Nintendo is updating the original Switch with a new CPU and storage

skittzo0413

Member
Oct 25, 2017
17,302
It's entirely possible OG Switch gets a new mould and more robust joycons etc and Era melts down thinking it'd the Pro

Whatever the case, we know there is another Switch SKU out there. .my gut feel is it's not a slight facelift to OG Switch but a new Switch category.

They have the lite and the Switch flagship
A higher tier Switch makes sense
Yeah I guess we'll see.


Anyway, if this thing has any performance boost a good one would be just defaulting all games in portable mode to the higher 460MHz GPU speed that only a few games currently run at. That would noticeably improve a number of games that use dynamic resolution and still offer a fairly substantial boost in battery life.
 

SleepSmasher

Member
Oct 27, 2017
1,456
Australia
You know what?

Crazy theory here, but I think the “Pro” will actually be a revision with a 1080p display and an upgraded SoC (perhaps X2) with undocked graphics running games at the same resolution of docked mode of vanilla Switch. This would require zero intervention from devs to update games to run at higher resolutions while in portable mode since the OS can handle the trick to ask the game to render at docked resolutions, although docked more would obviously benefit as well if they’re keen to push it as a perhaps an “almost” 1440p system.

Reason for this theory is Nvidia’s deleted tweet (erroneously) hyping the Lite screen. Perhaps their PR dept. knows something and ended up mixing things up thinking that the announced Switch was the beefed up version.

A man can dream.
 

BlueManifest

Member
Oct 25, 2017
4,304
The New 3DS has a matching manual stating 'New 3DS' as the product name as well as a new FCC ID in general, as it wasn't a revision. Here is that manual: https://fccid.io/BKEKTR001/User-Manual/Short-Term-Confidential-User-Manual-2399323.pdf

Here is the Switch manual: https://fccid.io/BKEHAC001/User-Manual/Users-manual01-3239293.pdf

This kind of stuff matters, legally. You can't play games with the manual. it has to reflect the product being sold.
Maybe it will be advertised as switch revision or new switch but on the actual box and manual it will still just be called switch
 

Daneel_O

Member
Oct 28, 2017
125
They can absolutely get more performance for free with the die shrink, what I mean to say is that a better cooling system would enable them to extract even more out of it. They leave performance on the table otherwise.
Ah, you mean that by designing a new model instead of a simple revision they would have got the best out of the new chip?

I agree, but then again games still would have to target the OG Switch profiles so maybe this is the best course of action for the time being.
 

BlueManifest

Member
Oct 25, 2017
4,304
You know what?

Crazy theory here, but I think the “Pro” will actually be a revision with a 1080p display and an upgraded SoC (perhaps X2) with undocked graphics running games at the same resolution of docked mode of vanilla Switch. This would require zero intervention from devs to update games to run at higher resolutions, although docked more would obviously benefit as well if they’re keen to push it as a perhaps an “almost” 1440p system.

Reason for this theory is Nvidia’s deleted tweet (erroneously) hyping the Lite screen. Perhaps their PR dept. knows something and ended up mixing things up thinking that the announced Switch was the beefed up version.

A man can dream.
There was a nvidia tweet after the lite was announced? Didn’t see it
 

MXT

Banned
May 13, 2019
646
Ah, you mean that by designing a new model instead of a simple revision they would have got the best out of the new chip?

I agree, but then again games still would have to target the OG Switch profiles so maybe this is the best course of action for the time being.
Yeah, exactly. Take the X1 die shrink and extract absolutely everything out of it. Put it in existing Switch housing, with the existing battery and all that but with a better thermal solution. Clock it high. That would be what I would hope for with a performance-focused Switch refresh.
 

MXT

Banned
May 13, 2019
646
You know what?

Crazy theory here, but I think the “Pro” will actually be a revision with a 1080p display and an upgraded SoC (perhaps X2) with undocked graphics running games at the same resolution of docked mode of vanilla Switch. This would require zero intervention from devs to update games to run at higher resolutions while in portable mode since the OS can handle the trick to ask the game to render at docked resolutions, although docked more would obviously benefit as well if they’re keen to push it as a perhaps an “almost” 1440p system.

Reason for this theory is Nvidia’s deleted tweet (erroneously) hyping the Lite screen. Perhaps their PR dept. knows something and ended up mixing things up thinking that the announced Switch was the beefed up version.

A man can dream.
Nvidia PR doesn't know shit about shit. The tweet was just wrong, it shouldn't be used to speculate about Nintendo's plans.
 

