Norion said:
bonzobanana said:
Looks amazing yet natively rendered at 360p when under load and upscaled to 1080p for portable mode. I believe portable performance mode is 720p final resolution but not sure but 120Hz (40 fps). So many different news reports to filter through. I'm unsure what native resolution is for docked but 1080p final resolution. I saw it is still using DLSS when docked so guessing something like 720p native but not sure.
I think ongoing we will see a lot more consoles feature AI upscaling and I guess AMD and Intel are in catchup mode to match DLSS. I think upscaling could well be an important feature of all new consoles going forward both portable and home. This helps them reduce their price and improve power efficiency. If Sony does come up with a new portable it will surely be important to have that feature. The steamdeck has FSR but I don't understand how it compares to DLSS not having a steam deck or anything with a powerful AMD graphics chip. Is FSR comparable, if so why isn't the steam deck rendering at lower resolutions to give better frame rate results. In theory the steam deck is still more powerful than Switch 2 if the upscaling technology was comparable but I'm assuming FSR is massively inferior to DLSS.
It feels to me that Nintendo have gone to town optimising and improving the DLSS upscaling on their console. I'm super impressed with the results. |
DLSS 4 still has a notable advantage but FSR 4 has closed the gap enough to where it's not a really big deal any more. In a few years or so this sort of tech could be good enough that the difference won't matter much except when upscaling from a really low base resolution or using ultra performance. |
I've now watched a few videos comparing upscaling standards and AMD's offering before FSR 4 gets poor reviews and to be honest those versions are the only ones that would run on my hardware. The Intel upscaling XeSS takes the middle ground and DLSS is at the top. Yes FSR 4 is decent but DLSS updated their technology and took the crown again. It feels like Nvidia is the leader here for sure and Intel takes the middle ground not AMD.
After watching the videos of FSR 3.1 or is it FSR 3.2 I can't remember the issues shown weren't terrible but still undesirable. If I needed to use a lower native resolution to get a game working and then upscale I would use it but it looks pants compared to Switch 2 and DLSS which I guess why its not commonly used on Steam deck because in theory it could use it to match or exceed Switch 2 if it was the same quality of upscaling but it definitely isn't.
After watching those videos I've come away thinking Nvidia is providing the best upscaling solution but I guess future console hardware that is AMD based will have FSR 4 or better although I think Sony's upscaling technology is something different PSSR or something like that (too lazy to google) and that seems to be better than AMD's offering even though on AMD hardware.
I'm convinced Switch 2 is the first in a long time of portable games consoles that focuses on upscaling technology. It just seems a win for hardware pricing and battery life etc. I'm not convinced at this point though that the Switch 2 will have the success of Switch 1 but really my only reason for that is pricing and the fact disposable income's have reduced worldwide. It just feels like the wrong price point to me for both hardware and games. It's going to be a fantastic launch for sure but I'm not convinced it will get the more casual gamers in the same way as Switch 1. I suspect Switch 1 will outsell it at least for this Christmas but we shall see.
I think Switch 2 needed Japanese market pricing worldwide.