Nintendo Update: Kotick was briefed by Nintendo in December 2022 about the "Switch NG", performance was compared to PS4 and XB1

[Commissar SFLUFAN]

Nintendo demoed Switch 2 to developers at Gamescom

WWW.EUROGAMER.NET

---

In Cologne last month, Nintendo's public Gamescom showfloor booth let you play Pikmin 4 and Super Mario Kart 8 Deluxe. …

 

Quote

 

Developer presentations for Switch 2 took place behind closed doors, Eurogamer understands, with partners shown tech demos of how well the system is designed to run.

 

One Switch 2 demo is a souped up version of Switch launch title Zelda: Breath of the Wild, designed to hit the Switch 2's beefier target specs. (To be clear, though - this is just a tech demo. There's no suggestion the game will be re-released.)

 

 

[crispy4000]

BotW running and looking better?  That’s nothing those journalists haven’t already seen.

[crispy4000]

Sources: Nintendo showed Switch 2 demos at Gamescom | VGC

WWW.VIDEOGAMESCHRONICLE.COM

---

The company is understood to have held private tech demos, ahead of an expected 2024 launch…

 

Now this sounds exciting, if true.

 

Quote

Another VGC source claimed that Nintendo showcased Epic’s impressive The Matrix Awakens Unreal Engine 5 tech demo – originally released to showcase the power of PlayStation 5 and Xbox Series X in 2021 – running on target specs for its next console.

 

The demo is said to have been running using Nvidia’s DLSS upscaling technology, with advanced ray tracing enabled and visuals comparable to Sony‘s and Microsoft’s current-gen consoles.

 

[best3444]

A new fully 3D Mario and Metroid Prime 4 at launch next Holiday. 

[Spork3245]

10 minutes ago, best3444 said:

A new fully 3D Mario and Metroid Prime 4 at launch next Holiday. 

Early screen of Mario’s new UE5 model: 

 

[AbsolutSurgen]

I'll believe that a handheld can have PS5/XSeX comparable visuals when I see it -- even with DLSS3.5.

[Mr.Vic20]

BS

[Spawn_of_Apathy]

It would be funny if the Switch 2 with DLSS3.5 was running games with better visuals and performance than the PS5 and XSX. 

[crispy4000]

13 minutes ago, AbsolutSurgen said:

I'll believe that a handheld can have PS5/XSeX comparable visuals when I see it -- even with DLSS3.5.

 

Just a handheld with DLSS 3.5 running would be wild and probably unrealistic.

 

Still, we're talking N64-like resolutions being upscalled from for portable mode.  And DLSS is way better at that than FSR 1 and 2.

[Mr.Vic20]

Just now, Spawn_of_Apathy said:

It would be funny if the Switch 2 with DLSS3.5 was running games with better visuals and performance than the PS5 and XSX. 

It would indeed, and I have no doubt a custom chipset might come close to pull it off on a small screen, but uh...oh the battery life! 

[Pikachu]

Let's go! It sucks having to wait 7 years to get a more powerful Switch.

[Spork3245]

31 minutes ago, Mr.Vic20 said:

BS

 

I think the Matrix UE5 demo running on it is believable tbh

*At a 1080p render with DLSS set to performance and a 20fps avg.

[Xbob42]

49 minutes ago, Spork3245 said:

Early screen of Mario’s new UE5 model: 

 

This just sent me back to a thread several years ago (Wii U launch? Pre Wii U launch?) on Negative World about how Nintendo didn't need HD because you didn't need to see every pore on Mario's face. 

[AbsolutSurgen]

26 minutes ago, crispy4000 said:

 

Just a handheld with DLSS 3.5 running would be wild and probably unrealistic.

 

Still, we're talking N64-like resolutions being upscalled from for portable mode.  And DLSS is way better at that than FSR 1 and 2.

 

25 minutes ago, Mr.Vic20 said:

It would indeed, and I have no doubt a custom chipset might come close to pull it off on a small screen, but uh...oh the battery life! 

Based on what we've seen so far, DLSS is very good at upscaling 1440p+/40fps+ video to 4k/60.  It's not nearly as good at 1080p and below 40fps.

Would this be offset by looking at it on a 4" screen? Maybe.-- On a TV?  Probably not.

And the power draw?

This sounds like Ultra 64 level hype to me.

[Spork3245]

4 minutes ago, Xbob42 said:

This just sent me back to a thread several years ago (Wii U launch? Pre Wii U launch?) on Negative World about how Nintendo didn't need HD because you didn't need to see every pore on Mario's face. 

 

[Brian]

It sounds good. Kind of wish Sony or Microsoft switch from AMD to Nvidia for that sweet DLSS.
 

