Topic: The Nintendo Switch Rumor and Speculation Thread

@Ulysses thanks for the link. I do remember seeing that story from a different sources couple of months ago. I think the prices rises are par for the course for modern silicon in recent years. It's the reason why MicroSoft produced the Series S - they knew there wouldn't be any silicon price cuts to support a mid-gen price cut of the Series X.

I'm not sure how much TSMCs prices rises would impact the 4N node - I remember reading that TSMC made Nvidia pay a lot in advance to get back in with TSMC. Plus the latest Nvidia GPUs (Blackwell) are an a more advance node (4NP), which is probably carrying the premium. And both nodes are dedicated for Nvidia, so there's less competition from other potential customers.

The consensus speculation is that the Tegra T239 SoC that the Switch 2 will use will be on Nvidia's dedicated 4N node with TSMC (which is 5nm), or maybe a similar node from Samsung. The 8nm node used to make RTX 3000 Ampere GPUs just doesn't make sense if Nintendo want to optimise for performance per watt and battery life. Besides, if the node was 8nm, the Switch 2 could've come out in 2023 (software permitting). I used to assume it would be 8nm too, and thought 5nm was a fanboys wet dream. Then Thraktor wrote this post on Famiboards, and I changed my mind ...

https://famiboards.com/threads/future-nintendo-hardware-techn...

Nintendo will be using years old chips, this price change won’t effect them.

@HeroYoshiko True enough for the Switch’s TX1 (that’s on 16nm), but I think Nvidia will already have prices locked in if T239 is produced on the 4N node

To be fair, Sony and Microsoft are using years old chips and their prices are actively increasing.

Well we finally got a new rumor I thought worth posting (even if it's as solid as a glass of water). Supposedly a commercial for the Switch Successor was just filmed...

@link3710 @link3710 Nate the Hate said on Reddit that assuming it’s the same intel, he too received this a month ago. I assume that means it was filmed a few weeks ago and therefore likely be revealed sooner rather than later.

8", 1080p with PS4 Power in handheld/table top.

But i can't be bothered to use it in HH, if they're resorting back to LCD..Unless it's QD-LED with FALD technology. Best case scenario for a future Switch refresh model would be to obviously use a QD-OLED display. But don't expect something like that at launch.

@NeonMullet I'm gonna say your in the minority unfortunately. Most consumers will prefer the lower price of an LCD screen over an OLED / QD-LED / LCD / whatever else, and the enthusiasts will buy at launch anyways. The nicer screen will definitely be reserved for an eventual mid-gen refresh.

I'm hoping that there will be screen options at launch. I'm willing to pay more for the best possible screen and hopefully more internal memory. But that's likely a refresh, like @link3710 said.

i think Switch 2 will be $499

Personally I'm really hoping for £/$400, but I think with a decent bump in specs, Nintendo could have a solid value proposition for a higher price. I just think they've always struggled when selling consoles for higher prices than consumer expectation. I think Switch has done so well (despite no price decrease) partly because of how good a price it is to parents looking at it next to PS5 and XBOX.

@cpmh1234 After talking about the differences in chip buyers with @TSR3, I feel like there's a good chance Nintendo charges more than $400 if they indeed switch to TSMC's 4N node as opposed to Samsung's more affordable 8N node.

The good news is, the improvements achieved with the 4N node over Samsung's 8N (like battery consumption, power efficiency, etc) would help future-proof the Switch 2 and help it have longer legs. The bad news is, this could jack up the initial price over what it would have been when Nintendo was using Samsung's larger nodes.

As an adult who wouldn't be on the hook for buying a game console for my kids, my personal bias is I would gladly take the improved TSMC chip node at a higher base price to help future-proof the Switch 2. Samsung's 8N might force developers to under clock game optimization even further to keep power consumption lower in handheld mode.

Living room game consoles can command more, IMHO. But a portable game console? One that you may have to buy multiple units of to keep the kids happy? One that you might drop, get stolen, sit on or otherwise wreck due to that thing called "life"? I don't know, I'd be nervous about buying a $500 portable and carrying it around. But then again, I'm not the kind of guy who buys a $1000 cellphone.

