By using this site, you agree to our Privacy Policy and our Terms of Use. Close

Forums - Sales - Black Friday Week USA. PS5 #1, Switch 2 #2, Nex Playground #3

Hardstuck-Platinum said:
Norion said:

First of all I literally replied to a post of yours where you said that the game being from 2011 is something that makes things more concerning so you're not even making a minimal effort at being consistent here. It being the 2017 remaster doesn't change the broad point at all either way though since the CPU's listed in the minimal requirements for the Special Edition are from 2009 and recommended ones from 2011/2012 and the Switch 2 CPU is obviously far above those. And yes that is the obvious conclusion if you had bothered to do any research on it since there's been major complaints about the port such as it having awful input lag.

It's not far above those though. That is factually incorrect. The PS3 CPU is much older than that but it is better than PS4 CPU, and because devs have said Switch 2 has similar power to PS4 CPU, we know that a CPU from mid 00's is better than Switch 2 CPU. I'm not trying to be argumentative or troll here, I just don't like smearing a well respected and successful developer as "lazy" when the platform has components inside that are weaker than what the PS3 had. 

I just don't want the "lazy developer" narrative to go uncontested here. I feel BGS deserved more respect than that. That's all. Having one person here on the other side of the argument is much better than having no-one. 

You keep repeating this notion that the Switch 2 CPU is PS4 level when that is false, benchmarks clearly show it to be multiple times more powerful than that. It is disappointingly weak for 2025 standards but even a weak 2025 CPU will beat the gen 8 consoles easily. Even putting that aside the i5-2400 can run Skyrim Special Edition at 60fps and is weaker than the Switch 2 CPU so that fact alone disproves what you've been saying so unless you can somehow explain why a stronger CPU should run a game worse than a weaker one it's about time to admit you've gotten this wrong.

Last edited by Norion - on 12 December 2025

Around the Network
Norion said:
Hardstuck-Platinum said:

It's not far above those though. That is factually incorrect. The PS3 CPU is much older than that but it is better than PS4 CPU, and because devs have said Switch 2 has similar power to PS4 CPU, we know that a CPU from mid 00's is better than Switch 2 CPU. I'm not trying to be argumentative or troll here, I just don't like smearing a well respected and successful developer as "lazy" when the platform has components inside that are weaker than what the PS3 had. 

I just don't want the "lazy developer" narrative to go uncontested here. I feel BGS deserved more respect than that. That's all. Having one person here on the other side of the argument is much better than having no-one. 

You keep repeating this notion that the Switch 2 CPU is PS4 level when that is false, benchmarks clearly show it to be multiple times more powerful than that. It is disappointingly weak for 2025 standards but even a weak 2025 CPU will beat the gen 8 consoles easily. Even putting that aside the i5-2400 can run Skyrim Special Edition at 60fps and is weaker than the Switch 2 CPU so that fact alone disproves what you've been saying so unless you can somehow explain why a stronger CPU should run a game worse than a weaker one it's about time to admit you've gotten this wrong.

Mods have contacted me so I don't want to continue posting in this thread but I just want to provide some context on where I got the Switch 2 and PS4 CPU being equivalent. It was Virtuos Studios that said it. This was their exact quote "CPU-wise, there is a clearer distinction between the two consoles. The Switch 2 is closer to the PlayStation (PS) 4 in this respect, having a CPU just a bit more powerful than the PS4’s". I had no reason to doubt them or not believe them when saying that. They seem like a reputable and successful developer. 

With regards to you saying the I5-2400 is weaker than Switch 2 CPU, I google AI'd "PS4 CPU vs I5-2400 and got this response -

The Intel Core i5-2400 is significantly more powerful in single-core performance than the PS4's AMD Jaguar CPU

Since Virtuos said that Switch 2 and PS4's are roughly a match, we can conclude that the I5-2400 is better? 



I said all along Nintendo was making a mistake with their Q4 switch 2 lineup this year. The only really big release they had was Pokemon Z-A, which was cross-gen so no one is gonna buy a S2 just for it. The fact that a Kirby Air Riders and Hyrule Warriors game were their big holiday S2 exclusives always seemed insane to me. That’s a holiday lineup I would’ve expected for Switch 1 last year at the very end of its life cycle, not a brand new console. 

They’re super lucky that the console had so much momentum out of the gate or that first holiday lineup would’ve been disastrous for it. I’m really hoping they have 3D Mario ready to go before the 1 year mark of the console’s launch. Launching alongside the Galaxy movie in spring would be perfect cross marketing for both (and sell a ton of Switch 2s). It seems ridiculously dumb to me if they would plan a new console launch knowing no main Mario or Zelda exclusive was coming in year 1. That’s even worse software strategy for a Nintendo console than Wii U tbh.

Last edited by HyrulianScrolls - on 13 December 2025

Hardstuck-Platinum said:
Norion said:

You keep repeating this notion that the Switch 2 CPU is PS4 level when that is false, benchmarks clearly show it to be multiple times more powerful than that. It is disappointingly weak for 2025 standards but even a weak 2025 CPU will beat the gen 8 consoles easily. Even putting that aside the i5-2400 can run Skyrim Special Edition at 60fps and is weaker than the Switch 2 CPU so that fact alone disproves what you've been saying so unless you can somehow explain why a stronger CPU should run a game worse than a weaker one it's about time to admit you've gotten this wrong.

