Nintendo Nintendo Switch 2

[Madmick]

Inside Nvidia's new hardware for Switch 2: what is the T239 processor?
A new, custom Tegra heavy on machine learning and ray tracing.

The Digital Foundry just dropped an article where they conclude a 2-year-old rumor about the Switch 2's core processing unit is almost certainly correct, and the chip in question is destined for Nintendo's next machine. If they're right, the obvious takeaway is that Nintendo sees no reason to change things up. It will once again be going with a custom NVIDIA SoC (system-on-chip) variant of a broader chip they'll manufacture for the industry at large; just as the original Nintendo Switch ran on a "custom" variant of their GM20B graphics chip from its Maxwell generation, better known as the Tegra X1, and then a refinement of that same chip on the improved 16nm fabrication process with a 2019 update.

Way back in June 2021, noted technology leaker kopite7kimi posted a detailed picture of Nvidia's T234 processor, revealing for the first time that Nintendo would be receiving a customised variant, dubbed T239. In the two years that followed, a wealth of overwhelming evidence has essentially confirmed that they were right. The T239 is an advanced mobile processor, based on an octo-core ARM A78C CPU cluster, paired with a custom graphics unit based on Nvidia's RTX 30-series Ampere architecture, combined with some backported elements from the latest Ada Lovelace GPUs - and with an all-new file decompression engine for fast engine. It also supports Nvidia's console-specific graphics API, all but confirming that it's destined for the next generation Switch.

However, as DF points out, that custom version of the Tegra X1 wasn't actually customized at all. That's why, for example, it was so easy for hackers to run the Nintendo OS on the NVIDIA Shield TV, for example. This is where the new chip will differ-- as it must. The general version of the chip is simply too large.

Let's be clear here: the existing T234 is a monster of a chip. With a die size of 455mm2, it dwarves the Xbox Series X processor at 360mm2. It's fabricated using the same Samsung 8nm technology used for the RTX 30-series cards, so it's actually a step behind the 7nm and 6nm processes used in current-gen consoles. CPU-size, it features 12 ARM A78AE CPU cores, paired with a GPU based on the 30-series Ampere architecture with 2048 CUDA cores and a 256-bit memory interface. For the automotive and robotics market, T234 requires a lot of machine learning performance, so there's also a deep learning accelerator built in - and its capabilities can be augmented by the tensor cores within the GPU.

So DF projects the expected T239 for the Switch 2 to have 1536 CUDA Cores. Among its current generation of Ada Lovelace GPUs, that constitutes half the cores in the RTX 4060. They also project a maximum 102 GB/s memory bandwidth. That would be far less than the RTX 4060 (272 GB/s). In fact, in both those respects, it falls far short of the RTX 4050 Mobile: the least of NVIDIA's current laptop GPU lineup. And, in reality, it's more Ampere (older) than Ada Lovelace (newer).

Memory bandwidth is crucial for a mobile gaming machine and it's the primary performance bottleneck in the current Switch. The 256-bit interface in T239 is wildly extravagant for a mobile games machine, and Nvidia's Linux update suggests a 128-bit interface, almost certainly paired with LPDDR5 memory. We should expect absolute maximum bandwidth of 102GB/s, but of course, Nintendo can choose to downclock that for improved efficiency.

So ultimately, DF attempts to give an idea of what level of performance to expect. They're forced to do some fuzzy math, but the writer offers the following laptop as a performance analogue. He predicts that DLSS will be critical-- baked in-- to the Switch 2 and the next generation of handheld console gaming for games to run smoothly.

What kind of performance should we expect from T239?
...To get some idea of what a mobile Ampere-class processor can do, I turned my hand to some practical work. There's no real equivalent counterpart for the capabilities of the A78C CPU cluster in the PC space, but when it comes to the GPU, we can get close. I bought in a Dell Vostro 5630 comes equipped with the following specs: a Core i7 1360p CPU, 16 gigs of 4800MHz LPDDR5, a 512GB SSD and an RTX 2050. It's that last component we're looking at more closely here...let's be clear: this is the closest approximation we can get together for the T239 GPU, but more accurately, what you're seeing in the video is an ultra low-spec Ampere GPU running at meagre clock speeds, starved of memory bandwidth. It can only really give us a ballpark idea of what a mobile Ampere chip can deliver, even when I downclocked it to a ridiculously low 750MHz - but even so, the results are intriguing.

