Nintendo Switch Pro Could Steal the Thunder from PS5 & Xbox Series X with One Move

Even though the PlayStation 5 and Xbox Series X have both already released, Nintendo could steal the spotlight away from both consoles with one move.

Read Full Story >>
The story is too old to be commented.
ABizzel115d ago

Please stop these ridiculous rumors that a Switch Pro will be anywhere near comparable to the PS5 and Series X. First and foremost the hardware isn't there in the handheld / mobile industry, and even the best hardware is held back due to lack of proper cooling in a mobile device thus causing clock speeds to be cut in half or 1/4 in order to not throttle and overheat.

Only laptops can take advantage of this hardware and that's because they have large batteries and fans to allow them to run the hardware, and generally only at maximum settings when plugged up, otherwise even those batteries last you 2 - 4 hours.

You cannot make a handheld device with the current hardware available that comes remotely close to the PS5 and Series X, or Series S for that matter. A top-end mobile device is still only approaching Xbox One VCR edition in performance and these are only in tablets which are starting to break the 1 TFLOP cap.

A Switch Pro would at best be using Tegra X2 which is only a 50% performance boost over Tegra X1 the majority of which is based on higher clock speeds, otherwise, the performance boost is closer to 10% in like for like clocks. Nintendo isn't drastically increasing the clock speeds, so a Switch Pro is only going to be marginally more powerful.

RaidenBlack13d ago

First of all, Ampere based Tegra Orin is what Nvidia's pushing for new platforms. And that's before their ARM acquisition. Next year they're bound to come up with a better SoC complete with Tensor and RT cores. It'll be upto Nintendo how much they'll want to invest.
Nintendo was also interested in Samsung's (Exynos+RDNA) SoC.
And also, its still not clear what the form factor will be of their next console. (Nintendo in their Corporate Management Policy Briefing doc they just stated "unique integrated hardware-software products" for 20XX)
It might be a traditional console with ARM architecture to have a seamless commonality with the Switch.
So that devs can make a 1440p/4K RT game for the new console and have a 1080p/720p non-RT version of the same running for the Switch.

mandf13d ago

We all know how nvidia tried to extort the console industry. All three console makers ran and jumped on AMD. Imagine what a handheld would cost from nividia.nothing less than a grand.

RaidenBlack13d ago (Edited 13d ago )

"We all know how nvidia tried to extort the console industry" ??
Only PS3 used nVIDIA GPU. X360 and Wii were already using ATi (AMD) GPUs.
The reason nVIDIA was not considered because, nvidia didn't have an x86 processor offering along with their GPU in a single die. Exactly what was AMD offering as APU (Jaguar-derived) SoC. Hence AMD was chosen. Plain and simple.
"All three console makers ran and jumped on AMD"
Wii U still continued with IBM CPU and Radeon GPU ... not AMD APU.
And later went with Nvidia for Switch.

mandf13d ago

Not saying anything you said isnt true but Ms and Nintendo used nividia before. Bothconsoles were hindered by price because of nividia. It will be a while before all 3 of them think about going back to them.

RaidenBlack13d ago (Edited 13d ago )

They'll switch only IF arm based processor becomes powerful enough to rival x86. Arm's already pretty efficient ... just needs the proper IPC to properly flex the power.
Why ARM? Coz nvidia acquired ARM and they'll boost the ARM's potential beyond mobile platforms.
nvidia doesn't have a viable x86 offering.
And the push is already coming for computing. MS already tried with Surface Pro X.
The biggest is Apple entirely gradually switching to ARM from x86.
Then for gaming?
Nvidia has ported many games like Half Life 2 and Doom3 to Tegra powered Nvidia Shield tablets. There's already the popular iPad(s) with huge catalogue of games and of course the main proof of ARM's gaming potential is Nintendo Switch.
GTA San Andreas, KOTOR, XCOM runs on simple Android phones.

mikeslemonade13d ago

Too little too late for Nintendo. The pro should have came 2 years ago. But I of course will be getting the pro. I’m trading in both of my Switches for it.

+ Show (2) more repliesLast reply 13d ago
1Victor13d ago

To the article headline writer I got some questions
1 is it going to be 4K (1080p minimum)
2 is it going to be free for current owners
3 how the hell when it hasn’t been announced.
Assuming that it’s real we won’t see a “switch pro” or any Nintendo system for the next 2-3 years and by then both big systems will have a bigger install base for it to be a a real competition as going by history Nintendo systems have always been 1-2 generations behind since Super Nintendo/ N64

ShadowWolf71213d ago

Nah man, the GameCube was actually stronger than the PS2, but when it underperformed they went for lesser hardware with "new experiences" to try to cut down on costs and present any future big losses.

Sciurus_vulgaris13d ago

Some people think Nintendo will magically make a 4k capable Switch. As you pointed out, the technology for such a device simply isn’t available. The best selling Switch games aren’t graphically demanding. Nintendo has no major incentive to upgrade the Switch. The Switch doesn’t have a competing hand-held, and it only semi-competes with the Series S/X and PS5.