Teh_Lurv

Member
Oct 25, 2017
1,987
Personally, I think Nintendo is going to leave performance specs the same for the "New" Switch in favor of a cooler, battery-sipping Switch. Battery life on the original Switch was the weakest part of the console, if Nintendo can boost that by 1-2 hours through a die-shrink, that's probably what they're going to do.
 

SleepSmasher

Member
Oct 27, 2017
1,456
Australia
Nvidia PR doesn't know shit about shit. The tweet was just wrong, it shouldn't be used to speculate about Nintendo's plans.
Speculation is exactly that - to come up with all possible scenarios. How are you so sure that they know absolutely nothing about it? Obviously my post is now on the satirical side of things but your word and Nvidia’s PR have the exact same weight here.
 

MXT

Banned
May 13, 2019
646
Speculation is exactly that - to come up with all possible scenarios. How are you so sure that they know absolutely nothing about it? Obviously my post is now on the satirical side of things but your word and Nvidia’s PR have the exact same weight here.
Why would some random intern that mans the corporate Twitter account know anything about Nintendo's plans? What's more likely: that said intern (okay, social media manager, basically the same thing) knows about Nintendo's plans or that said intern assumed the original Switch had a 1080p screen and posted the wrong thing on Twitter dot com?
 

Tron1

Member
Dec 23, 2017
4,725
Personally, I think Nintendo is going to leave performance specs the same for the "New" Switch in favor of a cooler, battery-sipping Switch. Battery life on the original Switch was the weakest part of the console, if Nintendo can boost that by 1-2 hours through a die-shrink, that's probably what they're going to do.
I just wouldn’t be willing to pay another 300 for 1-2 hours of battery life and that’s all I get. That’s silly to me. If that’s their plan on selling an upgraded switch to the masses.... good luck.
 

kirbyfan407

Member
Oct 25, 2017
1,361
So, it seems like the insider consensus is that this is a new model of the original Switch that will offer some small improvements and that it's not a "Switch Pro."

My question is: is there also a Switch Pro coming in the future? Or is this enhanced model what the Switch Pro was all this time?

I ask because if this new model offers a 20% performance boost or something, I'd consider buying it to replace my launch Switch. However, if a Pro model that offers bigger improvements were also planned for launch in 2020, then I'd really kick myself for "upgrading" prematurely.
 

SleepSmasher

Member
Oct 27, 2017
1,456
Australia
Why would some random intern that mans the corporate Twitter account know anything about Nintendo's plans? What's more likely: that said intern (okay, social media manager, basically the same thing) knows about Nintendo's plans or that said intern assumed the original Switch had a 1080p screen and posted the wrong thing on Twitter dot com?
Random intern? Come on dude, going too far with the hot takes.

I agree it’s probably nothing but to dismiss it like they did is just weird. They could, for instance, have kept the tweet by deleting it and tweeting again with the correct information. Also, back in 2017 their PR talked about the Switch as well by describing how it was powered by the X1, during the console’s launch window. Then there’s the famous “man years” quote from the CEO himself. It’s not like talking about the Switch is something new for them.
 

MXT

Banned
May 13, 2019
646
Random intern? Come on dude, going too far with the hot takes.

I agree it’s probably nothing but to dismiss it like they did is just weird. They could, for instance, have kept the tweet by deleting it and tweeting again with the correct information. Also, back in 2017 their PR talked about the Switch as well by describing how it was powered by the X1, during the console’s launch window.
Social media manager, whatever. Same deal: wouldn't be in a position to know because they wouldn't need to know. Not prior to Nintendo making an announcement.

I dismiss it as nothing because it is nothing. The person wouldn't in a position to know. Deleting incorrect tweets is normal. PR speaking about information they were provided after Nintendo has announced the console is normal. PR speaking about unannounced stuff that they would never need to know prior to announcement is not normal.
 

Putosaure

Member
Oct 27, 2017
791
France
A 720p screen is the last thing a "Pro" model needs if players hope for enhanced performance or graphics... The screen is so small, what's the point of bumping it to 1080p ?
 

bmfrosty

Member
Oct 27, 2017
561
SF Bay Area
I suspect that this will also add an additional GPU/CPU profile that will be available to games on this model (modest - 10-20% bump in clocks, keep in mind the existing Switch already has 16 different performance profiles that developers can choose, with 4 being added in the 7.0.0 system update). I think the model will also launch with Witcher 3 (Will utilize the added profile) and will have a bundle with it. I'm basing it off this tweet, which doesn't guarantee anything, but at least hints at the possibility of a Witcher 3 bundle.
You don't happen to have the list of profiles handy? I've been looking for it, but can't seem to find it.
 