The only issue I have is the downgrade from OLED. Give me a more expensive model at launch with OLED. 
 

[crispy4000]

2 hours ago, AbsolutSurgen said:

 

Based on what we've seen so far, DLSS is very good at upscaling 1440p+/40fps+ video to 4k/60.  It's not nearly as good at 1080p and below 40fps.

 

 

You're significantly underselling DLSS here, at best.  Conflated it with FSR 2's shortcomings, at worst.  The situation is much better than that.

 

This is mainly a problem today with action games like Jedi Survivor on consoles, relying on FSR 2 to reconstruct from ~720p to 1440p or ~1080p to 4k.  A 60fps target can help, but it's no magic bullet.  FSR2 is a more reasonable facsimile in its 4K Quality mode, scaling from 1440p to 4k (ie: Starfield).  The lower the target/base resolution and the quicker the action, the more trouble it has.

 

DLSS at lower resolutions, by comparison, can present a better than native presentation upscalling from 540p to 1080p.  Its actually more capable of producing a comparable image when trying for lower resolution targets.  Almost like an inverse of FSR2's use case.

 

 

That's all before you count in the perceived IQ benefits gaming on a smaller screen.

This is precisely why a Nintendo handheld using it has been so exciting.  On the other hand, that could just mean Nintendo does Nintendo and uses it as an excuse to cut corners elsewhere with the hardware.

[Spork3245]

12 minutes ago, Brian said:

It sounds good. Kind of wish Sony or Microsoft switch from AMD to Nvidia for that sweet DLSS.
 

The only issue I have is the downgrade from OLED. Give me a more expensive model at launch with OLED. 
 

 

What's interesting (kind of) is that the OG XBOX used nVidia GeForce4 prototype, after the business experience they had Microsoft said "never again" since nVidia threatened to sue them for trying to negotiate for better chip prices in the XBOX's final year of production. PS3 used an nVidia GPU and Sony noped out after that too, but not sure if the "why" was ever publicized 

[Jason]

"Quietly" is by far my least favorite news headline term.

[Commissar SFLUFAN]

Showing demos on a development kit using "target specs" is one thing.

 

Actually translating those "target specs" into a viable, mass production-level model is quite another.

[crispy4000]

26 minutes ago, Commissar SFLUFAN said:

Showing demos on a development kit using "target specs" is one thing.

 

Actually translating those "target specs" into a viable, mass production-level model is quite another.

 

If its ready enough to show demos to the press, the innards of the device are likely set in stone. 

 

[Keyser_Soze]

How many ducks can fit in a bathtub on a switch 2?

[best3444]

Whatever it ends up being I'll enjoy it and buy one. Nintendo has cartoony graphics so as long as it's 4K I'd be happy. But probably won't even get that. 

[AbsolutSurgen]

2 hours ago, crispy4000 said:

 

You're significantly underselling DLSS here, at best.  Conflated it with FSR 2's shortcomings, at worst.  The situation is much better than that.

 

This is mainly a problem today with action games like Jedi Survivor on consoles, relying on FSR 2 to reconstruct from ~720p to 1440p or ~1080p to 4k.  A 60fps target can help, but it's no magic bullet.  FSR2 is a more reasonable facsimile in its 4K Quality mode, scaling from 1440p to 4k (ie: Starfield).  The lower the target/base resolution and the quicker the action, the more trouble it has.

 

DLSS at lower resolutions, by comparison, can present a better than native presentation upscalling from 540p to 1080p.  Its actually more capable of producing a comparable image when trying for lower resolution targets.  Almost like an inverse of FSR2's use case.

 

 

That's all before you count in the perceived IQ benefits gaming on a smaller screen.

This is precisely why a Nintendo handheld using it has been so exciting.  On the other hand, that could just mean Nintendo does Nintendo and uses it as an excuse to cut corners elsewhere with the hardware.

I think a 540p DLSS to 1080p won't look particularly good on a 50" 4K TV.  If you are suggesting a 540p DLSS image is is indistinguishable from a modern PS5/XSeX game (that uses FSR2)....

[Paperclyp]

3 hours ago, Xbob42 said:

This just sent me back to a thread several years ago (Wii U launch? Pre Wii U launch?) on Negative World about how Nintendo didn't need HD because you didn't need to see every pore on Mario's face. 

NOW WHO LOOKS SILLY

[crispy4000]

44 minutes ago, AbsolutSurgen said:

I think a 540p DLSS to 1080p won't look particularly good on a 50" 4K TV.  If you are suggesting a 540p DLSS image is is indistinguishable from a modern PS5/XSeX game (that uses FSR2)....

 

I'd expect some Switch 2 games to target upscalled-to 1080p on the TV.   DLSS could make that look marginally better than native 1080p, by the metrics in that DF video.  But it's not like it would appear close to 1440p. 

