• Akira Toriyama passed away

    Let's all commemorate together his legendary work and his impact here

Switch 2 with Xbox One S specs for $399 or Xbox Series S specs for $499?

Switch 2 with Xbox One S specs for $399 or Xbox Series S specs for $499?

  • $399 Xbox One S specs (lower graphics, traditional storage)

    Votes: 53 46.5%

  • $499 Xbox Series S specs (higher graphics, SSD storage)

    Votes: 61 53.5%
  • Total voters
    114
MysticGon

MysticGon

Member
Enthusiast
FMeixyfX0AMd66C


What type of device do you believe would do better in this current sales climate?

A more traditional device that looks more like last gen for a more affordable price or should Nintendo push the boat out and ask Xbox Series X money for a portable Series S?
 
XSS specs would be great but I doubt it'd be possible at that price in the tablet form factor (assuming they have a high quality SSD, an OLED screen and improved JoyCons)
 
awng782 said:
It should be ahead of PS4 thanks to DLSS and RT, no?
Click to expand...
Handheld: PS4
Docked: Xbox One X
Of course modern tech and DLSS would give it a big advantadge in being able to get ports of modern games
(This is just an educated guess made from the information we have from Nvidia leak)
 
Last edited:
I think the comparison isn't realistic. The jump of specs from one S to Series S would be a lot higher than 100 $.
 
gibordep said:
I think the comparison isn't realistic. The jump of specs from one S to Series S would be a lot higher than 100 $.
Click to expand...
You are right but to go too low would hurt your bottom line and too high would doom the device on arrival. Price =/= specs in this modern age of rare price drops and high production costs.
 
ILikeFeet said:
From what we know from the leak, it's gonna be in between the One and ps4
Click to expand...
In handheld sure. Docked it will be between PS4 and PS4 Pro.

Xbox One has 12*64 shader cores @ 853MHz GPU based on GCN 1.1 from January 2012, 1.3TFLOPs.

Drake is 12*128 shader cores @ (unknown clock) GPU based on enhanced Ampere... It has twice the shaders of Xbox One, more than PS4's 1152 shaders as well, with 1536 shaders and even Switch's current clocks, we'd be looking at over 1.4TFLOPs in handheld with 460MHz and 2.359TFLOPs docked with the 768MHz Switch uses when docked... Both of these clocks are at the low end of expectations, and they don't even take into account that T239 (Drake) has RayTracing and DLSS support, adding even more visual fidelity to Drake powered games.

As for price, we don't know that yet, but I think the most likely outcome for pricing would be 2 different skus, a $399 128GB version and a $499 512GB version, much like they have done in the past... As for storage speed, its worth mentioning mobile storage is commonly 1GB+/s which would allow full featured next gen games.
 
Moved the thread to the main subforum as it is neither a prediction thread nor an official hangouts.

As for me, I believe this past couple of years showed how high the demand is, even for platform with a high price tag, and that a dual SKU strategy at launch could yield great results.
 
Switch OLED shows that Nintendo can work with higher pricing if the value proposition strong, but I would be shocked if they launched a $500 device.
 
Isn't rumored that the Switch 2 will be as powerful as the Xbox 1 with DLSS taking it to another level?
 
Z0m3le said:
As for price, we don't know that yet, but I think the most likely outcome for pricing would be 2 different skus, a $399 128GB version and a $499 512GB version, much like they have done in the past... As for storage speed, its worth mentioning mobile storage is commonly 1GB+/s which would allow full featured next gen games.
Click to expand...
$399 as an entry price for a Nintendo device?

I know costs are increasing and inflation is eating dollar value, but I think Nintendo is aiming at a lower price.
 
Nintendo is not releasing a $499 console. I see Switch 2 being $399 with specs between a Xbone and PS4 at base and close to a Series S when you take DLSS into account.
 
allan-bh said:
$399 as an entry price for a Nintendo device?

I know costs are increasing and inflation is eating dollar value, but I think Nintendo is aiming at a lower price.
Click to expand...
They will likely lower OLED model to $299 and they have the lite model for entry pricing, a lite version of drake isn't happening soon.
 
I personally think $399 is too high of a price for what the market wants. Nintendo may do it, but I think that would be a mistake. I think it would be smartest of them to launch Switch 2 around 2025 with a $299 price tag.

