I think you are wrong about the real power of Mariko and about 4K.

Devices that generate heat have a regulator that reduces the power. The first steam engines had a regulator. And today's machines that generate heat also have a regulator. The regulator makes the system always work below its capacity: normally 20% or 30%.

Switch generates heat. Therefore, it surely has a regulator that forces the equipment to operate below its power. As simple as that.

Of course, you can disable the regulator. But what you now have is a switch without a regulator, not a more powerful switch. As simple as that.

If the available production lines produce 4K chipsets, it is faster and cheaper to put that chipset in the OLED than to set up a new production line.

The Mariko chip is much more power efficient and can run the full clocks, that's the point. At full clock on a Mariko people are getting the same 2 1/2-4 hours battery life the original Switch did. The Switch will shut itself down anyway if the heat gets too high internally, at overclock the Mariko chip basically runs as hot as the OG Switch does at its stock clocks. 

This is simply just what the chip can actually do, the original 20nm process was not a very good one and held the chip back, its why Nvidia never used that node again. 

Ask yourself a simple question, why would Nintendo add 4K video output to the dock (thus requiring basically a new dock essentially to have to be mass produced) and also changed the chipset inside the OLED models itself to be able to output 4K/60. These are non-necessary hardware changes that mean they physically had to go out of their way and mass produce a new dock and a new chip when they could have just used the old one and saved money. 

They were making a 4K model IMO (at least a model that can display above 1080p, which would then be marketed in whatever way), they pulled the chute because it was something that maybe they thought they needed in 2017-20 (back half upgrade), but COVID gave them such an enormous boost that really all such a model would have done at this point would be to hurt some of the appeal of the Switch 2. We've just seen a generation where Sony/MS have basically been selling 'next-gen consoles' for almost 4 years now with almost entirely last gen games with improved performance. Nintendo probably looked at that and said "well we might want to save options for higher than 1080p resolution and increased frame rate in games for the next system at this point". 

Games like Tears of the Kingdom and Breath of the Wild etc. will probably make Nintendo a lot of money at 4K/60 on the Switch 2 and be a factor in people wanting new hardware as much as people have been content to buy PS5 or XSX and just keep playing COD, Fortnite, GTAV, etc. just with improved settings. Why waste that sales appeal on a Pro model if you don't really need the sales boost, it's better the Switch 2 has that one of its selling points (better performance for your Switch 1 library). 

why would it hurt the appeal of the switch 2? you realize cod, doom, fifa, and madden all it ran at a stable 60fps, and even worse with near 4k on ps4 pro. you could do high setting and much higher resolution, add graphical effects at 4k/60fps with switch 2 your reasoning for everything has 0 logic, never mind that even with the over clocks both zelda games need max clocks on everything and in docked mode still NEED TO BE in 720p to get 45-60fps so you think 4k higher settings locked 60fps is not massive jump is crazy talk. 

He also gave you excellent reason why the had docks have a 4k output.

If the available production lines produce 4K chipsets, it is faster and cheaper to put that chipset in the OLED than to set up a new production line.

He also gave you excellent reason why the had docks have a 4k output.

These points don't make any sense. First of all, Nintendo still mass produces the regular Mariko chipset for the regular non-OLED Switch and Switch Lite.

So to change the OLED chip only to a new chipset and a new dock for no reason creates two production lines for no reason. They could have just used the regular dock and the regular Mariko chip. 

They not only created a 4K dock for no reason, they purposely changed the DP lanes on the Mariko chip for the OLED model itself, the only point in doing that is it allows a max 4K/60 fps output.

So basically you're arguing for streamlining production, but this does the complete opposite, they now have to have two production lines for different Switch models when they could have saved money and just had one.

The OLED model has a different fan and different exhaust vents too for seemingly no reason. Again why are you changing the internal heat dissipation layout if you already have one in the old Mariko models that works for that chip at the lower clocks? Why are you now sourcing a different fan entirely for no reason? 

Even at overclock though the OLED model basically runs the same temps as the regular V1 Switch, even a little less in some cases I believe. 

My guess is they already had set up the production agreements for this new chip + dock and sank R&D money into it (as a Pro/4K model), so they may have been put in a position where cancelling production on this model altogether would've cost them even more in penalties and sunk R&D. Whether the OLED screen was supposed to be part of the the Pro/4K model all along or whether they pivoted and decided to slap that on after the fact and center the whole upgrade around that is anyone's guess. I think some years into the future we'll find out, much like the Game Boy Atlantis they admitted to like a decade plus later.

https://videocardz.com/newz/nvidia-ceo-jensen-huang-hints-at-ai-generated-textures-and-objects-in-future-games

Nvidia is developing AI to create NPCs, textures and objects. Lol, who would have thought AI would be leveraged for future game development to reduce costs?!!?
😀

Using AI as near complete leverage sounds like a dystopian nightmare, ngl. 

Reminds me of the time Disney ousted their 2D animators once CGI animation was taking off. 

unfortunately that's the only road to much better graphics with smaller budgets. 

It really isn't, that's just piss poor budgeting planning in general.

Also not everything has to be generated either. If you don't want the best writing or the best artist, that's entirely on you, and I'll call out anyone for snuffing both, and still wanting their cake.

I still think size/scope is the best way to tackle budgets. I haven't played Rebirth, but my daughter has been playing it. Half the cut scenes could be cut. Practically all the side quests are stupid. Cut the fluff, leverage practical AI, budgets will be fine.

I remember playing Metal Gear Solid 1 on the PS3 a few years ago and getting annoyed at having to constantly wake the controller up during cutscenes or being dropped into action right after cutscenes with a sleeping controller. MGS was made during a time with wired controllers and when that focus on presentation was a cutting edge selling point. I then played a couple of modern (to the PS3) JRPGs where I had the same issue, and was even more annoyed because they didn't have that excuse. That sort of thing was cool 25 years ago when FMV, voice acting and cinema like presentation where fairly new to the gaming space, but now I just want to play the game.

Things like what I mentioned above and being able to boast about how a game is 50-100+ hours long aren't the selling points they used to be when we have access to so many other games we want to get to. A lot of developers in general could stand to get back to the basics on focus on making smaller and more to the point experiences than to pack them with all of these empty calories that don't impress people the same way they use to.