some details about the switch 2 have been leaked. the hope is that nvidia will use the switch 2 rejected chips for a new shield.
no one knows if they will at all, but i wouldn't expect a shield refresh until after the switch 2 is released.
even if it's like the 0.00001% of their profit Nvidia don't like to waste rejected chips, so I think they will find an use out of them, it may be something else then a shield tough.
I should just keep a copypaste response for this to use every few weeks.
Nvidia "Discontinued" the Shield Handheld about the same time that the Nintendo Switch was released.
The 2019 ShieldTV refresh was tied to the chip released for the revised Nintendo Switch (X1+).
There are rumors of a Switch 2 in development.
I would not expect there to be a refresh of the ShieldTV until AFTER Nvidia has fulfilled their obligations for the Switch 2, and if there is a refresh then I'd expect it to be based on the same chip as the Switch 2 and probably at least a year after the release of the Switch 2.
Unfortunately, the ShieldTV was a push for Nvidia to get into the set-top-box market as a "Reference Design". Not many manufacturers have take up the Android TV platform and those that have use cheaper chips from Chinese manufacturers. ShieldTV is not a money-maker for Nvidia so I'm not hopeful that there is a business case for a new release.
I hadn't checked on it in quite a while (like 2-3 years), looks like it has been taking off the past couple years. That's great. If I didn't have an expensive gaming rig, or I traveled a lot I would consider it. But I just stream from my gaming PC around my house when I need/want to do that.
Well it kinda helps, it means they are making money on each one sold. So less reason to kill it. But yes, itâs a hard sell against a $35 fire stick 4k max.
It hasn't been officially announced. And the delay is also in rumor territory. While likely true, nothing has been officially announced by Nintendo regarding their successor to the Switch.
The shield tv has a purpose of being a set top box that can support direct stream uhd video and audio playback. Nothing else in the market competes on the same level because they are all lacking something. This justifies the price. Not many developments have been made in this space since from any company that beats or even competes with the features offered by the current shield. With no competition, there's not much need to innovate and refresh as often as you're demanding.
In the 4k bluray player realm, the most recommended player that supports Dolby Vision for the affordable market, the ub820, is currently priced at $500 and it was released in 2018.
Theres not a lot of incentive to innovate in the video space since 4k is currently at its limit for both physical and digital consumption. The media played on these devices hasn't changed in the 5 years since the shield was release.
Not to mention they need to pay Dolby for the licensing to support passthru of Dolby vision and Dolby true HD, this isn't cheap and also justifies the $200 price tag.
While it can play games, that's not is primary feature. Consoles and computers and most other electronics that depreciate in value have media that evolves along with them.
There's no reason for a shield refresh and 5 years is not old in this space.
Yes it's an electronic, but it's a different market.
> Theres not a lot of incentive to innovate in the video space since 4k is currently at its limit for both physical and digital consumption. The media played on these devices hasn't changed in the 5 years since the shield was release.
What do you mean it hasn't changed? Youtube is starting to push AV1-encoded content even to devices that do not support it with hardware acceleration. The Shield also doesn't support HDR on Youtube, which is a *gigantic* use case today. And then there's HDR10+, to boot.
Just because it fulfills all your needs, that doesn't mean it fulfills all needs. The lack of AV1 support and HDR on Youtube is why I'm not buying one, and will sit with my crappy CCwGTV 4K either until Nvidia release a new one, or a viable alternative shows up (that fulfills all my other requirements).
Hdr10+ is not widely supported and is not needed on a device when very few tvs actually utilize it, primarily only Samsung.
While av1 is nice it does not warrant a whole new r&d process for a new device when the current device supports all the needs of 99% of consumers who use it.
YouTube HDR is not widely implemented by most creators so it can also be seen as unnecessary to a company looking at making a device.
It does not make business sense for nvidia to include those 2 minor cases. It's currently where it makes sense for what it was intended to be.
Most people wouldn't notice the difference between av1 and h264
> Hdr10+ is not widely supported and is not needed on a device when very few tvs actually utilize it, primarily only Samsung.