However, I also realize that these mid-gen upgrades for their handhelds, like the OLED model, are a good signal of the way that Nintendo tends to go for their next gen platform. (A good example is the GBA SP, which is arguably more like the DS than it is like the launch model GBA.) Anyway, since the OLED model has a MSRP of $349, then I think the Switch 2 will have a minimum price of $349 and may even creep up to $399. I don't think Nintendo will price the Switch 2 at any thing more than that.

So, basically, I think the highest Nintendo is willing to go is $399. But personally I think the further they go above $299, the bigger a mistake they are making.
 
Why do we do this every generation for Nintendo hardware? This notion of 400 bucks being too much for a Nintendo device is hilarious. 300 was too much for Switch until it posted higher peaks than any playstaion peak year. Now here we are with another piece of hardware from Nintendo where 400 is too much even though Switch Oled retails for just 50 dollars less. 400 dollars for Switch 2 to start is very possible considering the environment we are in and Nintendo's current popularity.

We also need to see what exactly Nintendo is offering and what the plan is. I think alot of us assume Nintendo will follow the same strategy for Switch 2 they did for Switch 1. Switch 1 had a once in a lifetime event happen during its life span. Switch 2 will have different circumstances. Price cuts will be used if needed.
 
Last edited:
I personally see Switch 2 coming in at 399.99 alongside 299.99 Switch Oled and 199.99 Switch lite. Switch oled and Switch lite will play the cheaper role 3ds played early Switch life span. Maybe one cross generational game but not anything like we see from the others. Switch 2 lite could release at 249.99 two holidays later in time for Pokemon Gen 10 in holiday 2025.
 
$499 as long as the current Switch family, including OLED and Lite are kept in production. If it's more of a successor type thing that is meant to replace what we got right now then honestly even $399 feels a little high to me.
 
People will 100 percent pay $499 for a console from Nintendo. Even a weaker one because they understand the portable factor that makes it unique. It's $599 you want to stay the hell away from.
 
Pancracio17 said:
Isnt this a bit optimistic? I kinda doubt a $399 portable machine can output 4k in a game like RDR2. I think its gonna land closer to a PS4, unless DLSS really shakes things up.
Click to expand...
DLSS 2.2 is exactly how it'll output 4k.

Drake (public) specs aren't final but the GPU leak implied a much beefier machine than anyone was expecting in terms of SM count. It's CPU is also almost guaranteed to outperform the potatoes in the last gen consoles (and Pro/X really). In real world performance it's going to land closer to the midgen refreshes overall. Sort of like Switch did compared to PS360.
 
Even $399 is way too high for Nintendo.

I assume they learned the lesson from the 3DS (maybe, maybe not, or maybe they learned and still will do the same mistake one more time).

With the 3DS they were on a roll after the DS. People were hyped as frak. And yet the extra $50 in the initial cost nearly cost them everything.
So my point is carefull to not price it another extra $50 compared to the OLED. So $350 at max. Spec wise I don't know or care but lloking at what Nvidia has done and from the leaks, everything looks very good for a Nintendo hardware, especially if DLSS is here and add some kind of magic sauce.
 
adriandlte said:
Xbox One S power is not nearly enough for a Switch 2. Leaks seem to point out at something more powerful than that, fortunately.
Click to expand...

If I'm not misremembering from the leak, the GPU seems similar to the 3060 RTX or at least potentially derived from it. I imagine it'll be a stripped down version of it, clocked lower. Depending on RAM configuration and speeds, a system close to the Series S in terms of GPU power seems potentially feasible. Also worth mentioning is the Series S GPU is technically weaker than the Xbox One X GPU, but more powerful than the PS4 or Xbox One's (also can do things more efficiently).

Plus, remember, target resolutions may be lower to begin with, especially on portable (if they keep 720p, which I suspect they will due to battery life reasons).

CPU configuration is another thing and other than we know it's derived from Jetson Orin which uses the A78AE (which is a notable upgrade from the AMD Jaguar cores found in PS4/Xbox One and Cortex-A57 cores used in the Switch), for sure, we have no idea what the final clock speeds, configurations, etc., will be.

Either way, I'm really curious what the final configuration will be on the system. I'm nervous Nintendo will try and do less than 8GB of RAM, especially given it took Capcom pushing Nintendo on the original Switch to give it more RAM to begin with. The other thing I'm worried about is the base space in the system. I feel like 256GB might be the best case scenario, but I could see them opting for 128GB. Should not be lower than that, however.