@Ulysses I'm not sure that Samsung's 8nm would be more expensive than TSMCs 4N, when you take into account you'll got more chips per wafer, and node yield would be a factor as well. But to be honest I think $400 USD is now the floor for the 2witch's price. I think Nintendo will settle for a price somewhere between $400-$450 - trying not to look too 'cheap' but avoid a 1-on-1 comparison with the PS5 at the same time. How does $424.99 feel, in the aftershock of the PS5 Pro reveal?

@TSR3 Oh I meant, Samsung's nodes would be cheaper than TMSC's. Not only do the articles state Samsung is generally cheaper than TSMC, but also considering the reported price hike for 4N nodes next year. I definitely think Nintendo would save money if they went with Samsung over TSMC, but as you've stated, the 4N node would be much better for performance.

I'm also wondering if Nvidia having to pay TSMC a lot of money to get back into business with them had anything to do with Nintendo. Perhaps Nvidia was negotiating in a large part for the 4N nodes they wanted to allocate for the Switch 2?

Personally, I think the marketing team will tell Nintendo that if they are leaning toward $420 or $430, then they might as well just jump to $450. $450 compared to $430 should still be something the market can bear. Other toys like LEGO products do the $230 or $125 price range, but I think a gaming console will stick with $50 increments, like the $350 Switch OLED and $450 PS5.

But you're right; I also think $400 is now the cheapest the Switch 2 can be. I'm still hoping the base model is $400 to maximize the family market, but if Sony gets away with the PS5 Pro, then I believe Nintendo will no longer price the premium SKU just at $450, but rather jump it straight up to $500, and expect the enthusiasts to bear the extra cost, in order to increase profit margins for those dear shareholders. 😒

Another option is, Nintendo debuts one launch SKU at $450, then a year-ish later launch a $400 Switch 2 Lite, followed by a premium OLED SKU for $500. Then the Switch 2 family will range from $400, $450 and $500 models, similar to the Switch 1's family of systems. Of course, Switch Lite is $200 compared to the $300 V1 Switch, so it's possible we could see another $100 difference between the regular Switch 2 and the budget Lite model. But I think that might be less likely when dealing with a different climate in 2027~ as opposed to 2017, with a completely different chip architecture.

Coming off of the $700 PS5 Pro announcement, the expectation for the Switch successor's pricing is even more hotly anticipated. Figure $400 is the goldilocks zone. Considering the demand for their next platform, Nintendo could probably get away with $500...if it's packaged with a game.

I don't think so. Nintendo are definitely a prestige customer for Nvidia, but relatively small in volume or revenue terms, even before the AI boom. I think it was more to do with Samsung's more advanced nodes not performing well, and Nvidia not having much alternative to make back up with TSMC

@Magician Honestly, having a pack-in title would be an amazing way to increase value without increasing per unit costs. Switch basically had MK8 DX as that for the latter half of its lifespan, and Nintendo Land / Wii Sports were both amazing titles in their own right. A good pack-in title could make $450 feel like $400 for a lot of consumers.

@Ulysses I don't believe there ever was a change in node, simply because of the time it would take to go through all the steps. Even the Tegra X1+ wasn't something that took very little time to get from start to finish. It takes years to reach the first tape out of any chip unless you want to run the risk of using shortcuts.

As far as pricing, there is also something to consider. If they had gone with Samsung 8nm and then later on shifted to TSMC 4N as part of a mid-gen refresh, then they'd be paying for the work of 2 chips. But, if they went straight to TSMC 4N and kept that for the entire generation, then they'd only paid for the work of 1 chip. With the Tegra X1, they had no choice as there was no other viable options, but immediately went with the Tegra X1+ when it became available. I wouldn't be surprised if Nintendo was the one that had Nvidia jumpstart that.

I'm still a firm believer of a $400 price point. They can't price it too high or they'll price it out of the market. And we can't use the price of the Steam Deck or other portable PCs for comparison because those are not just of different markets, but also because none of their makers have the ambition to sell 100+ million units to require buying components in such high bulk that then offer greater discounts.