A new Nintendo Switch 2 rumor has surfaced claiming that the next-generation hybrid console could actually arrive with more memory than a powerful rival like the Microsoft Xbox Series S. The same source has also offered an update in regard to the Switch 2’s potential DLSS support and ray-tracing capabilities.

  • Mossy Feathers (They/Them)@pawb.social
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    40
    ·
    10 months ago

    Nintendo having hardware with some oomph? Bullshit. Their thing is making cheap consoles that appeal to anyone who isn’t an edgy teenager. Dlss, Ray tracing, etc is still too new for them.

    • hypelightfly@kbin.social
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      36
      ·
      10 months ago

      Having more RAM than the series S doesn’t translate to “having hardware with some oomph”. The series S is memory starved. 10GB was a small amount even when it launched.

    • red@feddit.de
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      18
      ·
      10 months ago

      I mean the Xbox Series S will be a 4 year old non-high-end console by the time the Switch 2 will be released. I can definitely see them go in that direction.

      Maybe it will have more RAM, but it will most likely have slower/cheaper RAM. LPDDR5 or LPDDR5X instead of GDDR6. Should also be more power efficient.

      • Mossy Feathers (They/Them)@pawb.social
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        10
        ·
        10 months ago

        Ram is easy to believe, but imo raytracing and dlss are still too new. That said, something I hadn’t thought about is that with the OG Switch using Nvidia’s tegra, it’s entirely possible that Nvidia pushed them to adopt a next-gen version that includes dlss and rtx support.

        • Dudewitbow@lemmy.ml
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          7
          ·
          edit-2
          10 months ago

          Neither are too new. Both features are technically available for volta gpus or newer. The switch was maxwell, and unless you fully believe the switch 2 will use pascal (2016), then it is at the very minimum, using volta, which means it can use rtx/dlss (but i dont expwct it to ACTUALLY use rtx)

        • Perfide@reddthat.com
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          5
          ·
          edit-2
          10 months ago

          Raytracing, no chance just from a performance standpoint even if it “supports” it, but DLSS is a given. If anything, I’m worried they’ll end up relying on DLSS to get games “playable”, just like what’s happening on PC.

          It’ll definitely be DLSS 2, though. No chance they get DLSS 3.

        • red@feddit.de
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          3
          ·
          edit-2
          10 months ago

          I bet the Switch 2’s SoC will include a GPU based on Ampere or newer, which means RTX 3000 series capabilities which. Nvidia Tegra Orin from 2019 already included that much.

          Of course it will be very likely more limited than even a 3060 mobile chip, but it could include both RT and DLSS 3.5 if they wanted to. I doubt they use RT but DLSS would make a lot of sense.

    • Kbin_space_program@kbin.social
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      7
      ·
      10 months ago

      Stable internet servers, to me, is probably the single most important thing.

      The lack of those is the primary reason all of their online league attempts are failing, despite the games themselves being perfect for leagues.

    • ninjan@lemmy.mildgrim.com
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      4
      ·
      10 months ago

      More importantly too battery draining. I can’t imagine them making a much bulkier switch but it could be that DLSS and Raytracing is docked only or optional with battery warnings if used undocked.

      • alehel@beehaw.org
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        10 months ago

        Nintendo never really did complicated. Can’t imagine them doing a battery warning with features you can turn on/off.

    • Blackmist@feddit.uk
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      2
      ·
      10 months ago

      DLSS or the AMD knock-off would actually be pretty good for them.

      RT is kind of pointless in low end hardware though.

      Be interesting to see if they support VRR since they control what screen goes into it. A lot more PC users accepting 40fps since Steam Deck. Forcing everything into 30 or 60 is kind of limiting.

  • Gamma@beehaw.org
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    34
    ·
    edit-2
    10 months ago

    Here we go again with the rumors 🙃 the worst part of the Nintendo console lifecycle

    That being said, DLSS would be awesome on something like the switch

    • red@feddit.de
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      6
      ·
      10 months ago

      I just wonder whether they want to use DLSS for more FPS on the handheld or whether it’s simply their future way to upscale from the native handheld resolution to 4K when docked.

      Surely DLSS would be very taxing on the battery life, but it would be great to improve the docked experience which is often rather bad (stuttering, etc.) with the old Switch.

      • Gamma@beehaw.org
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        5
        ·
        edit-2
        10 months ago

        Personally, I only want it in the dock. Handheld doesn’t have to be that high res but it would be really nice to have in TV mode

      • Lojcs@lemm.ee
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        10 months ago

        Why should it be very taxing for the battery? Docked or not it ultimately decreases the amount of work the gpu has to do.

    • kratoz29@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      3
      ·
      10 months ago

      I don’t remember how the rumours of the Switch OLED were… but I guess some were funny.