----

Honestly, my general thought is Nintendo may take a minor loss and make it up on software this generation. I'll admit defeat if they do price it higher, but I just can't see Nintendo justifying above $400. I feel like they may drop price on the OLED model to $300 and price the next Switch around $350-400.
 
I've been a firm believer that the only reason why the OLED is $50 more is so they could test out the waters on raising the price and solidify their tiers. Anything new would have a higher price in the $400 specially if it's a legit Switch 2 and not a "Pro" style boost.
 
whatever it is, I'm not keen on a Switch 2 at $499, when I bought the Switch Lite around $150 at discount.

Anything between $299 and $399 seems reasonable, if they improve a lot on the hardware.
 
Jackano said:
Even $399 is way too high for Nintendo.

I assume they learned the lesson from the 3DS (maybe, maybe not, or maybe they learned and still will do the same mistake one more time).

With the 3DS they were on a roll after the DS. People were hyped as frak. And yet the extra $50 in the initial cost nearly cost them everything.
So my point is carefull to not price it another extra $50 compared to the OLED. So $350 at max. Spec wise I don't know or care but lloking at what Nvidia has done and from the leaks, everything looks very good for a Nintendo hardware, especially if DLSS is here and add some kind of magic sauce.
Click to expand...

The problem with the 3DS is the hardware and software offerings did nothing to justify the price tag. People have paid over $250 for hardware for a long time. The 3DS didn't have the value proposition. With the Switch we saw $300 didn't sink them because the hardware and software offerings were very good.

There is no reason to think they'll price new more modern hardware 6-7 years later at the price of the current OLED. It's going to be $400+
 
Mendinso said:
If I'm not misremembering from the leak, the GPU seems similar to the 3060 RTX or at least potentially derived from it. I imagine it'll be a stripped down version of it, clocked lower. Depending on RAM configuration and speeds, a system close to the Series S in terms of GPU power seems potentially feasible. Also worth mentioning is the Series S GPU is technically weaker than the Xbox One X GPU, but more powerful than the PS4 or Xbox One's (also can do things more efficiently).
Click to expand...
A 3060 is 3584 cores. Drake is 1536. All ampere designs (save for ga100) are the same. Drake would have minor changes to the memory setup
 
unkindlynice said:
That's a crazy crazy statement. Series S is amazing but still a large machine. It's not a handheld!
Click to expand...
Steam Deck is more powerful than Series S when you compare the target definition of both machines, I could see a Switch competiting with Series S due to having to target ‘only’ 720 before DLSS help, but stil more powerful than Series S is a reach. It will be able to compete is a better way to put it
 
I just don't see a Switch 2 costing 499. No matter how popular Switch 1 has proven, 499 to me screams "failure! failure!". And even if wasn't complete bomba, I'd expect the hw install base to shrink from Switch 1-levels to like N64-levels at best. Not a device for the masses that Nintendo targets.

From everything we've heard, Switch 2 will be PS4-powered with DLSS, the latter basically enabling any PS5-downport that doesn't rely on sheer CPU-prowess. If I had to guess the maximum price for such a device that Nintendo could get away without much negative reactions, it'd be a dual-sku strategy, with the lower end-version launching for 399, the premium-version for 449. I mentioned this elsewhere already, but Nintendo could do it like Valve with Steam Deck and offer a cheaper version, but really have the premium-version be the desirable on, with a better screen, more storage or whatever. That's the scenario for the highest possible price.

Ultimately, I still expect one sku priced at 399.
 
unkindlynice said:
Switch is not going to have fancy storage. For lots of reasons but just not happening due to cost.
Click to expand...

You don't really need fancy storage. The UFS 3.0 that has been around for like 3 years in phones would be more than sufficient. The system is launching in 2023 at the earliest. By the time it is out the technology will be old if anything. I'd expect the newer Seitch to be fine unless Nintendo wants to purposely bottleneck their system.
 
unkindlynice said:
That's a crazy crazy statement. Series S is amazing but still a large machine. It's not a handheld!
Click to expand...
I'm not saying Switch 2 has to be as powerful as the Series S, just more powerful than the Xbox One. I have an Xbox One, and many games have had subpar performance on it, especially since 2019.