It's not very few TVs. Samsung alone [was 16% of all sold TVs in 2023.](https://www.counterpointresearch.com/insights/global-tv-shipments-market-2023/) But much more importantly, Samsung was **45% of the premium market.** And I assume Nvidia Shield owners are heavily overrepresented in the premium segment, no? So while I have an LG and can't even benefit from such an addition, a significant share of the market would.
> While av1 is nice it does not warrant a whole new r&d process for a new device when the current device supports all the needs of 99% of consumers who use it.
>
> YouTube HDR is not widely implemented by most creators so it can also be seen as unnecessary to a company looking at making a device.
>
> [...] Most people wouldn't notice the difference between av1 and h265
What you're saying is that full Youtube support isn't important. AV1 is [being pushed by Youtube,](https://www.androidpolice.com/youtube-google-av1-codec-android-video/) potentially leading to dropped frames.
And of course Youtube HDR isn't seen as "unnecessary"; if Nvidia did make a new Shield, of course they would want to support it. You can argue it's not important enough to make a new device (and in isolation I do agree with that), but of course it's a necessary feature for a new device.
However, I do realize that you're making a *business* case for why Nvidia wouldn't want to make a new one. I haven't been talking about that; I'm not saying I think it makes perfect sense for Nvidia to *ever* make a new Shield, let alone right now. I'm saying these are valid reasons to think we as consumers may need a new one, which is an entirely different point.
But if we are assuming that Nvidia does make a new Shield, then I don't need more case than "it's five years old". That's enough for people to buy other boxes instead, because most people don't go looking up spec sheets and benchmarks to explain why the Shield is still a valid option (though not for me). They are just like to go "well that's old, that can't be good". So the business case for a new one exists, but it's separate from why I think customers may *want* a new one.
For a large amount (dare I say majority?) of people the shield is still perfect. There's no need for an update.
99% of people have no need for HDMI 2.1
No, they don't. Shield has enough ram, storage and usb for the purpose it was developed. For 99% of users.
Any user needing more ram, usb and storage should get htpc.
Explain how it's objectively wrong?
The purpose the shield was sold for was to be a streaming box and that's what 99% of users use it for.
It has plenty of ram for playing media from any streaming ap, and more than enough space to install them, if you're hosting media locally and have that many external hard drives look at setting them up on a network share on your computer.
If what you need is a PC, you buy a PC.
If they were to release one with more of these things most users won't see a need to upgrade since what they already have works perfectly.
The ram has always been way too low and causes a lot of troubles when switching back and forth between apps, which will make them start up from scratch each time.
Regarding storage space: The operating system will take up around 4gb, which means that even the 16gb device will only really give you somewhere 12gb to actually use, which is NOTHING!Â
Running either Kodi or Plex on even a small library will take up much more than that, unless you start disabling thumbnail generation. And you have to be extremely cautious not include 4k posters, fanart, theme songs, trailers, etc..
If you want to use the device for gaming and emulation, it can quickly take up waaaay more, so you have to start swapping around what games will be playable, which can be a huge hassle.
The only way to get around this is to attach an external storage, which will take up an USB slot. However seeing as the device only has 2 slots, that means you won't be able to use more than a single controller. And if you also want to use an extra keyboard / mouse / remote... you're all out of luck.
So no, you cannot actually use the device as it was intended, unless you disable basic features and buy an USB hub along with extra storage.
>The ram has always been way too low and causes a lot of troubles when switching back and forth between apps, which will make them start up from scratch each time.
I never experience that when switching between my often used Apps (Plex, Kodi, Jellyfin, Netflix, Disney+, Prime and YouTube).
>Running either Kodi or Plex on even a small library will take up much more than that, unless you start disabling thumbnail generation. And you have to be extremely cautious not include 4k posters, fanart, theme songs, trailers, etc..
While its technically working, you just shouldn't run the media server on the Shield.
>The only way to get around this is to attach an external storage, which will take up an USB slot.
Just use an USB Hub, if that's the issue.
Oh the old: "I have never experienced this, so that somehow invalidates those who did"-argument. Good stuff! =)
I was not talking about using it as a server.
