GB LPDDR5X RAM is basically the best of the best for portable devices and that's quite a lot of it, it points to a powerful chip to need that much bandwidth too, this is way faster than the RAM in the Steam Deck (88GB for SD versus 120GB/sec for Switch 2) or stock ROG Ally. To put it in perpsective this is the same RAM the new OLED iPad Pros just announced this week use and those are $1000+.

256GB UFS 3.1 is also quite good and quite fast. Nintendo could have gone cheaper here (128GB EMMC or UFS 2.2?) and looks like clearly intended to let even the biggest games (roughly 150GB) fit comfortably right into internal storage, like Call of Duty. 

Again for reference the newly released Google Pixel 8 Pro has exactly the same RAM (12GB LPDDR5X) + a 256GB UFS 3.1 storage option and that setup costs $1050 USD right now. Now sure the Pixel 8 Pro has things like cameras and an OLED display, but the Switch 2 also has a way larger screen (7.9 inch reportedly vs. 6.7 inch), Joycons, and a dock that apparently now even does something (has a separate fan for great cooling, which again implies performance is going to be pretty good).

The hardware space and the smartphone manufacturers so not price their goods accordingly to the same metrics.

Apple is known for completely overpricing their products by metric tons. Google does as well but to a reduced scale.

399$ price tag seems more than fair when you look at this and counting the fact they will most likely only expect a small profit from the get go,  this time since this isn't the same cheap kind of deal they had with NVdia back then with TegraX1.

Not like 450$ sounds out of scope either, but naturally Nintendo has done these specs decision with the pricing(and development aspect) in mind. They will not want to overdo it. 

This is quite promising. I'm hoping it will be overall better than the Steam Deck instead of only being overall similar to it and it seems it will be. If it is this capable it'll for sure have a lot more ports of big games than the Switch has gotten.

Sounds right about what I have been expecting for years.

At face value, seems like it might run similarly, but it does offer a few advantages(speaking only with the handheld mode in mind vs Steam Deck).

Better memory bandwidth (120Gb/s vs 88Gb/s)

Access to DLSS to punch for higher resolutions, AA solution, RT Tensor cores, etc ...

Closed API will most likely run better than a PC handheld. Native ports will get the better deal than a compatibility layer the current PC handhelds have.

Most likely better battery life from the get go.

Points of contention center around the lesser memory storage and speed storage which is DLSS NVMe vs UFS 3.1 

Mind you, this isn't official information but the shipment documents that were read couldn't be more official than this. Only to know which node the T239 and we'll mostly set as to what the Switch successor will entail.

I think the increased performance when docked should be taken into account for the comparison since a big chunk will use it mostly or exclusively that way. It looks like the Switch was the end of Nintendo making their portable consoles weak which is a welcome change. A lot of people are gonna ecstatic with playing Nintendo games with visuals better than PS4 games if it is this powerful.

7,600MT/s is 486.4Gb/s.
486.4Gb/s X2 (Two chips) = 972.8Gb/s.
972.8Gb/s /8 (8 bits in a byte) = 121.6GB/s.

For comparison sake...

Playstation 4: 176GB/s.
Playstation 4 Pro: 217.6GB/s.
Xbox One: 68.3GB/s
Xbox Series X: 326GB/s.
Xbox Series S: 224GB/s.

So it definitely beats the Xbox One, but falls short of the Playstation 4.

HOWEVER... There are a ton of caveats to this which the raw numbers which everyone clings to doesn't tell us.

Things like Delta Colour Compression, Mesh Shading, Improved Culling and compression and even things like Tiled-based rasterization that the Playstation 4 and Xbox One didn't have... Means that it has more bandwidth to play with than the 121.6GB/s of memory bandwidth implies.

The real disappointment is the 12GB memory buffer, it's not enough.

But like all things... This is all rumor and not fact at this point.

Not really. It depends how wide you want to take it... Because you can implement LPDDR2 in such a way that it offers more bandwidth than LPDDR5X.

LPDDR5X also does go higher than the rumored 7500MT/s. - 8533MT/s, 9600MT/s, 10700MT/s exist for example, so Nintendo wouldn't be using the latest and greatest in DRAM.
10700MT/s would put the bandwidth at 171.2GB/s which is in spitting distance of the PS4 and more in line with an RTX3050 which would be preferable.

I would have rather liked to have seen 16GB of memory at the very least... The current layout ensures we will have a 96bit or 192bit memory bus, likely 96bit to keep costs down or a silly clam-shell memory layout.

And 12GB is not a lot of memory in 2024, let alone in 2025 and beyond.
16GB is considered the minimum these days... And we need to also keep in mind that Nintendo's OS tends to be memory hungry and will likely steal 2-4GB of that 12GB leaving 8-10GB for developers, which is a pittance.
Remember the Series S is very memory starved and that has over 8GB for developers out of 10GB.

Things like DLSS, Ray Tracing and more want more Ram.

Comparing it to iPad's and Phones is doing the device a disservice, they are utilitarian devices, not purely gaming devices. Ram and GPU is the priority in a gaming device which reinforces the need for different priorities in hardware.

12GB is more than the XBox Series S in total RAM, LPDDR5X is only used right now in premium $1000 mobile phones and tablets, it will have more bandwidth than a Steam Deck or ROG Ally, 120GB/sec is enough to feed a GPU running in the 4 TFLOP docked range. I'd rather have 12GB RAM @120GB/sec instead of 16GB @a lower bandwidth of 80GB/sec. 

Nintendo's engineers once put it best, even when you give people reasonably speced hardware techies miss the point and just want more, more, more, there's no satisfying that audience. 

This is pretty darn good tech and I think a lot of people will appreciate this much power in a portable device, this is nothing like the Wii/DS days where Nintendo used completely ancient hardware, this is more like the NES/SNES/N64/GameCube era, reasonably powerful hardware for probably a fair price but I think this is not going to be that cheap, $449.99 is my guess to launch with and that's fair given that this is a huge leap beyond the $349.99 OLED Switch which is selling just fine even now. 

Nintendo will sell more than the Playstation and XBox again if they have their software ducks in a row and it looks like Switch 1 given the extra little time will cruise past and crush the PS2's LTD record too. This should be powerful enough to handle plenty of PS5/XBSS/SX ports with the help of DLSS. A fan in the dock this time is interesting too, it tells me they are going to push this chip probably harder than the current Switch. 

I'm pretty happy with this news, I was expecting LPDDR5 only like the Steam Deck and ROG Ally, and maybe 128GB internal storage of UFS 2.2 or something like that, UFS 3.1 is still for today quite fast and 256GB is comfortably enough to download even the largest monster PS5 game and still have room left over for probably several Nintendo games. That's more than I expected. Also was not expecting a fan in the dock, thought it would just be another hollow dock that does nothing but HDMI pass through, a dock with an actual cooling solution inside can push a chip much harder, even with the existing Switch we're learning the Tegra X1 can do some crazy shit when pushed at higher clocks, like running Switch software at 4K resolution even.