      • t3rmit3@beehaw.org
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        edit-2
        10 months ago

        don’t know where you got that idea, but 16gb of ddr3 can be gotten easily for $30, as where 16gb of ddr5 is going to run you $100 minimum (talking retail prices, obv)

        • Lojcs@lemm.ee
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          3
          ·
          edit-2
          10 months ago

          Just looked up the cheapest new 16G options in Turkey

          • Ddr3: 1195₺ ~ $44
          • Ddr4: 837₺ ~ $31
          • Ddr5: 1179₺ ~ $44

          Ddr5 is cheaper than you think

  • Poggervania@kbin.social
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    11
    ·
    10 months ago

    More RAM doesn’t really mean anything in gaming performance. It helps, but a faster CPU and GPU with a good whack of VRAM is gonna help more.

    • Primarily0617@kbin.social
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      23
      ·
      10 months ago

      arguably RAM matters the most

      gpu and cpu you can just downgrade the quality, but at a certain point everything has to fit into memory

      e.g., baldur’s gate 3 literally couldn’t be properly ported to the S because of a RAM limitation

      • EddoWagt@feddit.nl
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        3
        ·
        10 months ago

        Also, textures, usually they don’t really cost performance and absolutely change the visuals of a game, but can be massively limited by a lack of ram

      • Poggervania@kbin.social
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        3
        ·
        10 months ago

        Oh shit, really? Wasn’t even aware of that lol, I always had the generally recommended amount of RAM in my gaming rig so I never thought that would be a thing.

        • dom@lemmy.ca
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          16
          ·
          10 months ago

          There is a point where more ram doesnt help and maybe that’s what you are thinking of. It’s more “must be this tall to ride” from my understanding

    • Never_Sm1le@lemdro.id
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      3
      ·
      10 months ago

      You are thinking from pc pov. PS3 is perhaps the last major home console that have dedicated ram and vram, maybe 3ds had it on the handheld front

      • narc0tic_bird@lemm.ee
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        10 months ago

        Not sure about 3DS, but the PlayStation Vita had 128 MB of VRAM in addition to the 512 MB of system RAM.

      • Jordan Lund@lemmy.one
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        9
        ·
        10 months ago

        More shocking is the speed of the RAM involved.

        Xbox Series S
        8 GB running at 224 GB/s
        2 GB at 56 GB/s

        By comparison:

        Xbox Series X
        16 GB @ 560 GB/s

        PS5
        16 GB @ 448 GB/s

        Xbox One X
        12 GB @ 326.4 GB/s

        Steam Deck
        16 GB @ 88 GB/s

        Switch
        4 GB @ 25.6 GB/s

      • Jordan Lund@lemmy.one
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        10 months ago

        More shocking is the speed of the RAM involved.

        Xbox Series S
        8 GB running at 224 GB/s
        2 GB at 56 GB/s

        By comparison:

        Xbox Series X
        16 GB @ 560 GB/s

        PS5
        16 GB @ 448 GB/s

        Xbox One X
        12 GB @ 326.4 GB/s

        Steam Deck
        16 GB @ 88 GB/s

        Switch
        4 GB @ 25.6 GB/s

        • hypelightfly@kbin.social
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          5
          ·
          10 months ago

          You’re highlighting the slower 2GB but in reality that’s not used by games in the first place. They’re relegated to the 8GB which is significantly faster.

          The Steam Deck has essentially 2x the available memory but it’s much slower. The point being “having more RAM” isn’t some amazing feat. It really depends on all the involved specs. Even amount/bandwidth isn’t enough. GDDR has much higher bandwidth than DDR or LPDDR but it’s also higher latency. It’s tuned for graphics, not system RAM depending on the work load one can be faster than the other.

          • Jordan Lund@lemmy.one
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            2
            ·
            10 months ago

            If it had 10 GB at the higher speed it would still be hamstrung, but not as badly as it is with 8 GB and 2 GB that’s essentially unusable except for maybe UI overlays.

            • hypelightfly@kbin.social
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              3
              ·
              edit-2
              10 months ago

              The 2 is mostly used by the OS. Yes, it would be better if it was all faster but it still wouldn’t be used by the GPU as it’s segmented.

              It’s all moot to my original point though. Having more RAM isn’t some miracle or a sign it will be faster.

  • .:\dGh/:.@lemmy.ml
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    2
    ·
    10 months ago

    One thing about the 12GB of RAM: it may be costly now, but it will become cheaper after three, four years into the cycle.

    Second, there is also the bandwidth. The Steam Deck has 32x4GB LPDDR5. I believe they wanted 8GB but DLSS and ML (if they add them to the next SoC) require at least 4GB plus. Hence, 32x4GB (96 bits). If the Steam Deck can get away with slightly more, then why not slightly less.

    So yes, I can see this device with 12GB of RAM to ensure DLSS and ML work without hitches.