I also tried Death Stranding, benchmarking its GPU-heavy intro. At 1080p native, the sequence averages at 34.9fps, which does support the last-gen horsepower narrative. At 720p, frame-rate rises to 52.5fps.

TLDR Cliffs: expect the Nintendo Switch 2 to offer roughly the same raw power as the RTX 2050 Mobile.


*Edit* Oh, I thought I'd add something. As far as comparing to first Switch to this Switch 2, know that the first Switch has 256 CUDA cores (compared to the 1536 that will be in the Switch 2), and the memory bandwidth of the first Switch peaks at 25.6 GB/s (compared to 102.0 GB/s projected for the Switch 2).

 

[Joe_Armstrong]

But can it play Mario Kart SNES ?

 

[Madmick]

But can it play Mario Kart SNES ?

Crysis jokes aside, it means it should be able to average over 60fps on 1080p@High settings for The Witcher 3 which might be the most demanding game on the first Switch.


Versus the original. This would be the equivalent of "Low" settings, and often the dynamic resolution rendered below 720p. The game at points dips to a completely unplayable 1 frame per second:

 

[WhiteMousse]

Nintendo utilizing DLSS for their own games is going to be insane

 

[Zazen]

I think I’m going to pass on this one. It’s going to be outdated on day one. Third party games will still run like trash because the other consoles have only gotten more powerful and will be releasing their next gen versions only 2 or 3 years into the switch 2 cycle. Can’t justify the price to just play the occasional Mario game. Maybe when my daughter gets older

 

[mixmastermo]

With nVidia dominating their industry, and Nintendo selling Switches like crazy, why don't they take the opportunity to do something unique and unexpected?

Hoping they will. As a Switch owner, if a multiplatform title ever comes out I never consider getting it on Switch.

 

[Zazen]

With nVidia dominating their industry, and Nintendo selling Switches like crazy, why don't they take the opportunity to do something unique and unexpected?

Hoping they will. As a Switch owner, if a multiplatform title ever comes out I never consider getting it on Switch.

Because of the failure of Wii U they’re probably not going to take extreme risks

 

[mixmastermo]

Because of the failure of Wii U they’re probably not going to take extreme risks

Wii was even riskier.. we all know how that went.

 

[Zazen]

Wii was even riskier.. we all know how that went.

I think things are different now though. Microsoft and Sony are also offering gamers backwards compatibility. I don't think a console can be successful anymore unless it allows people to play their previously owned games. A hard reset would turnoff so many people.

 

[blaseblase]

Because of the failure of Wii U they’re probably not going to take extreme risks

Was the Wii U supposed to be a risk? I feel like most people didn't even realize it was a new console.

 

[Fedorgasm]

I think I’m going to pass on this one. It’s going to be outdated on day one. Third party games will still run like trash because the other consoles have only gotten more powerful and will be releasing their next gen versions only 2 or 3 years into the switch 2 cycle. Can’t justify the price to just play the occasional Mario game. Maybe when my daughter gets older

Nintendo gave up on the arms race many years ago. They've always been behind Sony and Microsoft in terms of technology. And that's okay because they make up for it with great games and innovative ideas.

Graphics and frame rates aren't necessary for a Nintendo console to be a winner.

 

[7even]

I wish they came up with a console version only.

 

[Michaelangelo]

Nintendo gave up on the arms race many years ago. They've always been behind Sony and Microsoft in terms of technology. And that's okay because they make up for it with great games and innovative ideas.

Graphics and frame rates aren't necessary for a Nintendo console to be a winner.

Especially with Nintendo wanting to make a profit on each console sold

Got to respect the margins

 

[Madmick]

I think I’m going to pass on this one. It’s going to be outdated on day one. Third party games will still run like trash because the other consoles have only gotten more powerful and will be releasing their next gen versions only 2 or 3 years into the switch 2 cycle. Can’t justify the price to just play the occasional Mario game. Maybe when my daughter gets older

How is this different than the first Switch-- or the Wii U and Wii before that? All were "outdated" in terms of hardware power on their respective launch day.

Because of the failure of Wii U they’re probably not going to take extreme risks

How is the Switch different than the Wii U? As a piece of hardware it offers the exact same strategy in every way.