Quantum Break
Halo Infinite
Control
Borderlands 3
Marvel's Avengers
Cyberpunk 2077
Battlefield 2042
Ori and the Will of Wisps
Wasteland 3
The Ascent
Bleeding Edge
Tell Me Why
Marvel's Guardians of the Galaxy

All those games have problems running on Xbox One in terms of stability, performance or graphics. It's not impossible to play them on an Xbox One (I have), but it's not a good experience. Something closer to the PS4 Pro or Xbox One X in terms of power would be better, I think.
 
Just to remind everyone of the Drake GPU specs we do have from the NVN2 stuff in the Nvidia leak (from Alovon11 on Era):
  • 1536 CUDA cores
  • 2.3MB of L1 Cache
  • 4MB of L2 Cache
  • 6 or 12 RT cores (Orin's Devpapers and the NVN2 Files conflict on this so it may be a Drake-specific customization that makes it GA10F that brings it back to 1:1 on RT Core/SM versus the 1:2 of Orin/GA10B)
  • 48 Tensor cores
Even in pure core count it's comfortably ahead of One S or PS4. Obviously clocks will determine a lot in terms of overall performance envelope, but dedicated hardware for reconstruction and ray-tracing should make it leapfrog last gen in fundamental ways even if it's badly underclocked for heat/battery.
 
fiendcode said:
Just to remind everyone of the Drake GPU specs we do have from the NVN2 stuff in the Nvidia leak (from Alovon11 on Era):
  • 1536 CUDA cores
  • 2.3MB of L1 Cache
  • 4MB of L2 Cache
  • 6 or 12 RT cores (Orin's Devpapers and the NVN2 Files conflict on this so it may be a Drake-specific customization that makes it GA10F that brings it back to 1:1 on RT Core/SM versus the 1:2 of Orin/GA10B)
  • 48 Tensor cores
Even in pure core count it's comfortably ahead of One S or PS4. Obviously clocks will determine a lot in terms of overall performance envelope, but dedicated hardware for reconstruction and ray-tracing should make it leapfrog last gen in fundamental ways even if it's badly underclocked for heat/battery.
Click to expand...
Thanks for the summary.

How does this compare to the current Switch? I know it has 256 CUDA cores, but not sure about L1/L2 cache.

Either way, unless clock speeds are unusually low, the leaked Drake specs comfortably outperforms last gen machines.
 
Blue Monty said:
Steam Deck is more powerful than Series S when you compare the target definition of both machines, I could see a Switch competiting with Series S due to having to target ‘only’ 720 before DLSS help, but stil more powerful than Series S is a reach. It will be able to compete is a better way to put it
Click to expand...
Digital Foundry tackled that and the answer is sorta


fiendcode said:
Just to remind everyone of the Drake GPU specs we do have from the NVN2 stuff in the Nvidia leak (from Alovon11 on Era):
  • 1536 CUDA cores
  • 2.3MB of L1 Cache
  • 4MB of L2 Cache
  • 6 or 12 RT cores (Orin's Devpapers and the NVN2 Files conflict on this so it may be a Drake-specific customization that makes it GA10F that brings it back to 1:1 on RT Core/SM versus the 1:2 of Orin/GA10B)
  • 48 Tensor cores
Even in pure core count it's comfortably ahead of One S or PS4. Obviously clocks will determine a lot in terms of overall performance envelope, but dedicated hardware for reconstruction and ray-tracing should make it leapfrog last gen in fundamental ways even if it's badly underclocked for heat/battery.
Click to expand...
some corrections: 1MB of L2 cache is requested by NVN2, and there's 1 RT core per SM like desktop Ampere. I was the one who was looking through documentation and I think there was some weird copy/past shit going on

awng782 said:
Thanks for the summary.

How does this compare to the current Switch? I know it has 256 CUDA cores, but not sure about L1/L2 cache.

Either way, unless clock speeds are unusually low, the leaked Drake specs comfortably outperforms last gen machines.
Click to expand...
without clock speeds, it's hard to get a good measure, but it's not hard for the Switch to match the Xbox One just by doubling the cores and doubling the clock speeds. even at the same clocks, we're looking at 6x performance increase, which would put it well above the XBO and PS4 in docked mode. and that's also ignoring architectural improvements and DLSS
 
ILikeFeet said:
some corrections: 1MB of L2 cache is requested by NVN2, and there's 1 RT core per SM like desktop Ampere. I was the one who was looking through documentation and I think there was some weird copy/past shit going on
Click to expand...
Thanks, so 12 RT then.
 