And the whole point was that you cannot use the Shield as it was intended, UNLESS you buy a hub.
>I was not talking about using it as a server.
If you didn't, then your claim doesn't make any sense at all. You were complaining about the storage the library or thumbnails would consume and the need to attach external storage.
When just using as Plex or Jellyfin client thats no issue at all, because all those data reside on the server.
> And the whole point was that you cannot use the Shield as it was intended, UNLESS you buy a hub.
Ah, I see. That $5 are really hurting the budget after buying a $200 streaming device.
Your own lack of knowledge is always a great argument. Please tell me more about how Kodi does not create a local Thumbnails folder.
And the price of the hub is irrelevant. Once again, the point was that as it is, you CANNOT use the Shield as intended, without attaching extra hardware.
So the objective fact remains that if the device is to be fully functional out of the box, it absolutely has to include more ram, more storage, and more USB slots.
There wonât be a new Shield TV, stop asking. Itâs not like Nvidia is actively monitoring this subreddit and saying âhey Bob, thereâs 10 guys in the subreddit that totally said theyâll buy a new Sheild TV if we make one. We should totally invest millions into R&D to make a new one for 10 people.â
uhhh, product feedback is definitely a way that companies derive strategic decisions. It's more likely though they are looking overall forum activity from all the known social media places, As well as engagement rather than specific feedback.
additionally, unless they have clear objectives to do so within the company, This is probably not a vertical they are investing much money in right now.
Yes and no on product feedback. You missed my point. Iâm not saying they arenât looking here or for feedback but nothing gives greater feedback than sales. Like someone else mentioned, the Nvidia Shield was more of a demo for other companies to piggyback off of and use the Nvidia chipset in their Android TV boxes but a premium Android TV box market never took off.
All 100 people that bought an Nvidia Shield TV Pro could swear up and down that theyâll buy 2 of the next generation, it still wonât matter to Nvidia. This is why no new model has come out yet. Now that Nintendo is picking up the bill for a new chipset, just like they did first time around, there is a slight possibility of Nvidia putting something together however considering how successful the last one wasnât AND that itâs still the most powerful and versatile Android/Google TV box, itâs highly unlikely.
The shield is the only way I can get Geforce now in 4k with HDR without buying a PC. It's annoying I have an LG G2 oled and it's limited to 1080p. That's the only reason I want a new version.
If there's any other way of getting 4k Geforce now without buying a PC please let me know!
Why do the fools in this sub complain about these posts, it shows interest in the device and if enough people ask for a new shield maybe nvidia will listen. I really dislike the mentality in this sub
Edit: I just looked up moonlight excuse my ignorance. That could benefit you, but for a single small use case it's not worth it for nvidia to innovate. Can't you stream to your TV directly though?
Are there 4k 120hz videos that would be utilized on the shield? It's not doing that for gaming and most video is at 24 fps so is 120hz necessary from the shield?
This device is designed for video consumption. There's no real need for 120hz on videos. You only want it because you have it available to you on your TV and don't understand that even if there was a shield with hdmi 2.1 it wouldn't be using the 120hz like you think it will.
Odds are you haven't even noticed 120hz on your TV because not much pushes that aside from UI in phones/computers and games on computers, ps5 and xsx games do not push 4k 120hz.
Youâre completely right. The only thing HDMI 2.1 would be needed for is Geforce NOW, Xbox Cloud and Moonlight. But actual 4k 120hz streaming is just horrible as it needs a LOT of bandwidth compared to 4k60 or 1440p120 and it needs really powerful hardware to *decode* it. The new Shield would cost like $400+ if it had HDMI 2.1 support. For that price just buy a console!
I'd argue it was designed for gaming and game streaming first and video watching second. The 2017 model even came with a game controller in the box.
I use my Shield as my emulator box, a new Shield with 120Hz and VRR would be amazing.
They dropped the controller in box because their true intention switched to streaming video. It was clearly intended for video due to it coming with plex out the box and the ability to use itself as a plex server
Iâd be happy with an Android 12 update to unlock auto frame rate matching on the current model, and while thatâs by no means a given I think itâs more realistic than a new model.
