Many less demanding games can run with a ~7w TDP limit at 60fps without a hitch at full detail. This yields massive battery life improvements.
For modern AAA games you'll probably have to frame cap 30-40fps and lower detail settings in-game.
Setting the refresh rate to 40hz helps a lot too.
But they both have a place, side by side, below my TV.
That said, I don't get why Nintendo doesn't do a $500 Switch. I get that they’re about the gameplay and graphics come as an afterthought, but seriously their own launch title could not hit a consistent 30fps which is simply unacceptable. They cant keep using the gameplay excuse for being wildly out of touch with hardware reality.
Related, I invite you to review the comments and note how many are focused on the battery life of the Deck, and specifically on how short it is. Even if Nintendo could just upgrade to a faster CPU, that would bring increased power draw, which would lead to either shorter battery life or needing a bigger battery, at which point you are either at people complaining about your battery life or once again back to industrial design and retooling your assembly line.
Tldr: They can't just bump the price by $200, drop in a Threadripper, and call it a day.
They can and they will because it works.
They’ve been printing money since adopting this philosophy with the Wii because they are right.
But I don't agree that you can continue a trend of shipping hardware that fails to run even your experience centric resource limited titles and remain relevant. I’m saying there’s a middle ground between barely 720p @ 30fps and 4k @ 120fps with ray tracing and ultra settings. The Switch was marketed as a handheld console hybrid. Not a fancy gameboy. I’m not asking for Nintendo to ship a PS5. But I would like to be able to pay a little more (pass the cost entirely on to me and keep a lower tier for all I care) for a hardware device from Nintendo that can run on my 4k TV in docked mode without looking like pixel art. Nintendo needs to deliver a device that can run low to medium quality graphics at 1080-1440p @ 60fps. That’s a completely reasonable request and still confines Nintendo focused studios to the product centric resource constrained environment they want. It’s sad to see all the interest from devs in porting titles to the Switch but then actually trying them and encountering unplayable garbage. Like Skyrim, what a joke.
You say this like they didn't spend the last decade selling 75 million devices that barely pushed ~360p, and making a small fortune from it. I get wanting Nintendo to bump the hardware (I'd love a beefier Switch too), but they've proven over and over again that they don't need to do anything.
If anything, I kind of like that Nintendo has chosen to cede the market of "indie/port" titles, their decision to mostly ignore that market is a big part of what's allowing Steam Deck to flourish right now. And the Steam Deck might be the healthiest new development the industry has seen in 20 years.
Back to the Steam Deck, I guess that's silver lining. I'm lamenting that my Switch can't really do what the steam deck can do because it does get a lot of indie/ports "attempts" they just kinda suck and especially when there's a PS5 sitting next to the Switch why would I hamstring myself. I'm happy the Steam Deck has spurred a bunch of gaming compatibility layer love. The industry's needed that. I have a pc for pc games, and a switch for console games (and a ps5). As cool as it looks, I don't see myself dropping money on a steam deck at the moment because I got a switch pro last year. Maybe the steam deck will force Nintendo to get a little more serious about hardware? One can dream.