Mods have contacted me so I don't want to continue posting in this thread but I just want to provide some context on where I got the Switch 2 and PS4 CPU being equivalent. It was Virtuos Studios that said it. This was their exact quote "CPU-wise, there is a clearer distinction between the two consoles. The Switch 2 is closer to the PlayStation (PS) 4 in this respect, having a CPU just a bit more powerful than the PS4’s". I had no reason to doubt them or not believe them when saying that. They seem like a reputable and successful developer. 

With regards to you saying the I5-2400 is weaker than Switch 2 CPU, I google AI'd "PS4 CPU vs I5-2400 and got this response -

The Intel Core i5-2400 is significantly more powerful in single-core performance than the PS4's AMD Jaguar CPU

Since Virtuos said that Switch 2 and PS4's are roughly a match, we can conclude that the I5-2400 is better? 

One individual person from that studio said that and the benchmarks don't lie so either he was wrong or was stretching the definition of bit since I definitely wouldn't consider a tad over 2.5 times better single core performance and nearly three times better multi core performance only a bit more powerful. And that can't be concluded no since the Switch 2 has a better Geekbench score than that CPU and the idea that a mid range CPU from 2011 would be better than the CPU in a 2025 console would only makes sense if it's a really cheap low end console.

Last edited by Norion - on 13 December 2025

I have played some heavy hitters of Nintendo (Super Mario Odyssey, Super bros Wonder, Zelda) and have seen the rest in video and there is no doubt playstation and nintendo have different audiences. Nintendo's games are for kids and adults that like kiddy games.



Around the Network
Davy said:

I have played some heavy hitters of Nintendo (Super Mario Odyssey, Super bros Wonder, Zelda) and have seen the rest in video and there is no doubt playstation and nintendo have different audiences. Nintendo's games are for kids and adults that like kiddy games.

Nintendo’s games are for people who like video games. PlayStation’s games are for people who like film/tv. 



HyrulianScrolls said:
Davy said:

I have played some heavy hitters of Nintendo (Super Mario Odyssey, Super bros Wonder, Zelda) and have seen the rest in video and there is no doubt playstation and nintendo have different audiences. Nintendo's games are for kids and adults that like kiddy games.

Nintendo’s games are for people who like video games. PlayStation’s games are for people who like film/tv. 

I played games since Amstrad CPC and Sega master System but i guess i was  cinefiphile all along. :P



HyrulianScrolls said:
Davy said:

I have played some heavy hitters of Nintendo (Super Mario Odyssey, Super bros Wonder, Zelda) and have seen the rest in video and there is no doubt playstation and nintendo have different audiences. Nintendo's games are for kids and adults that like kiddy games.

Nintendo’s games are for people who like video games. PlayStation’s games are for people who like film/tv. 

By countering an idiotic post you made another idiotic post as a reply... but that one got upvotes.

Oh well.



Norion said:
Hardstuck-Platinum said:

Mods have contacted me so I don't want to continue posting in this thread but I just want to provide some context on where I got the Switch 2 and PS4 CPU being equivalent. It was Virtuos Studios that said it. This was their exact quote "CPU-wise, there is a clearer distinction between the two consoles. The Switch 2 is closer to the PlayStation (PS) 4 in this respect, having a CPU just a bit more powerful than the PS4’s". I had no reason to doubt them or not believe them when saying that. They seem like a reputable and successful developer. 

With regards to you saying the I5-2400 is weaker than Switch 2 CPU, I google AI'd "PS4 CPU vs I5-2400 and got this response -

The Intel Core i5-2400 is significantly more powerful in single-core performance than the PS4's AMD Jaguar CPU

Since Virtuos said that Switch 2 and PS4's are roughly a match, we can conclude that the I5-2400 is better? 

One individual person from that studio said that and the benchmarks don't lie so either he was wrong or was stretching the definition of bit since I definitely wouldn't consider a tad over 2.5 times better single core performance and nearly three times better multi core performance only a bit more powerful. And that can't be concluded no since the Switch 2 has a better Geekbench score than that CPU and the idea that a mid range CPU from 2011 would be better than the CPU in a 2025 console would only makes sense if it's a really cheap low end console.

Digital foundry did a video directly comparing the PS4 and Switch 2 CPU using the inbuilt cyberpunk benchmarking tool. Neither Switch 2 or PS4 was a solid 30fps and whilst on average Switch 2's fps was slightly better than PS4, at times the PS4 framerate would be above Switch 2's. PS4 Pro was a solid 30. I feel like what we're discussing has already been thoroughly investigated and and the results were conclusive. 

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pqRZ5wUlIes

The CPU comparison is at 13.00 minutes in



BraLoD said:
HyrulianScrolls said:

Nintendo’s games are for people who like video games. PlayStation’s games are for people who like film/tv. 

By countering an idiotic post you made another idiotic post as a reply... but that one got upvotes.

Oh well.

I’m obviously being hyperbolic to fight fire with fire