Final Nintendo Switch 2 Specifications Surface: CPU, GPU, Memory, and System Reservation

[AleksandarK]

With the launch scheduled for June 5, Nintendo has quietly confirmed the final technical details for its next-generation hybrid console, the Switch 2, clarifying the specifications of the "custom NVIDIA processor" at its core and specifying exactly how much horsepower developers can access. The Switch 2's SoC is officially labeled the NVIDIA T239, a custom iteration of the Ampere architecture rather than a repurposed Tegra. It contains eight Arm Cortex‑A78C cores running a 64‑bit ARMv8 instruction set, with cryptography extensions enabled and no support for 32‑bit code. Each core features 64 KB of L1 instruction cache and 64 KB of L1 data cache. Six cores are available for game development, while two are reserved for system tasks. Clock speeds reach 998 MHz in handheld mode and 1,101 MHz when docked, and the CPU can theoretically burst to 1,700 MHz for demanding operations or future updates.

Graphics are powered by a full Ampere‑based GPU with 1,536 CUDA cores. Clock speeds top out at 1,007 MHz in docked mode and 561 MHz in handheld mode, delivering approximately 3.07 TeraFLOPS when docked and 1.71 TeraFLOPS in portable use. As with the CPU, a portion of GPU resources is allocated to operating system functions, slightly reducing the amount available for applications. Memory capacity has increased from 4 GB of LPDDR4 in the original Switch to 12 GB of LPDDR5X in the new model, split across two 6 GB modules. Peak bandwidth measures 102 GB/s docked and 68 GB/s handheld. Of the total, 3 GB are reserved for system functions and 9 GB are dedicated to games and applications. Nintendo has also introduced a dedicated File Decompression Engine for LZ4‑compressed data, offloading asset unpacking from the CPU to improve loading times without overheating the chipset. The console ships with 256 GB of UFS storage, expandable via microSD Express up to 2 TB, and features a 7.9‑inch, 1080p LCD that supports HDR10 and up to 120 Hz variable refresh rate in handheld mode. Although HDMI VRR is not yet available, the internal display fully supports it.



View at TechPowerUp Main Site | Source

 

[Onasi]

“Clock speeds reach 1,101 MHz in handheld mode and 998 MHz when docked”

Uh, the opposite maybe?

 

[AleksandarK]

“Clock speeds reach 1,101 MHz in handheld mode and 998 MHz when docked”

Uh, the opposite maybe?

Yeah. Thanks!

 

[theouto]

Clock speeds top out at 561 MHz in docked mode and 1,007 MHz in handheld mode,

It feels like this should also be the opposite

 

[DarkDreams]

Those numbers make it about a quarter of the graphical compute power of an ROG Ally and worse than a 3050 mobile. Then again, noone in their right mind expected Nintendo to be competitive in hardware.

 

[watzupken]

May be I don’t really understand how VRR works, but I question if it is meaningful to have VRR on a portable console that generally targets 30 FPS? Isn’t that outside the VRR range where the lower band is typically like 48Hz? Indie games may benefit from it, but I would prefer to play indie games in the Switch OLED since they are generally not taxing on the console and you still get to enjoy a very good display as oppose to an IPS based Switch 2 display.

 

[Onasi]

@watzupken
Firstly, apparently some games will target higher framerates, like 60 or perhaps unlocked. So VRR is useful there. Secondly, no, 48Hz isn’t some set in stone floor, that was just the most common one on early FreeSync/AdaptiveSync scalers. VRR can still work below that, even up to 1 (if poorly). GSync from the very beginning worked below 30Hz, it just used frame doubling. So does FS with LFC.

 

[duraz0rz]

May be I don’t really understand how VRR works, but I question if it is meaningful to have VRR on a portable console that generally targets 30 FPS? Isn’t that outside the VRR range where the lower band is typically like 48Hz? Indie games may benefit from it, but I would prefer to play indie games in the Switch OLED since they are generally not taxing on the console and you still get to enjoy a very good display as oppose to an IPS based Switch 2 display.

It really depends on what refresh rates the screen supports when VRR is on. VRR does save on battery power as you are tying the screen's refresh rate to the frame rate and thus only refresh it when necessary.

 

[LastDudeALive]

The Switch had 4GB RAM total, while the Switch 2 has 3GB system reserved. That's worse bloat than Windows.

 

[Verpal]

kinda funny seeing 5060ti 8GB get sold when even Switch 2 have more VRAM lol

 

[Onasi]

@Verpal
9 gigabytes of SHARED memory is, in fact, less than 8 gigs of VRAM. Part of that shared memory is used for what, on PC, is done by system memory. So no, purely in terms of what will be available for the graphics it will be less.