Sirk7x13d ago (Edited 13d ago )

DLSS exists. Only need to render at 1080p for a 4k image. I'm certain that it will be on all consoles in a few years. There will be no need for native 4k resolution when no one will hardly be able to tell the difference, and you can get significant boosts in other areas, like frame-rate and more ray-tracing.
I don't think people understand how much AI is going to change the industry over the next ten year period.

FinalFantasyFanatic13d ago

A Switch Pro is going to be like the PRO is to the PS4, a bit bump in resolution and performance, but don't expect anything too wild because it needs to still be portable and support the previous Switch/Player base, you don't want to alienate them by making games Switch Pro only. I'm basically expecting a bump to 4k and a most consistent 60 fps for games (mainly because most Switch games aren't as graphically demanding as Xbox/PS).

+ Show (1) more replyLast reply 13d ago
-Foxtrot15d ago

Look only way it’s gonna turn my head is if it’s a home console which trades portability for a shit load of memory and upgrades everything else.

Even if it’s just a black box like the dock I’d take it

I’ve never taken my Switch out the dock, I’d rather have other things and since they’ve done a portable only version why not a home console only version

ABizzel114d ago

Nintendo's home console days are a big question mark. I believe the company is trying to determine if it's even worth investing in anymore after seeing the success of the Switch being equivalent to their previous handheld + console sales.

And Nintendo has the issue of being capped at a $349 (realistically a $299) price as the majority of their install base sees that as the golden buy price, which automatically limits them to a Xbox Series S style console.... Which wouldn't be bad for them and honestly perfect for the stylized games they make.

If Nintendo were to it the could practically launch a Series S rival in 1 - 3 years time getting the benefit of 5nm parts allowing for better performance at lower power draws, making an even smaller console (size matters to Nintendo, but in the opposite way it usually matters to others 🌝).

They can honestly get away with several key cuts as well, so they can make a profit Day 1 as they always try to. A 5nm Ryzen APU would do.

APU-CPU: 5nm refresh Ryzen 7 4700U (8/8)
APU-GPU: 5nm RDNA 3 APU GPU (16CU or 20CU @ 1.5 GHz = 3.1TF or 3.84 TF)
RAM: 12GB GDDR6 (although they could be cheap and go with normal DDR5 or even 8GB)
SSD: 120GB NVMe (could even go with a tradition SSD)

That basically gives them a smaller Series S that's cheaper to produce and manufacture, that consumers less power while performing practically the same, at an affordable $299 and easily hitting $249 if they needed to.

jukins13d ago

So with tech not even available a a generation ahead they'll be able to achieve a console the same price as today?

ABizzel113d ago


If they want to stay in the $299 price range, Yeah. Nintendo isn't like MS or Sony in the sense they're okay with taking a loss early on and making it up through online subscriptions and software sales. Nintendo wants to make a profit on everything Day 1, hardware, games sales, and service. That's not to say they won't, but they will do everything in their power and cut corners across all aspects of their console to try to get that point at $349 or less while making money on it Day 1. Which as a business I get 100%, but compared to your competitors and how it ends up affecting 3rd party developers, and as a result your fanbase it's kind of grimy.

But Nintendo platforms sell because of their exclusives, and the only 3rd party support they truly care about is the Japanese market and anything else is just gravy, and with those specs its more than enough.

Most of these parts will be available next year, and while it's not as powerful in raw performance numbers, the additional architectural improvements and software features of RDNA3 will balance out the raw hardware advantage.

An 8-core Zen 2 CPU is still enough to run all games still and is overkill for Nintendo style games. Hyperthreading on the consoles will only really be used to push the most demanding games and exclusives, as many game engines are still designed for up to 8-core CPUs, so it's a place where Nintendo can cut cost and still match the base CPU performance of over 90% of the games developed for PS5, Series X, and S.

The 16CUs is a bit on the lower-end, but it makes them a guaranteed profit on the hardware Day 1 and allows the price to possibly be $249 if they want. I'd hope for the 20CU version as it allows it to basically outperform the Series S in every way even with a slightly lower TF count as the architectural changes will likely outperform a 20CU RDNA 2 GPU by a fair amount, and as a result, even the 16CU RDNA3 should be on par with the Series S both of which offer a much better TDP compared to the Series S.

8GB - 12GB is enough for Nintendo style games. 12GB would mainly be for parity with Series S, therefore, potential western 3rd party support.

And Nintendo always cheap out on storage, and have been using 32GB while the competition has had 500GB and 1TB for over a decade now with the PS360 ending up with 500GB and the PS4 and Xbox One going the entire generation with 500GB or more. So a 120GB NVMe isn't out of the question as once again it's a huge cost cutter in comparison to a 1TB ($20 vs $100 on the consumer side, so I'd assume $10 or $12 vs $50 or $60 for ordering millions). Hopefully, they at least go for 250GB.

So yeah, I stand by it.

Tapani13d ago (Edited 13d ago )

Interesting to see how people speculate without understanding anything about technology. It’s wishful thinking that Switch Pro will have anything but a 4K _capable_ device. Technology is not there yet to have a 1080p portable / 4K docked Nintendo console where games would run natively 60fps which is what Nintendo wants from performance, not image quality, point of view. If it’s a DLSS capable 1080p portable, 1440p docked device, and even that’s a stretch, it would not come out in 2021, but in 2022. The tech is just not there yet.

