Its going to be 1080p 60fps.
Going 4k whas the worst mistake for consoles

I hear this same crap every gen.

Yeah, people have a tendency to become a bit too optimistic. Im sure it will be decent, but its not going to come anywhere near the PS5. Im still guessing around the base PS4.

Luigi's Mansion 3 looks like a PS4 game and runs at 1080p 30 fps, so I think we'll see good things on Switch 2 made by Nintendo... maybe they will use AA too.

I just learned that in Series S, the Matrix UE5 demo runs at 720p/ 30fps or less.

https://www.reddit.com/r/Games/comments/re2nc7/the_matrix_awakens_tech_analysis_ps5_vs_xbox/

So if the Switch 2 was running at a resolution and frame rate below the Series S in this demo, as many expect, say 540p/20fps or less, it would be
hard to believe at all that it gave those invited to the demo the impression that it was comparable to the PS5 or Series X (both 1620p~1440p/30fps or less). 

It depends on the size of the screen, but even a layman should be able to intuitively distinguish between 540p and 1620p.
And the people who witnessed the demo were developers.
Yes, so I don't think it's inferior to the Series S in any way, shape, or form.
And UE5 was also the latest game engine.

Another VGC source claimed that Nintendo showcased Epic’s impressive The Matrix Awakens Unreal Engine 5 tech demo – originally released to showcase the power of PlayStation 5 and Xbox Series X in 2021 – running on target specs for its next console.

The demo is said to have been running using Nvidia’s DLSS upscaling technology, with advanced ray tracing enabled and visuals comparable to Sony‘s and Microsoft’s current-gen consoles (however, it should be noted this does not mean the Switch successor will sport raw power anywhere near that of PS5 or Xbox Series X, which aren’t portable devices).

https://www.videogameschronicle.com/news/sources-nintendo-showed-switch-2-demos-at-gamescom/

I don't even care. I played through Mario Odyssey lately and that game looks abolutely gorgeous while running buttery smooth. It's allthe grfxxx I need. Sure, I will get the next system, but only because I know I will get Nintendo games on it. I couldn't care less about its graphical capabilities. It may be just me getting old, but I think we have reached a state where graphics are simply "good enough" a long time ago.

Back to Goldeneye 64 in all its glory, running at 20 fps or whatever, the game is still addicting as hell.

Both the tech demo and engine were WIPs with various changeable settings, so that tells us nothing.

Even if the engine and demo version were exactly the same, 540p upscaled with DLSS would be indistinguishable in a portable screen (especially in a heavily post-procced demo like this one) and require about half the GPU of a Series S.

The only thing you need is the spare frame time for upscaling, which, given how often the demo is CPU-limited, there would probably be.

Just look at the performance (and price) of the PC handhelds that are currently in the market.

I think it’s very funny that some are genuinely expecting Nintendo to charge $400 for NSW2 when NSW launched at $300 during a time where they NEEDED their next system to sell. I am absolutely prepared for a $500 price tag. Nintendo understands the demand. The system will move crazy numbers regardless of an iffy price.

If they’re charging $350 for an OLED, there is no way they will only charge $50 more for the 4k machine.

(Isn’t Nintendo the company who recently charged $100 for a glorified alarm clock? You think that company’s gonna price generously??)

You're right, you need to sit really close to the TV for 4K resolution on consoles to make sense. I've even heard of people wanting 8K for sofa gaming, as if they have superhuman vision haha.

2K (1440p) is for me the best and still overkill for TVs, while 4K is excellent for monitors.