 

[rv8000]

Those numbers make it about a quarter of the graphical compute power of an ROG Ally and worse than a 3050 mobile. Then again, noone in their right mind expected Nintendo to be competitive in hardware.

Why do people make comparisons like this? It’s apples and oranges, pc handhelds are not a closed ecosystem like a gaming console. Every Switch 2 game is tailored to the system, and considering its multiple times more powerful than the original switch, I see no issue.

If the games are good it’s largely irrelevant anyways. Only crappy thing is the ridiculous increase to game costs.

 

[sephiroth117]

So much wasted resources on the OS.
3GB and 2 cores and allocated GPU resources ? That's more ram than a freaking Xbox series X.

That's certainly because of gamechat, that thing is streaming your screen, voice chat..and using RTX for noise reduction and face tracking...and it's streaming the screens at like 10 fps and low resolution.
For me it's a big design mistake that gamechat for such a resource-constrained system, no one asked for it they could have made a much more conservative voice/message-only chat option and allocate much-needed resources to game developers instead.

 

[lilhasselhoffer]

Why do people make comparisons like this? It’s apples and oranges, pc handhelds are not a closed ecosystem like a gaming console. Every Switch 2 game is tailored to the system, and considering its multiple times more powerful than the original switch, I see no issue.

If the games are good it’s largely irrelevant anyways. Only crappy thing is the ridiculous increase to game costs.

From the makers of a console that's targeting 1920x1080 in 2025, while all other consoles are aiming for 4k. From the people who thought artificial scarcity with Amiibos locking game content away was more acceptable than buying DLC straight up. From the people who sued the developers of Palworld after trumping up a bogus patent to "catching things by throwing a spherical object" because they decided to be Pokemon but instead of generational losses they added a bunch of wonderful and zany crap. From all of this comes a console with a premium price, that requires you to dang near buy your games a second time to get the HD upgrade, and is selling you tech that makes them a profit day one because it's about two generations behind anything it competes with on the market. From that same company that wants to be able to brick your console if they detect any sort of modifications, making their stance of "you will own nothing and accept it" now front and center after decades of being the company who sued everyone and their mother for making ROMs available for games they wanted to resell from the 80's at new 2000's game pricing.

From the company that has done all of that comes the next great console that does everything listed above and more to bring the gaming experience back decades. This new console will probably be chained to first and second party software development because it won't be powerful enough to push the everygame slop that AAA has to make to justify it's enormous budgets.


I'll pass. I'm pretty sure that the Switch 2 is going to work out as the first console to dip its toes into the dramatic price increase of gaming market, survive by Nintendo life support, and drive even more people away from console loyalty when you will require online subscriptions and parents discover that what used to be a one and done purchase becomes a constant monthly bill, but despite all of this there'll be a legion of die-hard fanboys to tell us what we are missing. Because while I may love Super Smash, I hate that Nintendo is a letigious bunch of weasels...and that isn't defamation Sued by Nintendo website chronicling their lawsuits. It's only defamation if it isn't factually based.

 

[Nostras]

Why do people make comparisons like this? It’s apples and oranges, pc handhelds are not a closed ecosystem like a gaming console. Every Switch 2 game is tailored to the system, and considering its multiple times more powerful than the original switch, I see no issue.

If the games are good it’s largely irrelevant anyways. Only crappy thing is the ridiculous increase to game costs.

I don't think anyone is expecting Nintendo to compete with high-end mobile devices, but there's still a discussion to be had as to why the switch has a quarter of the performance of a mobile SoC released 2 years ago.
Nintendo would love if no-one looked too close at the hardware and just said what you said and stonewall any further discussion.
Nuance and context matter.

 

[LastDudeALive]

From the makers of a console that's targeting 1920x1080 in 2025, while all other consoles are aiming for 4k.

I'd rather play a good game like BOTW at 1080p than Snoyslop at 4k. And lets be real, the Xbox and PS5 aren't even consoles anymore. They're essentially entry-level gaming PCs on a hardware and software level, sold as loss leaders to lock people into the closed market where they get major premiums on game purchases.

This new console will probably be chained to first and second party software development because it won't be powerful enough to push the everygame slop that AAA has to make to justify it's enormous budgets.

That's been Nintendo's MO since the N64, not sure why you're unhappy about it now. I'd consider the inability to run slop a bonus tbh.

 

[GhostRyder]

I mean, I am not that upset by the specs as its significantly higher that the first switch and should allow for some bigger games. However, for the price it seems a little expensive based on the specs at least compared to other handhelds.

 

[LastDudeALive]

I mean, I am not that upset by the specs as its significantly higher that the first switch and should allow for some bigger games. However, for the price it seems a little expensive based on the specs at least compared to other handhelds.

Yeah, the first Switch had the advantage of being the only handheld in the market. The PSP was far too old and weak, and the WiiU had failed. But now with plenty of Steam handhelds that can even (poorly) emulate the first Switch, the value is lessened. The Nintendo brand and games still deserve a premium, but it's an open debate as to how much that premium should be.

 

[rv8000]

I don't think anyone is expecting Nintendo to compete with high-end mobile devices, but there's still a discussion to be had as to why the switch has a quarter of the performance of a mobile SoC released 2 years ago.
Nintendo would love if no-one looked too close at the hardware and just said what you said and stonewall any further discussion.
Nuance and context matter.

If no one expects them to, why all the hoopla? The only reason to own a Nintendo product is for first party games, I find it funny anyone would buy and or complain about ports of AAA titles.

It’s also amusing that to run any of those games on “highend” handhelds, you’re running minimum settings at 720p for any modern titles and generally getting sub 60fps or even 30fps. Let’s not pretend current pc handhelds are wildly powerful either.

At some point in the development cycle they had to decide on hardware, and Im sure that wasn’t last year, the year before or even 3 years to release date. Take it as an excuse, I don’t really care. People can choose to buy it or not. It doesn’t change fact the first party titles both run and look great 99% of the time.

 

[Nhonho]

I would love Mario games with this level of visuals:

Is there any chance that Nintendo release Mario games for the future MS and Sony consoles with the level of image quality seen in these videos above?

How I wish I could play Mario games in 4K 60fps. :/

 

[Sunny and 75]

Glad it's Ampere and not Turing.

 

[Arkz]

“Clock speeds reach 1,101 MHz in handheld mode and 998 MHz when docked”

Uh, the opposite maybe?

Nope, got leaked months ago, seems it is slower when docked. Maybe more of power budget is pushed to GPU so CPU slightly downclocks.

Clock speeds top out at 561 MHz in docked mode and 1,007 MHz in handheld mode

Might wanna swap them.

I would love Mario games with this level of visuals:

Is there any chance that Nintendo release Mario games for the future MS and Sony consoles with the level of image quality seen in these videos above?

How I wish I could play Mario games in 4K 60fps. :/

No. But hopefully the SW2 patch for Mario Odyssey pushes it to 4k.

You could always just emulate.

 

[JustBenching]

From the makers of a console that's targeting 1920x1080 in 2025, while all other consoles are aiming for 4k.

1) None of those consoles are portable.

2) They are all more expensive - considering they don't come with a screen and a battery

3) None of them really target 4k. When they run in performance mode (for 60 fps) the actual resolution goes as far down as 640p (!!!!!!). In quality mode it goes as far down as 1150p - but also framerates go as far down as 15. They may be targeting 4k - they are just not landing there.

If no one expects them to, why all the hoopla? The only reason to own a Nintendo product is for first party games, I find it funny anyone would buy and or complain about ports of AAA titles.

It’s also amusing that to run any of those games on “highend” handhelds, you’re running minimum settings at 720p for any modern titles and generally getting sub 60fps or even 30fps. Let’s not pretend current pc handhelds are wildly powerful either.

At some point in the development cycle they had to decide on hardware, and Im sure that wasn’t last year, the year before or even 3 years to release date. Take it as an excuse, I don’t really care. People can choose to buy it or not. It doesn’t change fact the first party titles both run and look great 99% of the time.

In fact im willing to bet switch 2 will play those PC ports better than the PC handhelds do.

 

[Prima.Vera]

Those numbers make it about a quarter of the graphical compute power of an ROG Ally and worse than a 3050 mobile. Then again, noone in their right mind expected Nintendo to be competitive in hardware.

The mobile RTX 3050 has between 5.5 to 7 twrraflops, depending on how is configured, so this garbage of console have half of that ‍

kinda funny seeing 5060ti 8GB get sold when even Switch 2 have more VRAM lol

That's unified memory, not comparable. Actually out of those 9GB at least 4, 5 are used just to run the game into memory

 

[JustBenching]

The mobile RTX 3050 has between 5.5 to 7 twrraflops, depending on how is configured, so this garbage of console have half of that ‍

A 3050 on its own is much larger than the whole garbage of a console. It also consumes around 30 times more power...