 

As for looking better on TV than FSR2 games on other consoles, probably not.  If anything, maybe in select cases where a FSR2 implementation on Series S is so bad that it'd look better at a low native resolution.

 

What was "suggested" is that this is killer for portable play.  We don't know anything about the screen yet.  But even something like 480p upscalled to 900p could yield incredible results, given what DLSS is good at.

[AbsolutSurgen]

28 minutes ago, crispy4000 said:

 

I'd expect some Switch 2 games to target upscalled-to 1080p on the TV.   DLSS could make that look marginally better than native 1080p, by the metrics in that DF video.  But it's not like it would appear close to 1440p. 

 

As for looking better on TV than FSR2 games on other consoles, probably not.  If anything, maybe in select cases where a FSR2 implementation on Series S is so bad that it'd look better at a low native resolution.

 

What was "suggested" is that this is killer for portable play.  We don't know anything about the screen yet.  But even something like 480p upscalled to 900p could yield incredible results, given what DLSS is good at.

We'll see how it compares with the other handhelds that are out there.

[Commissar SFLUFAN]

2 hours ago, crispy4000 said:

If its ready enough to show demos to the press, the innards of the device are likely set in stone. 

 

Normally, I'd be inclined to agree - I'm just curious as to whether there's still some variability left before the specs are well and truly final.

[crispy4000]

36 minutes ago, AbsolutSurgen said:

We'll see how it compares with the other handhelds that are out there.

 

That's the thing that's most up in the air.  It'll have the better upscaling solution on paper.  But there's not enough to say how much it could affect battery life, cost, etc.

 

Other handhelds will definitely brute force past it.  The larger question is where it falls next to the Deck.

[stepee]

I can say that dlss performance 1600p which is from about 800p native looks just about as sharp as 4k on a 65” TV on my 14” laptop display. I imagine this can scale even lower to a 7” screen. Could probably almost test this with moonlight, stream a game using dlss to go from 400p to 800p or something to ROG/deck and see how it looks.

[AbsolutSurgen]

51 minutes ago, crispy4000 said:

 

That's the thing that's most up in the air.  It'll have the better upscaling solution on paper.  But there's not enough to say how much it could affect battery life, cost, etc.

 

Other handhelds will definitely brute force past it.  The larger question is where it falls next to the Deck.

The Deck is already 1.5 years old, and has already been surpassed (by ROG Ally and others) -- and isn't really a good unit for the AAA games that are launching now (i.e. BG3, Starfield, Immortals of Avenum).   It will be 2.5 years old when this new console launches.  This new console had better be an improvement.

[Brick]

5 hours ago, Xbob42 said:

This just sent me back to a thread several years ago (Wii U launch? Pre Wii U launch?) on Negative World about how Nintendo didn't need HD because you didn't need to see every pore on Mario's face. 

 

Lol who the fuck said that?! 

[Xbob42]

12 minutes ago, Brick said:

 

Lol who the fuck said that?! 

I can't for the life of me remember, and I went back to do a forum search (for my own curiosity) but I couldn't remember the exact phrasing.

[crispy4000]

1 hour ago, AbsolutSurgen said:

The Deck is already 1.5 years old, and has already been surpassed (by ROG Ally and others) -- and isn't really a good unit for the AAA games that are launching now (i.e. BG3, Starfield, Immortals of Avenum).   It will be 2.5 years old when this new console launches.  This new console had better be an improvement.

 

Saying Nintendo "had better" make a more powerful handheld is reminding me of the PSP vs DS days, lol.

 

You're probably expecting too much.  The Deck is already as powerful as a last gen console for its resolution, and is more capable feature-wise.  I wouldn't expect a new Nintendo machine to be a sizable improvement.  I could see it being weaker on paper but DLSS doing more legwork.

 

The Deck's currently competitors are, frankly, a poor value.  You spend a lot more money for a bit more performance.  Partly because Windows is a bloated OS on a portable.

[AbsolutSurgen]

13 minutes ago, crispy4000 said:

 

Saying Nintendo "had better" make a more powerful handheld is reminding me of the PSP vs DS days, lol.

 

You're probably expecting too much.  The Deck is already as powerful as a last gen console for its resolution, and is more capable feature-wise.  I wouldn't expect a new Nintendo machine to be a sizable improvement.  I could see it being weaker on paper but DLSS doing more legwork.

 

The Deck's currently competitors are, frankly, a poor value.  You spend a lot more money for a bit more performance.  Partly because Windows is a bloated OS on a portable.

You've now gone from telling me I'm underestimating DLSS, to telling me I have too high expectations for the Switch 2.  I have no idea what you're trying to say anymore.