Wednesday, May 7th 2025
"Full Die Shot" Analysis of Nintendo Switch 2 SoC Indicates Samsung 8 nm Production Origins
Late last month, Kurnal (@Kurnalsalts) shared a partial die shot of a supposed Nintendo Switch 2 chipset—this teaser image seemed to verify previous leaked claims about the forthcoming next-gen hybrid gaming console being powered by a custom NVIDIA "T239" SoC design. Two weeks after the fact, Kurnal has boasted about delivering an alleged "world's first Nintendo Switch 2 die shot." Their social media post included a couple of key specification data points: "Samsung 8N (8 nm), eight Cortex-A78C cores, (shared) 4 MB L2 cache, and 1536 CUDA/6TPC 'Ampere' GPU." Another leaker—Geekerwan—said that they acquired a "Switch 2 motherboard" via Xianyu. This Chinese equivalent to eBay seems to be a veritable treasure trove of tech curiosities.
Earlier on in 2025, black market sellers were attempting to offload complete pre-launch Switch 2 packages for big money. As reported by VideoCardz, recent acquisitions only involved the securing of non-functional motherboard + SoC units—Kurnal disclosed a 1000 RMB (~$138 USD) price point. Digital Foundry's Richard Leadbetter is a very visible advocate of the Switch 2 chipset being based on a mature 8 nm Samsung node process. His personal belief was aimed at certain critics; these opposers predicted 5 nm manufacturing origins. Older leaks suggested a larger than expected die footprint—relative to Switch 1's internal setup; almost twice the size—leading to Leadbetter's conclusion. Comparison charts—produced by Kurnal and Geekerwan—propose an occupied area of 207 mm².
Geekerwan's video description: "the world's first Switch 2 chip! How powerful is the performance?"
Sources:
Kurnalsalts Tweet, VideoCardz, Geekerwan Youtube Channel
Earlier on in 2025, black market sellers were attempting to offload complete pre-launch Switch 2 packages for big money. As reported by VideoCardz, recent acquisitions only involved the securing of non-functional motherboard + SoC units—Kurnal disclosed a 1000 RMB (~$138 USD) price point. Digital Foundry's Richard Leadbetter is a very visible advocate of the Switch 2 chipset being based on a mature 8 nm Samsung node process. His personal belief was aimed at certain critics; these opposers predicted 5 nm manufacturing origins. Older leaks suggested a larger than expected die footprint—relative to Switch 1's internal setup; almost twice the size—leading to Leadbetter's conclusion. Comparison charts—produced by Kurnal and Geekerwan—propose an occupied area of 207 mm².
52 Comments on "Full Die Shot" Analysis of Nintendo Switch 2 SoC Indicates Samsung 8 nm Production Origins
It only needs to be good enough for its intended purpose, it doesnt need to run the latest AAA at 4k 100fps.
I think it is already overpriced as it is.
The A78's replacement, which by now is the A725, had three predecessors, the A710, A715 and A720, all of which would have been excellent choices, as they're all ARMv9 based cores, whereas the A78 is using the older ARMv8 instruction set.
We're not even talking the X1-X4 performance cores here, nor the GPU, so no need to get your knickers in a twist about cost.
This is merely a matter of long term software support, since these things are running some variant of Android after all.
It would most likely have cost Nintendo little to nothing to have gone with the newer Arm cores, but it seem like Nvidia might not have a license for them.
On top of that, it's odd that there are no Little cores at all, since a pair of A55 cores would've been able to handle background tasks and what no, while freeing up the A78 cores for the important stuff. It just doesn't look like a good chip for a battery powered device.
Also, the PCIe 4.0 x8 interface appears to not being used, except for maybe one lane being connected to the UFS storage chip.
I really don't get the location on the PCB of that chip though, as it means tricky routing of the PCIe lanes.
Can't find any details on the MTK WiFi and Bluetooth chip.
Bet Nintendo regrets going with Nvidia but now they're stuck with them.
Also interesting how that config is a middle ground between the Orin NX and the AGX.At least from Nvidia's side, there's no newer option available.
Atlas (Ada-based) was cancelled, and Thor is way too new, and so far only has beefier options available that likely consume way too much power.I don't think it's a license issue from Nvidia, nor I think Nintendo has any choice on which CPU cores are being used, but rather just picking what SoC is available from Nvidia.Nvidia has only properly done Little cores with their pascal-based Tegra generation, even on the Maxwell ones the A53 cores were never used and totally removed in later revisions.
Since then there were no other heterogeneous CPUs from Nvidia.Another artifact from being spun out of the regular Orin offerings. Those lanes would be used either for actual NVMe storage, or in-vehicle networking (something like 10GBASE-T1 for all the autonomous fancy features).
I guess the bigger question is not why that SoC, but rather why Nintendo kept the partnership with Nvidia (which we could discuss many different reasons as well)This is actually small compared to the actual Orin AGX at almost 450mm² lol
That SoC PMIC is rated for 34.4 W? :eek:
Only available in docked mode possibly? I can't imagine this much power being used in handheld mode. OG Switch was 15 W peak.
If nothing else, it means it shouldn't get too hot when charging.This. But at the same time, if I got to a company and ask for a custom chip, why would I accept getting whatever leftovers they want to give me?
Unless Nintendo got this for no up front cost and no down payment, this was a bad deal for Nintendo.
The chip really doesn't fit the requirements of the end product.
Then again, this is on brand for the Switch. The hardware is hardly mind-boggling, gets outdone by yester-yesteryear's mobile flagships and for cheaper nowadays, but it doesn't matter when everyone's just gonna whip out the 'but the games are what really matters' schtick.
I just wish it arrived for the $299 price point its older brother did. All would be (mostly) forgiven then.
lastlastgen hardware to its loyal customers? It's not like they won't pay for it anyway.Fuck, currently the PS5 Pro is the most powerful console and THAT cannot run 4K60 consistently in current titles. Switch 2 is significantly less powerful.
Also, for everyone slagging off the machine in this thread, what did you expect? It's around 6 times more powerful than the Switch 1, will be capable of better visuals than a SteamDeck (especially on TV), comes with a big 120hz screen with VRR, and is £400. Seems reasonable to me.
You mean it’s 6 times more powerful than a 10 year old Tegra X1 that wasn’t winning any performance awards even when it released? Truly, a marvel of technology. Stellar progress. I would certainly hope that being the case considering how long it has been and the price they are asking.
But I am being unkind, I am sure that first party stuff will run fine… for a while. But my concern is that, if they plan for another 10 year cycle, it might just not have enough grunt for that going forward.
And we're not talking about general purpose PCs here, we're talking about a console with games designed with that hardware in mind, that has resulted in some extremely good looking, polished games, belying the 10 year old mobile hardware.
And again, what do you expect exactly? It's £400 and similar power to a SteamDeck. What better handheld console/PC is there for £400?
I don't see any other handheld machines with the kind of "stellar progress" you speak of, machines that are 2/3 times more powerful than a SteamDeck for £400. The Rog Ally X and Legion Go are almost twice the price, and only around 50% more powerful than a SteamDeck.