I think the ram at most is capable of 120 GB/S of memory bandwidth.
So, its gotta be wrong at that front atleast.

Something tells me the Tflops numbers there are vastly over exaggerated as well.
I'm guessing its closer to 2 tflops.... but that depends on clock speeds.

Theres rumors of the same 25 watt-hour battery.
So Nintendo are doing again a handheld that uses like 9-11 watts.... and when docked atmost like 25watts or something.

Don't expect miracles, Nintendo are limiting themselves with older processing nodes, and low power usage optimizations
(so battery life isn't worse than Switch 1's currently is).

Right now it is still unclear if the node is Samsung 8nm or 5nm (4nm is too expensive, 6 & 7nm are being deprecated.) With this leak, we know it's not TSMC. There are good arguments for both 8nm and 5nm, depending on which assumptions one makes. We'll probably have to wait for clock speeds to know for sure what's up there.

Performance-wise, we've known the ballpark of where the Switch 2 will land for a while now. The difference between Samsung 8nm and TSMC 5nm would've been about 15% in portable mode (bigger in docked mode, at a given power level.) Basically expect it to perform like a mid-ranged gaming handheld. Capable of running Series S games at similar qualities, but with much lower internal resolutions, relying on DLSS to make up some of the difference. Regardless it'll be much closer to the Series S than the Switch was to the Xbox One.

Xbox One was 1230 Gflops (1.23 Tflops)
Compaired to the Switch docked peak of 393 Gflops.  (Xbox One was 3.1 times more powerful)

Switch 2, at like ~2 Tflops
Compaired to Xbox Series S, at 4 Tflops.  (a 2 to 1 ratio. (x2))

However compared to something like PS5 at 10,28 Tflops   (the PS5 is roughly 5 times more powerful)

Again this is just the theoretical compute performance of the GPUs.
Its not the be all and end all, of real world performance.

That said.... yeah the Switch is still very much the little brother in this picture.

Expect PS4 graphics in the portable mode.

More than many people demands. Much more than Japan industry (and japanese market) demands.

^ They'll eat cost no doubt. 299. No more than 350 euro. But I thought Sony would do that with the PRO and it turned out so massively wrong.

I've heard that from analysis of this mother board you can expect shit battery life and people's dreams of it being a ps4 pro level device are dashed, which was damn obvious.

Docked, and using DLSS... if there are games that are ported to the Switch 2 which also run on the PS4pro.
It would be fun to compare.

The difference probably isn't massive..... but yeah I expect the PS4pro to come out ahead by a tiny bit in a head to head.
However, that won't matter to most people.

It'll still be a massive step up, from what the Switch is.
That will be all people take away from it.

Also there is no way Nintendo launches this at 299$.

The devs have to put in the work to create graphics like that and they don't seem to want to, expect early third party PS4 graphics but not anything like Sony first party graphics. I'd doubt even to expect Nintendo first party to eclipse something like the Rachet & Clank remake on ps4 which would be equal to their style, they just don't budget like that at the drawing board but to expect something like, say Uncharted 4 is a definite no, not even from second or third party and we've seen how third party handles ports, if they get anything 9th gen on this device it'll be cut back in areas that'll make it no where near on par with decent PS4 games. 

Putting this up against graphics cards and PC graphics makes a lot more since than using the ps4 as a measuring device cause that's how ports will be handled, like sliding down the setting on a PC to get games to work on your limited hardware. The ps4 and Sony first party are just to far ahead of the curve, third party can't even get games looking nearly as good as Sony first party ps4 games on the ps5 so to expect it on Switch 2 is wishful thinking.

TFLOPs are not a useful metric when comparing between different architectures. 

For example,

The PS4 Pro was capable of 4.2 (GCN) Tflops and the Series S roughly 4.006 (RDNA2) Tflops. The Series S obviously is a more capable system for the task of running modern games. Besides, 2Tflops would mean the Switch 2's GPU would run at something like 650 Mhz in docked mode, which is way too low. That's less than Digital Foundry downclocked their 16SM RTX 2050 (downclocked to make up for the fact that the Switch 2 only has 12SM) in their Switch 2 performance simulation. Realistically, we're looking at a minimum of about 800Mhz - 1Ghz in docked mode, which gives about 2.5 - 3 Tflops. 

The original Switch was mostly bottlenecked by CPU and available memory capacity. Neither of these are as prominent issues for the Switch 2. The Switch 2 will (if leaks are accurate) have more available memory than the Series S, and the CPU is more adequate than the Switch's was, relatively.  

Remember devs have to put the work in to create these graphics. Name a dev that will pursue graphics akin to uncharted 4 on base ps4 which was an early PS4 game but Uncharted 4 on PS4 pro which done like 1440p then upscaled to 4k, nah. more than likely it'll upscale from something silly like some third party devs are doing on ps5 like 720p or less and that'll create insanely bad image quality problems even with DLSS. 

Remember third party devs on ps5 can't even get games running native 1080 at 60fps, some are upscaling from sub 900p and then some are even upscaling from 1080p in quality mode and on PS4 PRO too, Alan Wake and Star War Jedi Survivor are upscaled from sub 900p on the 800 euro PRO. I hold no hope of seeing 4k on this device, docked and upscaled with DLSS or not. Perhaps the odd title here and there, but as for graphical fidelity, Nintendo will never chase it even if they were to make a game that's realistic, they'd not get close to Uncharted 4, the studios just don't deal in that kind of thing. 

Switch runs at 768mhz when docked, on the gpu.
I would expect them to stay in the same range, to keep performance pr watt high.
Going broad with many cores at lower clock speeds, to keep power usage as low as possible, compared to performance.

You might be right, at around 800mhz or something (since there been shrinkage in nodes since to the switch).

And yes, going from 25.6GB/s to 120GB/s in memory bandwidth, is going to have a massive performance impact at these higher resolutions the Switch 2 will run. Same with it getting a much more capable cpu.