Can we steer the thread back from this back and fourth as both sides are arguing points that are valid but are being rigid in the conduction of the debate, yes S2 much better than expected? Yes is it well above certain other platforms? No it's numbers put it around Ps4 Pro level but at the same time it's a custom chipset and some dedicated hardware for certain functions like RT so the numbers aren't the full story especially with modern architecture as the numbers work differently. For reference a developer highlighted that S2's immediate performance is more around XSS level from their testing and this is early on in its life and that comes from people actually working with the hardware and this is backed by how the version of CB2077 that S2 runs is a version of the XSS version, this is known as in the coding it has settings that was exclusive to XSS version (literally no other version has it) so I'm inclined to believe it's more an XSS in performance than PS4P, DLSS also changes the math as cut backs can be made and the game scaled up to a fidelity that an older platform can't match.

Every game released at this point can run on all platforms with tweaks it's just that newer platforms incorporate newer features but ultimately it's a tiring debate because graphical leaps have diminished in returns, HZD on PS4 still looks on par with most games released after it as does GOT etc... GTA6 if they wanted could run on PS4.

Architecture matters more than raw horsepower, the moment it was known it was an Ampere chip with that many CUDA cores, it should have been obvious it was going to get a lot of PS5 games and even potentially fundamentally change how certain 3rd parties operate, and that's largely been borne out. Japanese developers like Square-Enix and Capcom are bringing top-end games to it, the next mainline Final Fantasy (7 Remake Part III) is Switch 2, so is the new Resident Evil 9, so is the newest console Monster Hunter (Wilds) apparently. I said this when lookin at the Nvidia data leak, this level of power was going to change how Japanese devs did business and we're already seeing clear signs of that. 

If people just swallowed their pride and admitted that then, yeah sure, it should have been a short and easy discussion. 

The whole crux of the problem is there's a lot of arrogant posters who think they "know Nintendo" when in fact they don't actually know a whole lot about anything. They probably in 3 years of trying to predict this console didn't even understand that there's an entirely new hardware team heading its design under an entirely new, much younger president. If you don't even really know that, like how much is it really worth for you to post in like 3 years worth of threads on the topic of Switch 2 hardware.

Like I don't know who is running the XBox division hardware side today. I'm not going to go into an XBox hardware prediction thread and act like I know what's up or base things on what they did with the XBox 360 (which is what an idiot would do).  XBox 360 was 20+ years ago now that means fuck all today.

Again it's like someone trying to argue about the NBA while also thinking the rosters are from 20 years ago. You can't really even have a discussion, they don't even know that the players they're talking about have been retired for like a decade+. The hardware head that made the Wii/DS/Wii U/etc. is gone, retired. The president from that obviously has passed away. You might want to first actually find out what the new guys' design policies are.

There is no one "Nintendo" either. Nintendo changes every decade and does whatever they want, but again this is lost on some posters because they actually don't really know their history with the NES or Super NES or N64, they kinda think "Nintendo" is just one monolith that's been the same and that was mainly the Wii/DS era they remember. Again I don't fault people for not knowing all of that, but don't freaking lecture other people who know better than you do on that either. If you don't know what you're talking about just say so. 

Absolutely not true.  A 5050 isnt better than a 4090.  Hell a 3090 beats out a 5050, substantially so.  Technically a 2080 beats out a 5050.

That statement is 100% horse****.

When you're comparing 7 YEARS APART for graphics architecture, yes it makes a big difference.

Also the fact that you apparently didn't know the Switch 2 launch had a $499.99 bundle (and that was the primary SKU by far) makes me wonder if you even own a Switch 2 or if that's one of your other tall tales like owning what is now? 3 5090s? 4? 5? lmao. 

Apologies if your reply was not a response to my post its just it reads like it is and was directly below it. My comment being mainly related to CPU performance and your reply focusing purely on GPU architecture which isn't relevant to my posting about the very low CPU resources of the Switch 2. Lets not forget though that PS4 easily beats the Switch 2 in some regards with its specification. It has much higher gflops performance with regard the portable performance of Switch 2 which at peak is likely 1.2/1.3 Teraflops but in real terms off battery likely well below 1 Teraflop so in that regard the Switch 2 is not a portable PS4 plus of course the PS4 has 176GB/s of memory bandwidth about 75% faster than docked Switch 2 and about 2.5x portable mode and the upscaling of Switch 2 is not without cost, we are seeing many Switch 2 games with fairly high input lag. The PS4 was far superior in achieving lower input lag than Switch 2 in many of its games. 

The way it seems is that heavy use of DLSS creates games with high input lag where as games using conventional basic upscaling or no upscaling are more responsive. We have seen conversions to Switch 2 inferior to PS4 like Tomb Raider, Skyrim and a few others. 

Whoever you are replying too your replies are incredibly childish in nature, almost angry and its just a discussion about the performance of consoles. I see little point getting so upset and worked up about a game console. I have multiple game consoles and have no loyalty to any of these companies but I do like to rationally discuss the hardware capabilities of consoles. 

Your statement on HP is wrong, much like your price statement.  Meanwhile you are crying about people not owning their wrongs?

Also I never said I owned a 5090, I own a 4090.  How many lies are you going to tell?

As for my 4090 claim, I posted pics years ago in the PC thread.  

Also I never said the bundle was not $500, so that is your 4th lie.  

At some point you ought to ask yourself why you are lying.  