This has always confused me, and I've never deciphered why exactly the Wii U failed where the Switch soared. I haven't encountered any compelling analysis answering the riddle, either (here's an example). I had originally predicted the Wii U to be a wild success because I thought the handheld/docking strategy was truly innovative, and the future. But it flopped. Subsequently, I accepted I didn't understand what people wanted, and predicted the Switch would be a flop because they doubled down on the same strategy. We can see how that worked out.

 

[Zazen]

How is this different than the first Switch-- or the Wii U and Wii before that? All were "outdated" in terms of hardware power on their respective launch day.

How is the Switch different than the Wii U? As a piece of hardware it offers the exact same strategy in every way.

This has always confused me, and I've never deciphered why exactly the Wii U failed where the Switch soared. I haven't encountered any compelling analysis answering the riddle, either (here's an example). I had originally predicted the Wii U to be a wild success because I thought the handheld/docking strategy was truly innovative, and the future. But it flopped. Subsequently, I accepted I didn't understand what people wanted, and predicted the Switch would be a flop because they doubled down on the same strategy. We can see how that worked out.

They didn’t double down on anything . The switch was a major correction as it was made to be a true handheld. Wii U was basically a PS portal except unlike that it was also uncomfortable to hold

 

[Madmick]

They didn’t double down on anything . The switch was a major correction as it was made to be a true handheld. Wii U was basically a PS portal except unlike that it was also uncomfortable to hold

The reason that always confused me is because the 3DS didn't exactly soar outside Japan, but okay, fair enough.

Why are you concerned with the Switch 2's general deficit of hardware power, though? Again, the Switch was like that at launch, too.

 

[Zazen]

The reason that always confused me is because the 3DS didn't exactly soar outside Japan, but okay, fair enough.

Why are you concerned with the Switch 2's general deficit of hardware power, though? Again, the Switch was like that at launch, too.

Because the power gap has only gotten larger and many of the games I enjoy playing on the go are third party titles. I’d probably be better off buying a Steam deck even if that means giving up first party Nintendo titles which I find myself buying less of anyway. Pokémon has been awful as of late and a lot of their IP like Star Fox and Donkey Kong they barely touch anymore. Maybe if get one it won’t be until they build up a big library

 

[HereticBD]

This has always confused me, and I've never deciphered why exactly the Wii U failed where the Switch soared.

Nintendo's success baffles me in general, but it might've just been something as simple as a better name. I mean, what the hell was the "U" in "WiiU"? Kind of like how I think Xbox fucked up by calling the followup to the "360" the "One". They definitely had other marketing issues, but those names are just fucking awful and confusing on their faces.

 

[GtehMVP]

Nintendo's success baffles me in general, but it might've just been something as simple as a better name. I mean, what the hell was the "U" in "WiiU"? Kind of like how I think Xbox fucked up by calling the followup to the "360" the "One". They definitely had other marketing issues, but those names are just fucking awful and confusing on their faces.

Yeah, I think if they called it called the Wii2, or something signifying a true sequel, it probably would have fared better.

The Xbox names are retarded. I follow gaming news too closely, and even I have to ponder for a few seconds to get them right.

Anyone play the modern Hitman games? Wanna see a cluster fuck of naming conventions, they take the take.

 

[Madmick]

Yeah, I think if they called it called the Wii2, or something signifying a true sequel, it probably would have fared better.

The Xbox names are retarded. I follow gaming news too closely, and even I have to ponder for a few seconds to get them right.

Anyone play the modern Hitman games? Wanna see a cluster fuck of naming conventions, they take the take.

That's because Microsoft culture is clearly ruled by American business school by-the-numbers sensibilities. At some point in the past decade there must have been oodles of research from nerds showing that putting "One" or "1" in your brand was the way to juice sales. I remember those several generations where every goddamn Android phone was trying to wedge that into their flagships' names. In more recent years it's been "X". Gotta get that goddamn X in there. X,X,X...wait, um, Mr. Musk, sir...

Sony and Apple are trying to show the world how you do it. Stop being a bunch of tryhard shitters. Just label it what it is. Apple only succumbed that one generation with the "iPhone X", and everyone hated it. They listened. Back to numbering. PS2, PS3, PS4, PS5...it's almost like it makes goddamn sense.