Details about "New" Switch revision via OS datamine (LPDDR4x RAM, modest GPU performance boost, no "Pro" model in sight)

Gurgelhals

Member
Oct 27, 2017
698
Of course they are. They didn't make a long term deal for nothing. The only way to really make a big improvement over the current Switch (As powerful as Xbox One S when docked, with an 800Gflop Turigg GPU, with more powerful CPU) is with the 7nm node. I speculated Nvidia might use the TSMC node for such a Tegra chip this year, but perhaps they'll do so next year with Samsung's 7nm EUV just like with their desktop GPUs.
Given Nvidia's past history in the console business, I cannot share that optimism: First, the Xbox deal ended in tears, then they overpromised and underdelivered for the PS3, and then they overpromised for the 3DS as well, which resulted in Nintendo jumping ship and going with that shitty PICA200 instead. Finally, I still remember the collective disappointment at the old place when it turned out that, on the hardware front, the much-touted "long term relationship" between Nintendo and Nvidia for the Switch platform meant "We're just using stock Tegra X1s, lol."

My (admittedly cynical) expectation is that, one or two years from now, Nintendo is going to come knocking at Nvidia's door asking for their current tablet SoC in their portfolio and Nvidia is just going to go "Lol, we don't do those anymore, we're only doing AI and automotive stuff now". Ideally, any Switch successor would use a 7nm SoC that would roughly come with twice the CPU and GPU processing power, but there's no sign that Nvidia is working on anything like that at the moment.
 

Murdy Plops

Member
Dec 21, 2018
141
Selfishly I'm glad.

I don't think mid generational upgrades are a good idea outside of aesthetic and design improvements. I like the idea of developers targeting one CPU/RAM/GPU sku to ensure that the same performance metric can be enjoyed by all.

By all means improve the screen with OLED, better builds, new materials new colours etc but keep the internals the same, or at least downclock and enlarge the battery life so the performance is the same.
 

Fliesen

Member
Oct 25, 2017
4,441
tech noob here - what exactly will the RAM boost do in practice? Will it improve performance?
Well, more ram means that games need to load shit from the SD card / internal storage less, which could mean faster load times in certain games, or less pop-in?

The improvements for games won't be all that meaningful, though - since developers won't optimize their games around a hardware advantage that a tiny share of Switch owners have.
 
Oct 27, 2017
3,907
Spain
It actually is a pretty huge jump in efficiency, don't forget that the Lite also has a much smaller battery.
Not all of the jump in efficiency (By any means) comes from the SoC change.

As I said, the screen is quite a bit smaller, (Less energy spent in the back light) the memory is now LPDDR4X, (Less power used) it no longer has to waste energy in keeping the JoyCons charged, it doesn't have the USB-C crossbar...

So, while the Switch lite as a whole is consuming quite a bit less energy (Seems to be from 7-9W to 4.5 to 5.7W when playing a demanding game, or about 62% of the power the flagship Switch consumes, according to Nintendo's claims of battery life. (The 7-9W figures of the Switch depend on screen brightness, based on what Anandtech measured, so I did a crude extrapolation to get an estimated range)

What I'm trying to say is that, while it's obvious the new chip represents an improvement in efficiency, it's far from the only power saving element, and I don't think the jump is huge as in "It consumes 50% the power" but more like "It consumes 80% the power".
 

skittzo0413

Member
Oct 25, 2017
17,212
Not all of the jump in efficiency (By any means) comes from the SoC change.

As I said, the screen is quite a bit smaller, (Less energy spent in the back light) the memory is now LPDDR4X, (Less power used) it no longer has to waste energy in keeping the JoyCons charged, it doesn't have the USB-C crossbar...

So, while the Switch lite as a whole is consuming quite a bit less energy (Seems to be from 7-9W to 4.5 to 5.7W when playing a demanding game, or about 62% of the power the flagship Switch consumes, according to Nintendo's claims of battery life. (The 7-9W figures of the Switch depend on screen brightness, based on what Anandtech measured, so I did a crude extrapolation to get an estimated range)

What I'm trying to say is that, while it's obvious the new chip represents an improvement in efficiency, it's far from the only power saving element, and I don't think the jump is huge as in "It consumes 50% the power" but more like "It consumes 80% the power".
The new Switch is also getting those efficiency gains from the LPDDR4X though. The only major difference is gonna be the 0.7 inches smaller screen and the lack of joycon charging, although the latter point is more complicated because IIRC the joycons could at times help charge the console itself, and not always the other way around.

Either way the majority of the energy savings comes from the more efficient SoC.
 