Most likely the next Switch would have to be Tegra based due to BC as well, or something very similar so the earlier games would work out of the box. Think of Wii and Wii U, but also how did that go for Nintendo again? I’m pretty sure their Execs are scared of doing a similar mistake. Incremental increase with Tegra 2 or 3 would make most sense and that’s still a nice boost, including image quality if there’s an upscaling tech involved.

Nintendo will not sell its products without a significant margin, and if the tech is not there yet, they can’t make money while keeping the most affordable system. Their systems also have a relatively bad build quality, so I’d imagine a 4K capable device would cost more to produce/manufacture as well to make it work.

It will be most likely and incremental upgrade, like the New 3DS. I’m sure they are separately thinking of ARM+Ampere/Volta combo next due to the contract they have with Nvidia, but this contract being there doesn’t guarantee it materialises to anything either.

curtain_swoosh13d ago

ur right, but they trade off a cheaper console with RIDICULOUSLY expensive controllers and games that never change their prices, and basically a last last gen console software and shop experience. the switch can do nothing but play games. which is fine but its quite idiotic in the times we live in

FinalFantasyFanatic13d ago


They probably could do 4k, most Nintendo exclusive games aren't that demanding, but 1440p unscaled to 4k is also acceptable to me, I expect a more consistent 60fps. And you're right they need to support the previous games as well, so it'll be like 3DS to New 3DS or PS4 to PS4 Pro.


Your dreaming, Nintendo won't change the APU to Zen or include RDNA3 because they still need to support their original playerbase and games, that'll be painful for developers to code and develop for two wildly different versions of the Switch.

ABizzel113d ago


I was clearly talking about if Nintendo ever decided to make a home console, not a Switch or Switch 2. The first sentence of that comment says "Nintendo's home console".

Sirk7x13d ago (Edited 13d ago )

With the wild success of the Switch (it is their second best selling console of all-time already), I believe they are going to keep the Switch as similar as possible, just with more power. More storage, higher quality screen(no higher than 1080p), joy-con revision. It will use DLSS, be backwards compatible and have a better battery. Their best bet would be just to make a Nintendo Switch 2. With the new leadership at Nintendo, I think they're going to play it safe and not mess up a good thing by trying to reinvent the wheel again.

ABizzel113d ago


My response to Foxtrot was about a home console, not the Switch 2. The Switch 2 will still use pure mobile tech, like a Tegra Xavier.

But if Nintendo made a home console in the next 1 - 2 years it would be around the Xbox Series S performance.

+ Show (5) more repliesLast reply 13d ago
gerbintosh13d ago

Well, they could make a base station that has all of the technology required for 4K. Dock your switch and then you can play 4K games on your TV. Remove the switch and then you are back to portable graphics. I honestly believe this is the only way that can make 4K gaming on a Switch a reality

Sirk7x13d ago

DLSS seems more likely.

Cuzizkool14d ago (Edited 14d ago )

I really hope people aren’t getting their hopes up for a super powerful Switch Pro. I agree a revision is coming, but it’s likely going to be similar to the 3DS/New 3DS. I don’t even think the screen will get a resolution boost. What I think is realistic is a boost in performance so that there will be a frame rate increase, resolution boost so graphically demanding handheld mode games would go from 540p to consistent 720p, docked mode graphics heavy games would go from 900p to 1080p, and slightly faster loading times. Anything more advanced than that and 3rd parties might skip developing for OG Switch altogether. 4K is not in the equation here, unless Nintendo pulls something out of left field and releases a non portable home console only Switch, something like the opposite of the Switch lite. In that case all bets are off and I wouldn’t know how powerful it would be. Probably whatever graphics power $350 could get you, as I think Nintendo wouldn’t like pricing their console higher than that. Of course I’ll wrap this up by saying I’m guessing this solely on past handheld revisions Nintendo has done. 🤷‍♂️

Destiny108014d ago (Edited 14d ago )

knowing nintendo it will be more expensive then a PS5

it will launch with Breath of the Wild 2

if they can keep the price at 299 they will have another hit

NotoriousWhiz13d ago

Gamecube launch price: $200
Wii launch price: $250
Wii U launch price: $300
Switch launch price: $300

What ever makes you think a Switch Pro will cost more than $500?

SullysCigar13d ago

Xbox and PlayStation consoles often represent good value for money from a hardware standpoint, where Nintendo doesn't.

That's not to take a dig at Nintendo, it's just the way they operate. If it doesn't harm their sales and people go out and buy at that price, I'd imagine they won't change that trait any time soon.

NotoriousWhiz13d ago


I agree with you completely which is why I also don't think it will come anywhere near PS5 / Series X in terms of technical capabilities. We'll be lucky if it can match the PS4 Pro.

Games1st14d ago (Edited 14d ago )

“One move” they go off on a tangent, but it’s just release big game or switch pro.