Nintendo remaking the Philip’s CDi Zelda game! Let’s go!

https://famiboards.com/threads/future-nintendo-hardware-technology-speculation-discussion-st-new-staff-post-please-read.55/post-1583364

This is of interest, to me at least.

So Nvidia unveiled DLSS 4 and said that it would work for older rtx series cards going all the way back to the 20 series, but without frame generation.

Switch 2 has been compared to a 30s or 20 series periodically.

DLSS 4 uses a transformer model for super resolution, rather than the cheaper to use CNN model of DLSS 3 and below.

But Nvidia said it was computationally 4x more expensive. There's been people flip flopping over this asking if it's 4x more intensive for training or for rendering.

Digital Foundry recently replied to a user question as to whether Switch 2 could use this model. They said before it was unlikely as they would likely use a more lightweight model. Then Rich said fundamentally it could as an rtx with tensor cores, but would it be practical as its more expensive to use computationally?

So DLSS 4 recently was released for the public to use, a famiboards user has an rtx 2070 and has been testing DLSS 4 with the transformer model on it. Mostly at 1080p and it seems to work and work well without a massive drain on resources. He also says it looks great on a 65 inch 4k tv.

I can see the image.

What image? You two are nuts?

I'm just joking, i just wanted to fuck around with you two.

I love Nintendo games, especially Mario Bros and The Legend of Zelda, my favorites are Mario Kart, Tears of the Kingdom and Breath of the Wild. I also enjoy playing Horizon, Crystal Fruits Deluxe, Fire'n Diamonds, and Midas Dynasty, which I play mainly because I follow DiceGirl Egle expert slot streamer. Anyway, while I save up to buy Super Mario Party Jamboree, I'll be playing Pokémon Go.

Question for you guys.

Switch 1 was a neat concept and it worked well for a lot of games. But for graphically intensive 3rd party games, there was always a compromise. The version you had access to had to be significantly scaled down. So there were relatively few current AAA 3rd party games on it. I'm not counting ports from 360 era.

So Switch 2 is significantly more powerful than switch 1 and with DLSS it's rumoured to be around Xbox Series S performance.

People have said it can be compared to an rtx 2050 or 3050.

It should be better in some respects (File decompression engine, SSD, RAM) and worse in some others (low power draw, shader cores)

I've been watching RTX 2050 and 3050 game test videos on YouTube. Even though the 2050 is like a laptop GPU, it runs virtually anything at a decent framerate at 1080p.

Forza for instance was at over 75 fps. It runs Witcher 3, Cyberpunk, Red Dead Redemption 2, God of War(s), Horizon etc and not at low framerates. For the games I've seen the framerates are as high as 170 fps and as low as 25 fps. Many of the games tested didn't even enable DLSS so you might expect some switch games at 1440p or higher.

And it basically looks broadly the same as versions of the games on other systems. It's not some obviously compromised version.

Now that you can get a AAA version of a game, that does, basically, look the same and that you can play anywhere, does that change your equation on which version of a game to get? Is there a point where it reaches the point where it looks "good enough" for you in terms of graphics where you wouldn't recoil in horror at the thought of playing a Switch 2 version of a 3rd party AAA game?

I can imagine that there are other factors at play, your online service, you may not play games portable etc, you may want to preserve your steam library etc

What I found with the OLED and this is true for many users, the portable experience is so much better you feel less of a need to play many games docked. If switch 2s screen and performance in handheld play is a lot better, (graphics too) you might find yourself more willing to use it as intended, switching between both modes.