Oct 27, 2017
3,907
Spain
The new Switch is also getting those efficiency gains from the LPDDR4X though. The only major difference is gonna be the 0.7 inches smaller screen and the lack of joycon charging, although the latter point is more complicated because IIRC the joycons could at times help charge the console itself, and not always the other way around.

Either way the majority of the energy savings comes from the more efficient SoC.
Only 0,7 inches smaller, but that's only 78% of the surface area, aka a more than 20% energy consumption improvement at the same brightness in a component that consumes several watts. And it also probably consumes even less on account of being newer.
 

skittzo0413

Member
Oct 25, 2017
17,212
Only 0,7 inches smaller, but that's only 78% of the surface area, aka a more than 20% energy consumption improvement at the same brightness in a component that consumes several watts. And it also probably consumes even less on account of being newer.
Does the backlight really consume energy in a linear way like that? I'm not sure that assumption makes sense, the activation of the light itself would use the bulk of the power, the size of it probably doesn't scale directly with power used.

And if they're using a newer more efficient panel for the Lite they could easily be using that for the new Switch too.
 

Daneel_O

Member
Oct 28, 2017
117
Only 0,7 inches smaller, but that's only 78% of the surface area, aka a more than 20% energy consumption improvement at the same brightness in a component that consumes several watts. And it also probably consumes even less on account of being newer.
I think you are overestimating the impact of the screen consumption compared to the SoC under full load. Assuming Nintendo measured battery life under the same brightness setting, a 33% gain for one of the most demanding games is bound to heavily depend on better efficiency of the chip itself.
The smaller battery can easily balance the other gains in my opinion.
 

Kewlmyc

Avenger
Oct 25, 2017
11,701
So we're looking at a "New" situation instead of a "Pro"?

If that's the case, then I doubt I'll get it. Getting the New 3DS after owning the original was a waste outside of the 10 hours I played of Monster Hunter due to the nub.
 

BlueManifest

Member
Oct 25, 2017
4,132
Going by all reports the XL is also a lie. This will look just like the original Switch, no bigger.

All hail the Switch 2019!
He does say the new model “appears” to be the same, doesn’t really say anything about the screen specifically, the new model could appear to be the same size as the og switch while still having a larger screen

I’m going to leave it at there’s still a possibility
 

skittzo0413

Member
Oct 25, 2017
17,212
He does say the new model “appears” to be same, doesn’t really say anything about the screen the new model could be same size as the og switch while still having a larger screen
I'm combining this info with the FCC filing info.

Also the fact that making it any bigger in any appreciable way would break compatibility with things like the dock and Labo. Which is fine for a supplemental revision like the Lite but not for a replacement model like this.
 

T002 Tyrant

Member
Nov 8, 2018
593
I don't know I'm fully happy with a minor upgrade if it means a slightly more stable frame rate on Doom or getting AA in Breath of the Wild or better resolutions in Mario.
 

BlueManifest

Member
Oct 25, 2017
4,132
I'm combining this info with the FCC filing info.

Also the fact that making it any bigger in any appreciable way would break compatibility with things like the dock and Labo. Which is fine for a supplemental revision like the Lite but not for a replacement model like this.
Good point with Labo, doesn’t hurt compatibility with the dock though
 

BlueManifest

Member
Oct 25, 2017
4,132
It depends on where the "XL" comes from. If it's just a bit wider then yeah no issues with the dock but making it any thicker would.

Anyway I'm expecting the exact same dimensions as the original.
Oh I wasn’t talking about making the system bigger, the system can stay the same size while also making the screen a little bigger by getting rid of the bezel
Think 6.2 inches vs 7 inches

This is why I was saying even if the system itself appears to be same size the screen could still be a little bigger
 
Last edited:

skittzo0413

Member
Oct 25, 2017
17,212
Oh I wasn’t talking about making the system bigger, the system can stay the same size while also making the screen a little bigger by getting rid of the bezel
Think 6.2 inches vs 7 inches

This is why I was saying even if the system itself appears to be same size the screen could still be a little bigger
Ah I see. I don't think you get an extra 0.8 inches from removing the bezel though, it's not NEARLY that big.

I don't see it happening though. I'm betting there's a technical reason why the bezel exists, otherwise they would have gotten rid of it for the Lite (to either make the screen bigger or make the device smaller).
 
Nov 21, 2017
36
USA
I'm absolutely fine with the Switch's performance, what I want is better build quality. My Vita Slim just feels so solid in comparison. Don't get me wrong, I love my switch, but I'd pay a good price for it to feel more solid (while also being dockable).
 