BlueManifest

Member
Oct 25, 2017
4,304
I don't know how you market a product one way on TV and another way on store shelves. No one will have any idea as to what they bought.
Another thing, Nintendo could wait until they announce it before they request a name change, why would they risk leaking what the new system is called before they announce it
 

Rotimi

Member
Dec 25, 2017
725
Lagos , Nigeria
For those familiar, This filling does it mean we can expect a release soon. Also what’s the realistic difference this new 001 model will have to original
 

Teh_Lurv

Member
Oct 25, 2017
1,987
I just wouldn’t be willing to pay another 300 for 1-2 hours of battery life and that’s all I get. That’s silly to me. If that’s their plan on selling an upgraded switch to the masses.... good luck.
I don't think this revised Switch is meant to be a mass upgrade console like the XBOX or PS4 Pro. Nintendo is probably going to market it as the normal Switch and just save money on the production.
 

Foorbits

Member
Oct 26, 2017
3,928
I just wouldn’t be willing to pay another 300 for 1-2 hours of battery life and that’s all I get. That’s silly to me. If that’s their plan on selling an upgraded switch to the masses.... good luck.
The plan is probably just to revise the internals of the Switch. They are swapping the 2017 Switch with this.
 

skittzo0413

Member
Oct 25, 2017
17,302
For those familiar, This filling does it mean we can expect a release soon. Also what’s the realistic difference this new 001 model will have to original
When do you think the new colors/revision will hit stores? I'm in the market for a new Switch.
Apparently the time period between the original filing for the Switch and its release was a little over 3 months. We have no way of knowing if that'll be the case with this or not though.
 

MXT

Banned
May 13, 2019
646
Another thing, Nintendo could wait until they announce it before they request a name change, why would they risk leaking what the new system is called before they announce it
Nintendo cannot control the inventory of every single store on earth, unless they want to offer buy backs. Which they don't - buy backs are to cleanse the shelves of Wii Us. They're expensive.
 

Gurgelhals

Member
Oct 27, 2017
750
Hm, any revision coming with an actual performance increase would need additional performance profiles, as these all max out at 768Mhz GPU clock, which has been the docked GPU clock speed since launch. And I guess those 7.0.0+ profiles are the new temporary boost profiles already used on the 2017 model in BOTW and Mario Odyssey to speed up load times (= merely higher CPU clock while GPU stays at 768Mhz).

The other question here is the RAM. The FCC application doesn't mention new RAM chips, so we can assume that nothing's changed there – but LPDDR4 maxes out at 1600Mhz. Would a revised Switch actually benefit from higher GPU clocks with the same RAM or wouldn't the latter act as a bottleneck?
 

skittzo0413

Member
Oct 25, 2017
17,302
Hm, any revision coming with an actual performance increase would need additional performance profiles, as these all max out at 768Mhz GPU clock, which has been the docked GPU clock speed since launch. And I guess those 7.0.0+ profiles are the new temporary boost profiles already used on the 2017 model in BOTW and Mario Odyssey to speed up load times (= merely higher CPU clock while GPU stays at 768Mhz).

The other question here is the RAM. The FCC application doesn't mention new RAM chips and LPDDR4 maxes out at 1600Mhz. Would a revised Switch actually benefit from higher GPU clocks with the same RAM or wouldn't the latter act as a bottleneck?
Yeah I think if this has any performance upgrades they will only be for portable mode. Like, forcing every portable mode game to run with the 460MHz GPU clock and call it a day. Or maybe a new clock speed between that and 768MHz.

I don't see any improvements happening in docked mode.

EDIT: Regarding RAM, it doesn't mention a change in the RAM type or amount but would the RAM bus width depend on the CPU board, which is being changed? Or would they have to specifically mention that too?
 

BlueManifest

Member
Oct 25, 2017
4,304
Nintendo cannot control the inventory of every single store on earth, unless they want to offer buy backs. Which they don't - buy backs are to cleanse the shelves of Wii Us. They're expensive.
I don’t remember any console name leaking before it was announced

We didn’t even know the switch lite was going to be called lite
 

inpHilltr8r

Member
Oct 27, 2017
1,138
faster CPU that they'll underclock to save power and increase battery life
maybe a new api for turning it back up in Korok forest
 

hrœrekr

Member
May 3, 2019
92
You know what?

Crazy theory here, but I think the “Pro” will actually be a revision with a 1080p display and an upgraded SoC (perhaps X2) with undocked graphics running games at the same resolution of docked mode of vanilla Switch. This would require zero intervention from devs to update games to run at higher resolutions while in portable mode since the OS can handle the trick to ask the game to render at docked resolutions, although docked more would obviously benefit as well if they’re keen to push it as a perhaps an “almost” 1440p system.