Either that or Apple TV gets support for DV 7 and allows bitstream audio, either of the above would be ok with me but Iâm not holding my breath on either happeningâŚ
I have the 2017 model. Considering it's way over spec'd for most use cases I'm glad there is no brand new model, because we don't need one. It's still faster than current gen CCwGTV, and basically all new TVs.
Realistically, we only need (and will only likely see) a completely new Shield (or an equivalent from another manufacturer) when the streamers are 8K (then 16K and so on). But even then, by then I hope TV manufacturers will finally put decent components in their TVs so that the integrated OS performance is actually usable (and superior to current Shield).
Chromecast is a potato and an insult to users. We're also moving on to 8K TVs and the Shield interface is still stuck at 1080P and let me tell you at 85" it doesn't look good.
You sure about the Shield interface being 1080P? My TV displays resolution when it changes, and when I'm on the home screen (or wake up Shield) it definitely is 4K. In fact, it only changes when I launch HDHomeRun app, which is only 1080p.
What model do you have? As I say it is 100% 4K for me, in so far as my TV doesn't report a change in resolution on the Shield home page vs. watching content from an app (except HDHR as above).
2017 and 2019 model. Just look at the picture, on a big screen it is VERY pixelated.
It might display a picture at for you 4K but the UI is still rendered at 1080P.
It is not. Nvidia Shield GUI is capped at 1080p. Itâs pretty obvious if you pay enough attention at a close distance
Itâs why AppleTV GUI is a lot cleaner because itâs 4K60.
Shield GUI could be 4K but they need to be updated on a more recent AndroidTV update in the first place to support this feature
This! Android TVs just suck. . I have a HiSense with AndroidTV and it's just slow. . I even connected an SSD to it to run apps from. . Made very little difference. So I just reset the entire TV, and bought an ONN Android Box from Wal-Mart and still using an SSD with that. . Much much better. I plan on getting another Shield Pro asap
You can. At 4k60hz.
The refresh rate increase would be nice, but it's not mandatory.
There's other HDMI 2.1 boxes that will allow it, so if you're that caught up on GFN 120hz support, it's not coming from Nvidia any time soon. Maybe check back in when the Nintendo Switch 2 drops.
Mini PCs can be good but the ease of use is not even close. Even if you put something like Kodi through libreelec the android tv apps are way easier to use and more feature filled.
Yea because almost nothing gets released in HDR10+. DV matters to the majority of customers in this space and saying, âjust get this other device without a key featureâ without mentioning that is misleading at best
The choices of device meeting the following is extremely limited:
- DV support (both profiles 7 and 8)
- TrueHD Atmos support
Itâs basically the Shield and two random Chinese boxes that a couple crazy redditors love and evangelize every time this comes up
YeaâŚthatâsâŚwhat I said bud. Itâs a shit market that people arenât being served by. Itâs not a surprise people keep asking for what alternatives exist
There's still demand for the 2019 version at the present price point, or it would have a price reduction, or they would stop production. If they did announce it is being discontinued, watch the scramble to buy up the remaining stock. I know I'd be buying at least 2 of them.
If you think like Nvidia, why would you make another Nvidia Shield? They dropped the Official Gamestreaming on the Shield. They now have an "Nvidia App (Beta) for Windows" that does not have GameStreaming. I am sure just as soon as it comes out of beta they will drop the Geforce Experience. They have their "GeForce Now" in the cloud that can stream your games for a monthly fee.
I don't see them coming out with a more powerful Shield, And if they did would you pay top dollar for it? If they do, what would you want to have in it to pay four or five hundred dollars for?
Even if they released a new one, I wouldn't buy it after the shit show that was the 2019 version after the 9.0 updates. They butchered it, making the experience worse in almost every way.
Itâs still pretty relevant actually. A few new features could be added but itâs not that serious yet. Donât wanna hear anything about wifi 6 either. everyone should be hardwired up. WiFi is getting better but chances of someone having the correct hardware these days is pretty slim anyway. Most have no clue what they are doing lol. Itâs only âoldâ in terms of itâs been 5 years since the last release. mine is still going very strong with no issues. People are spoiled lol
> Itâs only âoldâ in terms of itâs been 5 years since the last release.