Edit

My friends code is SW-2167-1098-3613

Feel free to send an invite so you can clearly see not only do I own a S2 but have played prime 4, kart world, DK, tears upgrade and botw upgrade.  So yeah, only one person is lying in this thread and it is you. 

You statements on hardware power are incorrect, hardware architecture 7 years apart is a massive difference. It's also more than 7 years in some respects because Switch 2 has features from Ada Lovelace as well direct from Nvidia's own documentation which is an even newer architecture than Ampere is, either way they both smoke AMD's dated GCN 2.0. If you want to argue against those points go ahead and try and make a fool out of yourself. 

You said you have multiple GPUs, the number seems to go higher as you keep posting, did you buy one for your dog too? Frankly I don't even care about this, I just find it funny.

You sounded like you were unaware there was a $500 Switch 2 launch bundle, in fact that is the primary hardware model the Switch 2 launched with. If you had bought one at launch or in the launch window it just seems awfully curious you didn't know that. It looks like you just quickly Googled what the Switch 2 price is, saw what the price is today (after the bundle is discontinued) and tried to use that as some kind of "gotcha". 

He specifically said your statement about architecture mattering more than raw horsepower was not true, not that architecture wasn't important so he clearly wasn't arguing against those points in that response. If you think he's wrong about raw horsepower mattering more you should actually back up your claim instead of arguing against something he didn't say there. Also bonzobanana is right, you really are acting childish over this by implying he might be lying about owning a Switch 2 for no good reason and other nonsense like the GPU comments.

Architecture does matter massively when you are talking about a 7+ year difference in architecture, I didn't think I had to spell that out specifically because I would think people would do their homework and know that GCN 2.0 (the PS4) is 7 years older than Ampere, but apparently I had to point that out as I guess that wasn't common knowledge or common sense? 

Of course there will be a large difference between Ampere and GCN 2.0 (PS4) ... like does that seriously need to be explained and dumbed down? Just like Ampere will be dwarfed by a GPU architecture from 2027 (7 years afterwards). That shouldn't even be a controversial statement at all, jeeezus. 

If you want to side track the discussion, y'know it's not terribly hard to find GCN 2.0 GPUs (PS4 class) ... go see if the configs of those AMD cards that are roughly in line with the PS4 (so like not cherry picking the highest config GCN 2.0 card) can run Star Wars Outlaws, Assassin's Creed Shadows and the like. Frankly I don't care, I don't even know why someone wanted to fall on their sword to defend the PS4's honor in a thread that isn't even about the PS4, lol. Like who cares. This topic isn't about the PS4. 

I get that it's a premium part... But it falls into that "price" argument, that you get what you pay for.

The Switch 2 doesn't exist in a bubble where it offers the best price/performance for every single person.
The Switch Lite is half the price and has an amazing game library...
Or you could spend a bit more than the Switch 2 and get 40+ years of games and a dozen console platforms with a PC handheld.
Or you can go all out and get the most powerful handheld device on Earth that can play PS5 games at PS5 quality settings.

So any argument that the Switch 2 is a "premium" device is just blatantly false.

There are many people who can't justify the Switch 2's price when they can buy 2x Switch Lite consoles instead.

You literally said the Switch 2 is a "Premium product" in a previous post.


The literal mind-games and backflips is pretty hypocritical.

The Switch 2 has multiple hardware advantages when compared against the Playstation 4 or even Playstation 4 Pro.
The Playstation 4 being based on Graphics Core Next hasn't aged particularly well when it comes to newer rendering methods.
The lowest and slowest discreet GPU's today, even on a 64bit memory bus... Will beat a Radeon 7850 that is the PS4-equivalent.

I.E. DLSS decimates Checkerboard.
RT is far better suited to the Switch 2's GPU over Graphics Core Next due to that architectures lack of low-precision math. (Even when accounting for PS4 Pro's RPM path)

The Switch 2's ARM A78C cores are significantly better than Jaguar.
A78c is based on ARMv8.2-A with better branch prediction, wider execution, larger caches... I would peg the IPC of A78c to be around 3x-4x that of Jaguar at the same clock.

Thus the PS4 CPU would need to operate in the range of 3ghz-4ghz to match the Switch 2's CPU's and not the paltry 1.6Ghz clock.

The Switch 2 also offloads some CPU processing like decompression, which would consume a core or two on last generation hardware, significantly increasing available CPU resources for other tasks.

The Clock on the Switch 2 whilst only at 1ghz... Sucks. It's not the end of the world.

It falls significantly short of AMD Zen however.

It is budget hardware.
It's not even using a fully enabled Tegra Orin chip, it's using a cut-down chip.

The full Tegra Orin is a 2048 SM part running at 1.3Ghz.
Switch 2 is a 1536 SM part running at 0.561Ghz mobile, 1Ghz docked.

There are instances where the Switch 2 will have less than a THIRD of the performance of a fully enabled Tegra Orin chip.

And that ignores the other white elephant in the room... That Tegra Orin is old and outdated in nVidia's Tegra product stack as nVidia has Tegra Thor on the market which would have given Nintendo 2-3x~ the performance for the same 1536 SM chip.

12GB of Ram is small and budget.

The Xbox Series X and Playstation 5 released with 16GB of Ram.... 5 years ago.
24-32GB seems to be the sweet spot for DRAM in most devices, even PC handhelds currently.

The 8" display is utter cheap garbage, it's blurry, it's got poor contrasts, colour and response times. It can't even do HDR properly, it is the worst part about the Switch 2.. And I would argue should have been the most important part.
There are much better LCD panels on the market.

What features? Name them.