Reason for this theory is Nvidia’s deleted tweet (erroneously) hyping the Lite screen. Perhaps their PR dept. knows something and ended up mixing things up thinking that the announced Switch was the beefed up version.

A man can dream.
Adding a 1080p screen would be a stupid decision when most games barely hit 720p. Wasted energy, processing power, and added cost for little benefit: just a very small % of games would run at 1080p. Games that today look great in 720p will suddenly look worse on a 1080p screen.
 

SleepSmasher

Member
Oct 27, 2017
1,456
Australia
Adding a 1080p screen would be a stupid decision when most games barely hit 720p. Wasted energy, processing power, and added cost for little benefit: just a very small % of games would run at 1080p. Games that today look great in 720p will suddenly look worse on a 1080p screen.
A 1080p screen running games at 1080p, not at 720p, if the theoretical SoC revision or replacement would be able to do so.
 

skittzo0413

Member
Oct 25, 2017
17,302
Nvidia posted this yesterday after the Switch Lite announcment. It was up for over 30 minutes before they deleted it.

Ah that phrasing looks like that was nothing then. Just a mistake about what the screen was or what it was capable of.

It would be hard to have confused that with another revision given it has Switch Lite in the tweet, plus an image of the Switch Lite.
 

Rand a. Thor

Member
Oct 31, 2017
7,225
Greece
I'm starting to think they will gradually update the OG Switch as they start releasing variants and jump between entire hardware generations. What the variants will be are basically gonna be a handheld or a proper traditional console, entirely dependent on your needs and wants, with the flagshop tablet always being the priciest model. Yes you read that right, the OG Switch and its incremental updates will be the highest point in the product line, with the handheld/console being cheaper alternatives. You want the full shebang you get the tablet, you get the handheld for playing on the go or the console jist for playing at home. This is reflected in the FCC filing, which has a (001) in the product refiling. What I think that means is that its a small change to the OG Switch and the first of maybe 2 or 3 until the proper product code changes to 002 for the Switch 2. Like the pro console will come in 2020, then in 2021 we get the HAC-001(002) which will come with the same beefed up SoC in the Switch Pro. Perhaps even the pro console also acts as a dock/scd unit, which is compatible with each OG Switch(HAC-001/HAC-001(001)/(002). Then sometime in 2022 2023 the proper 2nd Gen switches hit or whatever, with a full prodcut line from the start.
 

hrœrekr

Member
May 3, 2019
92
A 1080p screen running games at 1080p, not at 720p, if the theoretical SoC revision or replacement would be able to do so.
I doubt the SoC revision would be enough to push 1080p on games that today run at sub 720p.
I would prefer the same 720p + better performance in that screen, but I understand how resolution is better to market.
 

Gurgelhals

Member
Oct 27, 2017
750
EDIT: Regarding RAM, it doesn't mention a change in the RAM type or amount but would the RAM bus width depend on the CPU board, which is being changed? Or would they have to specifically mention that too?
Bandwidth would depend mainly on the SoC and the RAM chips themselves (and only the board if you actually increase the bus width). The current SoC has a 64bit memory interface clocked at 1600Mhz and it's connected to two memory chips with a 32bit interface each. There's two ways to increase memory bandwith there and, given what is in the FCC application, both seem unlikely:

- You use faster RAM, but the FCC application doesn't mention the revision to use different RAM (also, I'm also not sure whether it's actually possible to go higher than 1600Mhz with LPDDR4).
- You use a wider (128bit) memory interface, but this would, again, require different memory chips with a 64bit interface each and the FCC application doesn't mention anything like this.
 

skittzo0413

Member
Oct 25, 2017
17,302
Bandwidth would depend mainly on the SoC and the RAM chips themselves (and only the board if you actually increase the bus width). The current SoC has a 64bit memory interface clocked at 1600Mhz and it's connected to two memory chips with a 32bit interface each. There's two ways to increase memory bandwith there and, given what is in the FCC application, both seem unlikely:

- You use faster RAM, but the FCC application doesn't mention the revision to use different RAM (also, I'm also not sure whether it's actually possible to go higher than 1600Mhz with LPDDR4).
- You use a wider (128bit) memory interface, but this would, again, require different memory chips with a 64bit interface each and the FCC application doesn't mention anything like this.
Ah so a higher bus width would indeed need different RAM chips. That's what I was asking, thanks.

Now that I think about it that seems pretty obvious.