Nintendo Switch 2 Launches on June 5th Worldwide; 1080p Screen With 120 FPS and HDR Support, Docked Mode 4K Resolution Support Confirmed
-
It’s not similar to PC hardware; It uses a Tegra processor like the Switch 1. Which means it’s more like a phone with a less than laptop grade Nvidia graphics chipset thrown in. Unlike the Steam Deck, for instance, which uses an AMD Z processor, a scaled down version of what is in the Xbox and PS5.
-
I would have bet real money if you had asked me yesterday that it would have been limited to 1080p to reduce cost. I am very curious to know more about how it actually performs in each setting, how much of it is upscaling, etc. I imagine that most 4k games won’t have much in the way of better graphics than the Switch 1, the higher memory bandwidth could help with higher res textures though.
-
That is entirely meaningless. That's not how performance works, it has no bearing on anything.
In practice, they showed a whole bunch of footage of comparable games, including Elden Ring, Cyberpunk. Hitman, Star Wars Outcasts and Split Fiction. At a glance, it seems fairly comparable to the current batch of PC handheld APUs and seems to be mostly running cross-gen PC games at lower resolutions and framerates but pretty solidly otherwise.
That puts it in a weaker spot than next-gen PC handhelds, but on par with most of the current batch. Or at least as on par as the Steam Deck is.
So in terms of pricing for the hardware it seems pretty consistent with what we're seeing elsewhere. The two Deck models seem to have the most comparable specs, and those are slightly cheaper for the LCD and slightly more expensive for the OLED. Other handhelds are marginally more powerful but also way more expensive. With the upcoing batch of high-end AMD APUs being also way more expensive than last gen, it seems the Switch 2 is price-competitive, at least until Valve decides it's time and tries to make another custom deal with AMD for a more powerful APU at scale.
-
The Steam Deck is... not significantly cheaper?
I mean, go nuts. It will have cheaper games, a lot of the same cross-platform stuff and it trades blows on performance and display, from what I can see... but price isn't really the biggest difference here.
-
-
Don't quote me, but I think they will ship a plastic guard to use for the mouse, just like the Lenovo Legion Go does. Don't knock it til you try it, it does work.
For the record, it's weird to see Nintendo stumble upon the incredible concepts of Kinect and Discord in the year of our lord 2025. But hey, every Nintendo console needs a gimmick you can proceed to ignore, and this one will at least be useful to... somebody? At least it's a gesture that online games aren't an afterthought anymore.
What I'm not sure about at all is the pricing model for games and backwards compatibility as it is. And while the hardware is perfectly acceptable for a modern handheld and very comparable to the current batch of PC handhelds it's the target for the next decade, presumably, so it's at best as outdated as the original Switch was while not being the only game in town to play some of those HD ports.
I don't think it's an underwhelming propostion at this point, and you can't deny the first party software on display. I don't think it's nearly as exciting as the first Switch. We'll see how it does with mainstream audiences, I suppose.
-
For $50 less, you get a similarly capable machine in terms of specs but more comfortable to hold, with an immensely larger library, and an operating system far more respectful of your authority to do what you want with the machine you bought.
-
You can sideload a program called Heroic Games Launcher that lets you easily manage your GOG games, as well as Amazon and Epic.
-
It's at least through this year with Prime 4 and Legends Z-A. I bet the price will make adoption slow and we'll get major Switch 1 games through 2026.
-
I understand what you were saying. I'm saying it doesn't make a fundamental difference what architecture is being used and there are other aspects that impact performance, so you can't make assumptions based on that. Plus the GPU is very PC-like, or at least it was on the first Switch. Porting to these things is actually surprisingly straightforward.
-
I'm personally very excited for Prime 4, DK Bananza, and Hyrule Warriors Imprisoning War, as well as F-Zero GX getting released from the vault. Maybe not hyped enough to pay day 1 prices though
-
there are other aspects that impact performance, so you can't make assumptions based on that
That is literally what I have been trying to say this whole time in response to you saying it looks comparable. I genuinely have no idea what you are arguing against at this point.
-
I said "considering how similar hardware on PC handhelds stacks up", meaning the current batch of PC handhelds seem to get similar performance and visuals than what they showed today. You claimed that the hardware isn't similar because the CPU is an ARM device.
If you meant that to mean that the performance is the same despite the different architecture you have to walk me through how you thought I was going to interpret that from you caveating that the architecture is different with no additional context, but I guess I'll take it?
-
The real advantage of a 120 Hz screen is that you get a much more graceful degradation if you dip below your fps target for a bit. If you're targeting 30 fps but drop to 25, it still feels pretty smooth on a high-refresh screen, whereas that's appallingly clunky on a low-refresh one. A "poor man's gsync", if you will.
-
After a week with Nintendo controllers you don't even have to hold it anymore.
-
The price reductions on the nintendo eshop aren't really that enticing in comparison. So you have to pay pretty high prices for games or have to search on the second hand market to buy games cheaper.
On Steam, Gog and Epic you get good deals every day. Those crazy 1000+ game collections from Steam users aren't there without reason. Games are often so cheap on Steam that you buy them even when you have 10 other games in the backlog you would rather play before.
-
Your response was to Simple’s comment about price. From my reading it seemed that you were implying that the price was right because the performance was similar. I was agreeing with Simple and disagreeing with that perceived implication based on the fact that it uses a different and historically cheaper architecture. One that would typically make a dollar per hertz comparison useless, as you seem to have pointed out. Hence my confusion.
-
Yes, I am implying that the price is right because the performance is similar. ARM isn't fundamentally cheaper than x64, I don't know where you get that. The Switch was cheap because it was running a cheap, old, basically off-the-shelf part, not because that part had an ARM CPU. And indeed the Deck is running an older AMD APU as well at this point.
My laptop has an ARM CPU in it. I assure you it wasn't any cheaper than the equivalent x64 version with the same performance.
-
Hadn't done the math.
Heck.