I'd love to see the analysis done by Nintendo on what the best balance of components is when looking at cost vs longevity (though accept we never will).

They obviously save money up-front in going a little conservative on the specs but will that then be more than offset by the hardware having a shorter lifespan or less software sales as more demanding games skip the platform?

I know that I stopped buying Switch games a couple of years ago as it was becoming more and more common for new releases to chug.

Pushing the boat out for S2 specs could have meant an extra couple of years before they need to replace it. Over the span of 20 years that could be the difference between 2 vs 3 console releases and all of the associated R&D costs, not to mention that every new install base starts at zero, so software sales take a big dip...

Maybe with S3 they'll be more aggressive, I can only hope.

ARM A78 is vastly more performant than Jaguar. - Clockspeed and core counts aren't everything.
Many tasks that are also typically done on the Playstation 4's CPU can be offloaded onto fixed function hardware blocks with the Switch 2 like decompression.

UE5 has a good showing on Switch 2 thus far and has shown to be a very scalable engine across hardware... Fortnite on Switch 2 is actually pretty good.

Switch 2 does and will support Unreal Engine 5 and it will be perfectly fine. - Will we see full Lumen, Nanite and all the other bells and whistles? Depends on the developer and what their goals are.

Starfield is a demanding game, but it's also stupidly scalable, anyone who has this on PC and used it across different hardware configurations can testify to that... You can run it on a Geforce 1050 with FG. Or even a Geforce 1060 6GB at 1080P @30fps. - Switch 2 beats both of those.

Remember Starfield runs on the Xbox Series S. - No reason why the Switch 2 couldn't run it even if it has to use DLSS.

We need to remember that Switch 2 is using commodity Laptop/mobile RAM, so it's actually pretty cheap verses the GDDR6 that the Xbox/Playstation twin consoles are using... I guess being conscious of components you are throwing into a device when the prices of hardware have been increasing for the last 5 years probably played a large role in the decision being made for better or worst.

Hopefully this generation isn't as long as the Switch 1 generation as I imagine that 12GB of memory will be very long in the tooth in 2032.

I admit that I find a bit weird when people talk about resolutions hitting 360p at current days. But it's in handheld mode, and it's Cyberpunk 2077, a very demanding game. And it seems to keep a good performance overall.

People who played it on Switch 2 are praising it.

My apologies for assuming you had a limited vocabulary when in it was actually a reading comprehension disability.

Hitting 540p in docked mode for 40 fps, or 720p for 30 fps quality mode. 

Yes it's impressive for a handheld, but it's no replacement for consoles as some have said. Maybe a good alternative to Series S but that's a cheaper alternative for game pass. 

GTA 6 will be the real test, so far not announced yet for Switch 2. 


I'm waiting to see what Nintendo can do with it, next Mario and Zelda. I have no interest in playing in handheld mode so will be looking at how it performs on a 4K HDR tv without VRR or 40 fps mode. Don't have that.

As someone who has the game on both PC and Switch 2 all this that people are debating is pointless as it all comes down to the end output on Switch 2 rather than what's under the hood to make the game run and when it comes to the end result on when you're playing Switch 2 is easily on par with other versions, this isn't like Doom or The Witcher 3 where the are significant compromises you put up with in the end result when playing in comparison to other versions. The main factor going forward will no doubt be DLSS, above is a PC playthrough I did and below is the Switch 2 version.

I accept anything above 720p/30FPS. I mean, I play in 1080p on my PC, but I've played on 768p for a lot of years before that and it was really fine.

Based on what I'm seeing on the internet, Cyberpunk 2077 on Switch 2 stays below the Series S version most of time. It's great to play things on maximum settings, but people who want to invest on a Nintendo system, or a handheld device, and knows what they're going for, will probably be OK with that.

A couple of things worth noting in this regard are that: 

a) Those are the absolute minimum numbers, so it will only hit those resolutions in the worst case scenarios, the majority of the time the resolution will be much higher than this.

b) Base resolution is increasingly less relevant today in the age of machine learning; a lower resolution with good image treatment can look better than a higher resolution one that's not treated as well.

c) Lower resolutions are less noticeable on a portable screen than a TV.

Handily beating XSS?! Bollocks. We all watched the same video, right? It manages better textures, though not all, it resolves SSR better and has crisper image in some cases, but it has lower rendering resolution with more aliasing, worse shadows, last gen level of traffic and NPCs, and finally, the most important thing, worse frame rates, where XSS is running always on locked 30, while SW2 has prolonged dips in low 20s, and even sub 20 on occasion.

SW2 port is really, really good, but let's not go with wild statements.

CPU will be its weak spot it seems - they could've gone with smaller node AND bigger battery with 30Wh capacity (instead of actual 20Wh), letting it run at 15W handheld and 30W docked - that would be big performance uplift.
Bulkier I hear? By small amount, not that I care - I don't see any of these "handhelds" as proper old school handhelds, yes, they are portable, but not something you can put in your pocket and carry around that way.
Much higher price I hear? Bollocks. It raises price by max 15$, plus $5 for additional cooling and bigger chassis - sure it would eat into Nintendo profit somewhat, but I'm willing to bet that at $450 it would still be profitable, just not as profitable as it is right now - they are making them to sell at least 100 millions, not 1 million.

I already clarified that statement in a reply to Hardstuck-Platinum.

I'm not claiming that S2 handily beats Series S - I agree that overall the Series S version is a slightly superior experience.

I was asking Hardstuck-Platinum to provide an example of a handheld in the same price bracket as S2 that does easily beat the Series S as he seem disappointed that the S2 isn't much more performant than it is.

I'm basically asking him to justify his reasoning as his criticisms seem more based on willful negativity than on the real-world tradeoffs you have to make between mobile & plug-in consoles and the available tech for each.