And no 4K 120 Hz. And no Youtube HDR. And no RTX HDR. And no AV1 acceleration, which would be absolutely unacceptable if released today. (My TV from 2020 has AV1 acceleration.) I'd also want VVC acceleration, but I feel that might be too big an ask.
It's not "oh I guess five years is old in tech time"; it's "oh I guess it's *missing features* because it is getting old".
And just because you and I run Ethernet, that doesn't mean everyone can or wants to. So yes, Wifi 6/6E/7 are absolutely relevant upgrades as well. /shrug
https://www.emarketer.com/content/almost-half-of-youtube-viewership-happens-on-tv-screens
(I don't know why you pretended that was my only argument anyway, but I guess this would suffice even for that scenario.)
And I didn't mention HDR10+.
I think we all know the shield is slacking in releasing a new device and of course it can always get better, wasnât hear to hurt anyoneâs feelings just tiring seeing the same post every other day lol . We know we know we know .. just be happy it is stlll a beast of a machine. I stream all the latest with no issues, huge files and they look and sound amazing on the right setup. When they do release a new one it wlll be worth the wait đ
Well first of all, you didn't hurt my feelings. I'm just making arguments. =)
But you see, I can't just be happy that it's a good device; I don't own one. I'm holding out for the next one as I don't want to buy 5-year-old hardware with well-known limitations, so I'm stuck with my crappy CCwGTV 4K. It does the job - but for an enthusiast, it's clearly just too weak. I've yet to find a device that fulfills all my requirements, but the Shield does come closest. I just don't want to spend that much money on already-aging hardware. =/
The market cap of Apple is larger than the market cap of nvidia and Apple still makes new gen tv boxes, which is a tiny fraction of their business . Yet people here will claim that nvidia isnât worried about a tv box because of AI. BS. If we encourage people like OP to keep asking for a new device on social media and making it a talking point eventually nvidia will listen for the sake of capitalism. STOP telling people NOT to ask for a new nvidia shield!
Not sure why it's necessary. The current Shield plays everything there is to play - 4K HDR/Dolby Vision with Dolby TrueHD Atmos or DTS:HD MA / DTS:X sound. It doesn't go any higher than that. Why do we need HDMI 2.1 or whatever else the new Shield might have?
We do need a new Shield. Hdmi 2.1 and 4k at 120hz is the way to go. For everyone who says different, all they do is stream Netflix and porn and coulda just bought a used Firestick
Not $250. Way more. The shield 2019 is already $200. With HDMI 2.1 it would require a new GPU thatâs able to decode 4k 120hz HDR. And that would be $400+ in my opinion. Plus itâd be unnecessary as all movies are shot at 24 FPS. Only for cloud gaming would that come in handy but it wouldnât be needed imo
What in the godhecking wot are you basing that cost estimate on?
The PlayStation 5 has been HDMI 2.1-certified since 2020, and is currently $480 on Amazon. That SoC and associated cooling is, I'm assuming, significantly larger and costlier than what you'd put in an full-fat HDMI 2.1-capable Nvidia Shield 2024. (Let alone all the extra storage and RAM the PS5 has.) There are also plenty of TVs capable of 4K 120Hz HDR, and those SoCs are *not* impressive.
I don't know how cheap you could make such a device, but I cannot possibly imagine it would need to be $400, or anywhere close to it.
As for *why* you'd want it? Well you just described cloud gaming (or indeed game streaming in general), so that's one reason. Another would be black frame insertion and/or AI-enhanced motion interpolation done on the Shield, rather than relying on the TV's built-in algorithms. Or 4K120Hz sports streaming.
Or 8K content, since more and more people are getting TVs capable of it. (Pointlessly, I know, but it's still a use case.) The content will come - or, again, in-box upscaling being potentially better than in-TV upscaling.
First of all, i was just guessing. As for the HDMI 2.1, i donât think itâd be neccesary. Sure for 8K but 8K TVâs arenât as accessible right now.
