this post was submitted on 06 Apr 2025
189 points (88.9% liked)

Games

37418 readers
1562 users here now

Welcome to the largest gaming community on Lemmy! Discussion for all kinds of games. Video games, tabletop games, card games etc.

Weekly Threads:

What Are You Playing?

The Weekly Discussion Topic

Rules:

  1. Submissions have to be related to games

  2. No bigotry or harassment, be civil

  3. No excessive self-promotion

  4. Stay on-topic; no memes, funny videos, giveaways, reposts, or low-effort posts

  5. Mark Spoilers and NSFW

  6. No linking to piracy

More information about the community rules can be found here and here.

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] Agent_Karyo@lemmy.world 2 points 1 day ago* (last edited 1 day ago) (12 children)

So you're saying it's identical to the PC version in terms of scope and capabilities?

Have you ever played Cities: Skylines on PC?

And claiming that the Cortex A57 was a capable CPU in 2017 is not serious.

[–] MudMan@fedia.io -2 points 1 day ago (11 children)

Well, it runs like crap, for sure, but that's not the bar that you set here.

Now that I think about it, what are you saying? Your point seems a bit muddled.

[–] Agent_Karyo@lemmy.world 3 points 1 day ago* (last edited 1 day ago) (10 children)

The Switch CPU had very poor performance for 2017, it was 3 generations behind then current ARM/cortex releases.

It is very likely the CPU in the Switch 2 will also be subpar by modern standards.

I.e. You don't know that the Steam Deck has a worse CPU and considering Nintendo's history with CPUs, it is not impossible for the Switch 2 CPU to be noticeably worse than the Steam Deck.

[–] missingno@fedia.io 0 points 1 day ago (1 children)

What "standards" are you comparing it to? The Switch 1 was behind home consoles, but that's not really a fair comparison. There was nothing similar on the market to appropriately compare it to, no "standard".

Five years later the Steam Deck outperformed the Switch, because of course hardware from five years later would. But the gap between the 2017 Switch and 2022 Deck is not so vast that you can definitively claim in advance to know that the 2025 Switch 2 definitely has to be worse. You don't know that and can't go claiming it as fact.

All we know so far is that the Switch 2 does beat the Deck in at least one major attribute: it has a 1080p120 screen, in contrast to the Deck's 800p60. And it is not unlikely to expect the rest of the hardware to reflect that.

[–] Agent_Karyo@lemmy.world 2 points 1 day ago (1 children)

OP claimed the Steam Deck's CPU was definitely worse than the Switch 2 (this was an explicit, categorical statement).

Considering the Switch's history (Cortex A57 used in the OG Switch being three generation behind in 2017), it's not unreasonable to speculate that the Switch 2 CPU is likely to be extremely weak from a gaming perspective (I never brought up compute or synthetic benchmarks).

[–] missingno@fedia.io 1 points 1 day ago (1 children)

Exactly what hardware at a similarly competitive price point and form factor are you comparing it to when you say it's behind?

The Switch 1 didn't use the very best top of the line parts that money could buy, but if that's what you're fixating on then you're missing the fact that neither did the Steam Deck. The Switch made compromises to hit a $300 price point in 2017, and the Deck made compromises to hit a $400 price point in 2022.

[–] Agent_Karyo@lemmy.world 1 points 1 day ago (1 children)

Portable devices using ARM CPU cores, even ones for ~$350, like the Xiaomi F1 released in 2018. It came with a new Snapdragon 845 SoC that included an Adreno 630 GPU.

It didn't have the form factor of the Switch, I will give you that. My point is that the Switch had a very weak CPU when compared to similar devices even in the same price band for its time.

[–] missingno@fedia.io 1 points 1 day ago (1 children)

It didn't have the form factor of the Switch

So it's not a similar device. Comparing to phones is rather misleading, given that phones do not have active cooling and wouldn't actually be able to run the kinds of games the Switch hardware could without catching on fire in the process. They aren't gaming hardware.

[–] Agent_Karyo@lemmy.world 1 points 1 day ago

It's a portable gaming device. It is in the same market.

You can play complex strategy games that require strong CPUs like Project Highrise, The Final Earth 2, Mega Mall Story 2 on mobile.

You won't be able to run The Final Earth 2 even with the standard mobile population limit on a Switch because it uses an ancient CPU and it's a quad core.

Don't limit yourself by Nintendo PR and marketing. The gaming world (portable or otherwise) is not limited to Nintendo.

load more comments (8 replies)
load more comments (8 replies)
load more comments (8 replies)