Nov 21, 2017
36
USA
Yep. It's a major bummer that we're not going to get it.
Put it out for $350 with permanently attached (pro) joycons with nicer sticks, buttons, and a real D-Pad. Throw in a nicer screen, maybe shrink down the bezels and make the whole thing a little more compact. I think people would be all over it. Ultimately you can still dock it and use the Pro Controllers that most of us here likely have.
 

thebishop

Member
Nov 10, 2017
1,341
Put it out for $350 with permanently attached (pro) joycons with nicer sticks, buttons, and a real D-Pad. Throw in a nicer screen, maybe shrink down the bezels and make the whole thing a little more compact. I think people would be all over it. Ultimately you can still dock it and use the Pro Controllers that most of us here likely have.
350 is more than I'd pay to play Switch exclusives, unless they did some magic on the hardware side and at least matched Xbox One graphics. I don't think that's possible right now. I think 200 for the Lite is a great price, and I would've paid 250 if it did TV out.

But... if Switch had a good Stadia client it might push me over the edge.
 

Rand a. Thor

Member
Oct 31, 2017
7,110
Greece

Something glossed over, looks like the Switch'19 will have a smaller battery as well thanks to some internal code or whatever the hell the parameters are. Which is interesting, cause as I said earlier a smaller battery for the OG Switch shell would be a weird decision due to structural integrity and build quality. What I mean is:

Look at the size of that thing. And more importantly, its got its own housing in the plastic shell, which means that for it to get a reduction in size, they would need to cover it in even more foam padding. Beyond that, battery size reduction and the die shrink means we might even see a price reduction for the OG Switch refresh. Not a lot obviously, but it could go from 300 to 270.
 

skittzo0413

Member
Oct 25, 2017
17,212

Something glossed over, looks like the Switch'19 will have a smaller battery as well thanks to some internal code or whatever the hell the parameters are. Which is interesting, cause as I said earlier a smaller battery for the OG Switch shell would be a weird decision due to structural integrity and build quality. What I mean is:

Look at the size of that thing. And more importantly, its got its own housing in the plastic shell, which means that for it to get a reduction in size, they would need to cover it in even more foam padding. Beyond that, battery size reduction and the die shrink means we might even see a price reduction for the OG Switch refresh. Not a lot obviously, but it could go from 300 to 270.
What's weird about some of this is that the FCC filing doesn't mention anything about a change in battery size. Nor does it mention a change in RAM that the OP is indicating (only a change in flash memory). I'm not sure exactly what needs to be disclosed in those requests but it's odd that we don't see those here.

It makes me wonder if the FCC request is actually only a minor change to the OG Switch and not meant for this new Switch which will be treated as a different product.
 

kami_sama

Member
Oct 26, 2017
1,391

Something glossed over, looks like the Switch'19 will have a smaller battery as well thanks to some internal code or whatever the hell the parameters are. Which is interesting, cause as I said earlier a smaller battery for the OG Switch shell would be a weird decision due to structural integrity and build quality. What I mean is:

Look at the size of that thing. And more importantly, its got its own housing in the plastic shell, which means that for it to get a reduction in size, they would need to cover it in even more foam padding. Beyond that, battery size reduction and the die shrink means we might even see a price reduction for the OG Switch refresh. Not a lot obviously, but it could go from 300 to 270.
Maybe they're adding a beefier heatsink? With that and the more efficient SoC, the fan wouldn't need to be used as much.
 

Rand a. Thor

Member
Oct 31, 2017
7,110
Greece
What's weird about some of this is that the FCC filing doesn't mention anything about a change in battery size. Nor does it mention a change in RAM that the OP is indicating (only a change in flash memory). I'm not sure exactly what needs to be disclosed in those requests but it's odd that we don't see those here.

It makes me wonder if the FCC request is actually only a minor change to the OG Switch and not meant for this new Switch which will be treated as a different product.
That's the thing though, the Mariko Switch's are only two models within the firmware code, and the Switch Refresh on the FCC refiling with the new SoC IS the other Mariko Model beyond the lite. The only way it makes sense to have the Refresh not part of the Mariko Duo is of in the firmware Nintendo still treats the Refresh as the OG despite having Mariko.
Maybe they're adding a beefier heatsink? With that and the more efficient SoC, the fan wouldn't need to be used as much.
If the heatsink is also one of those water ones, yeah that would mean almost no fan usage in handheld bar the absolutely necessary cases of graphic intensive games.
 

Hermii

Member
Oct 27, 2017
1,285
10nm and lpddr4x should make it considerably more power efficient than an x2, unless I’m missing something.