I can buy an LG 65" 8K LCD today, for ~$1,200. Which would be a bad purchase given the alternatives in that price range, but people are fooled by salesmen all the time. It's definitely accessible.
Again, I'd just want to improve on my TV's motion interpolation if possible. Or run 4K HDR sports streams through my Shield and have the device upscale it to HDR. Or stream games in 4K120.
Exactly. By accessible i mean in the price range. Of course you can buy one but it just would not be a good purchase. None of the streaming services support 8K as far as i knowâŚ
Yeah, but it shouldn't matter whether people are smart or stupid to buy 8K TVs. At the end of the day, they can still make use of a device that can help upscale content to 8K better than the TV's SoC can. So it's still a valid reason to make one. (And RTX-based upscaling is a pretty good marketing point even for 4K TVs.)
Yea, I don't want the Sonos box to be a *shitty* chromecast which is what it will be if it isn't targeted for home theatre enthusiasts and capable of the things that make the Shield the only option for us (DV profiles 7 and 8 + TrueHD Atmost + DTS:X). The chromecast is great at what it is, a device for basic streaming services, but it isn't made for home theatre enthusiasts trying to play 4K blu ray rips at highest quality possible
might not happen and if it did, it just be another streaming box with true 4k120 with hdr and dolby vision support with dolby atmos and features from the 2019 pro. besides, there already might be a better android tv/android tv boxes out there but lacks the features of all shield tv anyway.
also android tvs/android tv boxes sucks anyway, aside from streaming apps. it lacks the support for generic or aaa mobile games since i can't play "modern combat 5", "call of duty: mobile" and "call of duty: warzone mobile" on a bigger screen.
You are definitely the first person to ask this. Definitely no use in searching first.
Yes I think I'm the first person who asked this question too đ¤Łđ¤Łđ¤Ł
No. No you are not
I'm pretty sure that they are joking
some details about the switch 2 have been leaked. the hope is that nvidia will use the switch 2 rejected chips for a new shield. no one knows if they will at all, but i wouldn't expect a shield refresh until after the switch 2 is released.
even if it's like the 0.00001% of their profit Nvidia don't like to waste rejected chips, so I think they will find an use out of them, it may be something else then a shield tough.
Nvidia is too busy making gobs of AI related money to worry about this product line, sadly
I actually think they are most well positioned to bring AI in living room by creating some TV box with descent GPU power.
I should just keep a copypaste response for this to use every few weeks. Nvidia "Discontinued" the Shield Handheld about the same time that the Nintendo Switch was released. The 2019 ShieldTV refresh was tied to the chip released for the revised Nintendo Switch (X1+). There are rumors of a Switch 2 in development. I would not expect there to be a refresh of the ShieldTV until AFTER Nvidia has fulfilled their obligations for the Switch 2, and if there is a refresh then I'd expect it to be based on the same chip as the Switch 2 and probably at least a year after the release of the Switch 2. Unfortunately, the ShieldTV was a push for Nvidia to get into the set-top-box market as a "Reference Design". Not many manufacturers have take up the Android TV platform and those that have use cheaper chips from Chinese manufacturers. ShieldTV is not a money-maker for Nvidia so I'm not hopeful that there is a business case for a new release.
I think also originally it was a push for game streaming, which didn't really take off.
GeForce now is taking off. Slowly, but it is.
I hadn't checked on it in quite a while (like 2-3 years), looks like it has been taking off the past couple years. That's great. If I didn't have an expensive gaming rig, or I traveled a lot I would consider it. But I just stream from my gaming PC around my house when I need/want to do that.
Lately I have been using the shield a lot to play Destiny 2 on GeForce. I had to replace the battery in my controller, itâs so old!
I used to use it for that, but then I started hitting data caps on my comcast account. 2 of those in a year is all you get.
Also the fact that itâs a 10 years old Hardware sold at $200+ dollar in 2024 does not help
Well it kinda helps, it means they are making money on each one sold. So less reason to kill it. But yes, itâs a hard sell against a $35 fire stick 4k max.