ILikeFeet said:
A 3060 is 3584 cores. Drake is 1536. All ampere designs (save for ga100) are the same. Drake would have minor changes to the memory setup
Click to expand...
fiendcode said:
Just to remind everyone of the Drake GPU specs we do have from the NVN2 stuff in the Nvidia leak (from Alovon11 on Era):
  • 1536 CUDA cores
  • 2.3MB of L1 Cache
  • 4MB of L2 Cache
  • 6 or 12 RT cores (Orin's Devpapers and the NVN2 Files conflict on this so it may be a Drake-specific customization that makes it GA10F that brings it back to 1:1 on RT Core/SM versus the 1:2 of Orin/GA10B)
  • 48 Tensor cores
Even in pure core count it's comfortably ahead of One S or PS4. Obviously clocks will determine a lot in terms of overall performance envelope, but dedicated hardware for reconstruction and ray-tracing should make it leapfrog last gen in fundamental ways even if it's badly underclocked for heat/battery.
Click to expand...

Thank you for both for this. I was misremembering details a bit in that regards to the GPU (I do remember someone mentioning for sure it seemed similar to something in the RTX 30 line on the Famiboards' Hardware thread, so maybe I misunderstood something there), so glad both of you pulled this data on. Sorry about that.

----

One thing I do wonder what the finalized CPU configuration will be. A lot of people over there seemed doubtful if we'll get a 8-core configuration, given information about the power draw we have currently with the kits and stuff, but I imagine with how Drake would be cut down from the Orin, it obviously would have a lower base wattage/power draw compared to both the development kits and main units. Kinda hoping for 6-core/threads, but maybe I'm asking for too much, too...
 
Just like PS5 and Series X|S, there will be defective cores. It won't be the full chip on a cutting edge node.
And as we're talking Nintendo here, just expect less than the consensus on message boards.
At least the track record of Nintendo indicates that.

I would love raw power above PS4, but I think it might end up just below it.
But that's still more than enough to target 1080p for Nintendo games and 720p for third parties with DLSS upscaling to 4k docked.
 
Mendinso said:
One thing I do wonder what the finalized CPU configuration will be. A lot of people over there seemed doubtful if we'll get a 8-core configuration, given information about the power draw we have currently with the kits and stuff, but I imagine with how Drake would be cut down from the Orin, it obviously would have a lower base wattage/power draw compared to both the development kits and main units. Kinda hoping for 6-core/threads, but maybe I'm asking for too much, too...
Click to expand...
the problem with any idea of a cut down Orin is that the node Orin is on (samsung 8nm) might not be adequate enough. 1536 gpu cores is pretty large for 8nm and getting the clocks low enough might not be possible. tsmc 4nm might actually be on the table

SoonyXboneUhh said:
Just like PS5 and Series X|S, there will be defective cores. It won't be the full chip on a cutting edge node.
And as we're talking Nintendo here, just expect less than the consensus on message boards.
At least the track record of Nintendo indicates that.

I would love raw power above PS4, but I think it might end up just below it.
But that's still more than enough to target 1080p for Nintendo games and 720p for third parties with DLSS upscaling to 4k docked.
Click to expand...
"it's nintendo" might have worked before the nvidia theft, but now, you're in uncharted waters. before the theft, anything over 1024 or 1280 was seen as absurdly idealistic.
 
I want the Switch successor to be as powerful as possible for handheld and I don’t care how expensive the device will be as long as it can run Xbox series S level graphic games.
 
8 Cortex-A78AE cores is my guess on CPU. Which makes sense scaled down from the 12 core T234.

My real curiosity is more on RAM speed, capacity and how much Nintendo's willing to spend? RAM's historically one area they're not averse to investing on.
 
Amin_Parker said:
I want the Switch successor to be as powerful as possible for handheld and I don’t care how expensive the device will be as long as it can run Xbox series S level graphic games.
Click to expand...

I think Nintendo's main concern would be capability so their teams can stretch their legs. Availability concerns would probably be a close second but affordability might actually be a distant third because they have their value proposition nailed down at this point. But our console you want to play Pokemon and Animal Crossing etc... Hard to argue against that.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom