Thursday, January 2nd 2025
Nintendo Switch 2 PCB Leak Reveals an NVIDIA Tegra T239 Chip Optically Shrunk to 5nm
Nintendo Switch 2 promises to be this year's big (well small) gaming platform launch. It goes up against a growing ecosystem of handhelds based on x86-64 mobile processors running Windows, its main play would have to be offering a similar or better gameplay experience, but with better battery life, given that all of its hardware is purpose-built for a handheld console, and runs a highly optimized software stack; and the SoC forms a big part of this. Nintendo turned to NVIDIA for the job, given its graphics IP leadership, and its ability to integrate it with Arm CPU IP in a semi-custom chip. Someone with access to a Switch 2 prototype, likely an ISV, took the device apart, revealing the chip, a die-shrunk version of the Tegra T239 from 2023.
It's important to note that prototype consoles physically appear nothing like the final product, they're just designed so ISVs and game developers can validate them, and together with PC-based "official" emulation, set up the ability to develop or port games to the new platform. The Switch 2 looks very similar to the original Switch, it is a large tablet-like device, with detachable controllers. The largest chip on the mainboard is the NVIDIA Tegra T239. Nintendo Prime shared more details about the chip.
NVIDIA originally built the T239 on Samsung 8 nm DUV foundry node, but the semi-custom chip powering the Switch 2 is very likely built on the Samsung 5 nm EUV node. This node offers a 70% transistor density increase over 8 nm, and Nintendo Prime calculates that the chip in the picture is roughly that much smaller than the 341 mm² die area of what the NVIDIA Orin would be with 2/3rd its CPU core and iGPU SM count. The chip in the pictures is estimated to has a die size of roughly 200 mm².
The T239 features a 3-tiered hybrid CPU consisting of one Arm Cortex X1 HP-core, three Cortex A78 P-cores, and four Cortex A55 E-cores, with Arm DynamIQ, a hardware-based scheduler. The iGPU of the T239 is based on the "Ampere" graphics architecture, with 12 streaming multiprocessors worth 1,536 CUDA cores. On the Switch 2, this chip drives 12 GB of LPDDR5X-7500 memory. The console uses a UFS 3.1 based 256 GB flash storage solution.
As for the device itself, the Switch 2 prototype measures 270 mm x 116 mm x 14 mm (WxDxH), which is noticeably larger than the 242 mm x 102 mm x 13.9 mm of the Switch OLED. Its display is larger, too, measuring 8-inch, compared to 7-inch of its predecessor. Nintendo likely took the opportunity to update the communications feature-set of the Switch 2.
Sources:
MHN1994 (Reddit), Nintendo Prime (Twitter), VideoCardz
It's important to note that prototype consoles physically appear nothing like the final product, they're just designed so ISVs and game developers can validate them, and together with PC-based "official" emulation, set up the ability to develop or port games to the new platform. The Switch 2 looks very similar to the original Switch, it is a large tablet-like device, with detachable controllers. The largest chip on the mainboard is the NVIDIA Tegra T239. Nintendo Prime shared more details about the chip.
The T239 features a 3-tiered hybrid CPU consisting of one Arm Cortex X1 HP-core, three Cortex A78 P-cores, and four Cortex A55 E-cores, with Arm DynamIQ, a hardware-based scheduler. The iGPU of the T239 is based on the "Ampere" graphics architecture, with 12 streaming multiprocessors worth 1,536 CUDA cores. On the Switch 2, this chip drives 12 GB of LPDDR5X-7500 memory. The console uses a UFS 3.1 based 256 GB flash storage solution.
As for the device itself, the Switch 2 prototype measures 270 mm x 116 mm x 14 mm (WxDxH), which is noticeably larger than the 242 mm x 102 mm x 13.9 mm of the Switch OLED. Its display is larger, too, measuring 8-inch, compared to 7-inch of its predecessor. Nintendo likely took the opportunity to update the communications feature-set of the Switch 2.
54 Comments on Nintendo Switch 2 PCB Leak Reveals an NVIDIA Tegra T239 Chip Optically Shrunk to 5nm
Just two weeks ago Nvidia announced the Jetson Orin Nano Super with 6x Cortex A78 and 8 SM / 1024 cuda cores, so this could perfectly be the Switch 2's SoC and it would match the die area just as well.
And Nvidia releasing their own hardware using the same chips they sell to Nintendo has become standard practice. In 2017 they released a revised Shield TV using the same TX1 as the Switch, and in 2019 they released another Shield TV with the Mariko shrink to 16nm.There's practically zero data pointing to the existence of a Cortex X1 or A55 cores in T239. There's never been any mention of anything other than Cortex A78.
What's this Nintendo Prime's track history in hardware leaks?
That CPU config seems weird given how the original Orin has 8x A78, but that would be similar to a Snapdragon 888, the one found in the S21.The Orin Nano Super is just a clock bump and new memories onto the old Orin Nano from 2023. But yeah, agreed that it's likely they'll be using this SoC for it.Same, I don't doubt they'd change the config, but I believe it'd be easier to just go with an homogeneous config that already exists.
Edit: It's an open secret that the T239 is a cut down version of the T234 designed for use by Nintendo. Nintendo just needs to officially reveal the Switch 2. It's been all but revealed at this point.
The Ampere-based GPU to power the Switch 2 is speculated to have 12 SMs grouped in 6 Texture Processing Clusters. This translates to 1,536 CUDA cores (128 per SM), with 48 Tensor cores and 6 RT cores.
A standard implementation of the Jetson Orin SoC uses 2,048, 1,792, 1,024 or 512 CUDA cores grouped in 8, 7, 4 or 2 TPCs respectively. So in terms of specs, the custom Switch 2 GPU is slightly below the second fastest implementation:
The 1,792 CUDA implementation, the AGX Orin 32 GB, achieves 3.4 TFLOPS (FP32) theoretical graphics performance with a GPU clock of up to 930 MHz, and a TDP of up to 40 W for the whole SoC.
The 1,024 CUDA implementation, the Orin NX 16 GB, achieves 1.9 TFLOPS (FP32) theoretical graphics performance with a GPU clock of up to 918 MHz, and a TDP of up to 25 W for the whole SoC.
Being a handheld hybrid, it's unlikely that the Switch 2 would utilize the 40 W power budget of the AGX Orin 32 GB SoC. Consequently, I'd speculate the GPU to be closer in performance to the Orin NX, with maybe 2.5 TFLOPS peak, or around half of the mobile RTX3050.
15W TDP handheld? Umm no. Switch was 6W to maintain decent battery life, this should be the same. Something like 6W handheld, 25W docked would make sense.
I still think a custom Ada SoC would have been better, especially since Nvidia's launching Blackwell and likely would have appreciated a reliable ongoing order for the older silicon so they can focus on pushing Blackwell, but Samsung probably gave a nice discount for the business.
At any rate, I find the double-standards hilarious; most everyone praises Nintendo for keeping their games behind a locked ecosystem and denying their release on PC via legal means, but pan Sony for doing the same on PS and demand and praise them for allowing games to release on PC later on or at the same time. If anything, Nintendo should be treated just the same and forced to release their games outside of the Nintendo ecosystem too, even if they mandate an exclusivity period, and instead keep up the quality of most of their in-house games (and fix whatever is going on at Gamefreak, allowing for the worst-performing Pokemon games to release in recent years).
As for the double standards, I do see your point, although there is a couple differences. First, any of Nintendo's IP's absolutely smashes everything Sony has put together. Mario, Zelda, Super Smash Bros, Pokemon, etc, any one of those is vastly more significant than Snoy cutscene slop like Last of Us or God of War. Like it or not, Nintendo's IP has the popularity to financially justify Switch exclusivity, Sony's does not. Keeping their IP exclusive to their consoles and imposing a high quality standard has been their MO since the N64, and it's worked, since they are the last true "console" manufacturer left.
Nintendo not only make good games, but I expect the games to perform well on the hardware, we have learnt in recent years that big hardware gains can be made but with trash level optimisation on the software side games perform like crap.
Pretty impressed with what my switch can do, this should be even more impressive, especially when factoring in DLSS.
Compare this thing to the PS5, its a far bigger marvel as wont be the size of a dozen bricks.
And hardware improvements have long since stopped doing anything meaningful for consoles. Comparing PS4 games to their PS5 and "PS5 Pro Enhanced" ports has become a meme at this point, the improvements are so minuscule. The next step of graphical improvements is ray tracing, which neither the Switch nor Xbox/Playstation can do yet.
As long as the Switch 2 can output ~PS4 level graphics with the help of DLSS, it will be both a significant improvement over the Switch and be more than enough to allow Nintendo and 3rd party developers to create good looking games functionally indistinguishable from the latest AAAA slop.
I jumped of when the N64 cartridges were too expensive and their anti gamers attitude (i know, weird statement considering but correct)Even though, i would dare say, the snes, n64 and gamecube were actually very powerful but then they scaled down.
There's nothing dirty or underhanded about it. The power of their IP isn't just the name Mario it's the quality control they can only execute focused on just one hardware. Multiplatform games are train wrecks. Especially ports and especially on the PC with all it's hardware configurations. Nintendo going down that road would be suicide and take down them and their IP permanently.
This has always worked for them. What they learned with how their handhelds did while the N64 and Gamecube got crushed, followed by the Wii being a hit is that having the best hardware and fanciest graphics doesn't mean jack shit. It's the games. And the games don't have to look the best they have to be fun and polished and optomized better than what everyone else can do. They own fun, and the secret sauce in their polish is designing their own consoles and not caring what anyone else does and only releasing on their consoles.
The really know what they are doing and what people actually want.
Quality is the most important. Nintendo maintains their quality standards on their IP by only releasing for one platform that they control. They know it and the dev kits inside and out. They don't have to spend time on other platforms and worry about crappy ports or releases. The PC is the worst platform for them to ever move to due to all the hardware requirements.
Releasing on PC is the end of Nintendo and all their IP and the death of their reputation. Now I'm sure mUH G4m1nG!!!! PC will gladly let that happen while screaming for free nvidia GPUs because it's that selfish of a group but it's not gonna happen. And nobody who actually loves their games wants it to happen.
Emulation is theft. Flat out. There is no way to justify it. If you want to do it that's fine. I do it with stuff that isn't around anymore. But I don't lie that it isn't theft and it makes me a thief and if someone stopped me or sued me over it they would be in the right and I would be in the wrong. That the PC gaming community has earned a reputation of theft, cheating, and complaining about not being treated special along with the worst gamer toxicity out there makes me sad. But it is entirely true, was earned over decades, and has gotten much worse.
Pirating of AAA titles is a very tiny fragment of what PC gaming truly is. If it wasn't, no one would bother making PC games anymore and the whole industry would be long dead.