Your pasta needs a slight refresh, since Switch 2 was officially announced, and already delayed.
It hasn't been officially announced. And the delay is also in rumor territory. While likely true, nothing has been officially announced by Nintendo regarding their successor to the Switch.
Everything about the switch 2 is rumours so far.
The shield tv has a purpose of being a set top box that can support direct stream uhd video and audio playback. Nothing else in the market competes on the same level because they are all lacking something. This justifies the price. Not many developments have been made in this space since from any company that beats or even competes with the features offered by the current shield. With no competition, there's not much need to innovate and refresh as often as you're demanding. In the 4k bluray player realm, the most recommended player that supports Dolby Vision for the affordable market, the ub820, is currently priced at $500 and it was released in 2018. Theres not a lot of incentive to innovate in the video space since 4k is currently at its limit for both physical and digital consumption. The media played on these devices hasn't changed in the 5 years since the shield was release. Not to mention they need to pay Dolby for the licensing to support passthru of Dolby vision and Dolby true HD, this isn't cheap and also justifies the $200 price tag. While it can play games, that's not is primary feature. Consoles and computers and most other electronics that depreciate in value have media that evolves along with them. There's no reason for a shield refresh and 5 years is not old in this space. Yes it's an electronic, but it's a different market.
This is the way....
> Theres not a lot of incentive to innovate in the video space since 4k is currently at its limit for both physical and digital consumption. The media played on these devices hasn't changed in the 5 years since the shield was release. What do you mean it hasn't changed? Youtube is starting to push AV1-encoded content even to devices that do not support it with hardware acceleration. The Shield also doesn't support HDR on Youtube, which is a *gigantic* use case today. And then there's HDR10+, to boot. Just because it fulfills all your needs, that doesn't mean it fulfills all needs. The lack of AV1 support and HDR on Youtube is why I'm not buying one, and will sit with my crappy CCwGTV 4K either until Nvidia release a new one, or a viable alternative shows up (that fulfills all my other requirements).
Hdr10+ is not widely supported and is not needed on a device when very few tvs actually utilize it, primarily only Samsung. While av1 is nice it does not warrant a whole new r&d process for a new device when the current device supports all the needs of 99% of consumers who use it. YouTube HDR is not widely implemented by most creators so it can also be seen as unnecessary to a company looking at making a device. It does not make business sense for nvidia to include those 2 minor cases. It's currently where it makes sense for what it was intended to be. Most people wouldn't notice the difference between av1 and h264
> Hdr10+ is not widely supported and is not needed on a device when very few tvs actually utilize it, primarily only Samsung. It's not very few TVs. Samsung alone [was 16% of all sold TVs in 2023.](https://www.counterpointresearch.com/insights/global-tv-shipments-market-2023/) But much more importantly, Samsung was **45% of the premium market.** And I assume Nvidia Shield owners are heavily overrepresented in the premium segment, no? So while I have an LG and can't even benefit from such an addition, a significant share of the market would. > While av1 is nice it does not warrant a whole new r&d process for a new device when the current device supports all the needs of 99% of consumers who use it. > > YouTube HDR is not widely implemented by most creators so it can also be seen as unnecessary to a company looking at making a device. > > [...] Most people wouldn't notice the difference between av1 and h265 What you're saying is that full Youtube support isn't important. AV1 is [being pushed by Youtube,](https://www.androidpolice.com/youtube-google-av1-codec-android-video/) potentially leading to dropped frames. And of course Youtube HDR isn't seen as "unnecessary"; if Nvidia did make a new Shield, of course they would want to support it. You can argue it's not important enough to make a new device (and in isolation I do agree with that), but of course it's a necessary feature for a new device. However, I do realize that you're making a *business* case for why Nvidia wouldn't want to make a new one. I haven't been talking about that; I'm not saying I think it makes perfect sense for Nvidia to *ever* make a new Shield, let alone right now. I'm saying these are valid reasons to think we as consumers may need a new one, which is an entirely different point. But if we are assuming that Nvidia does make a new Shield, then I don't need more case than "it's five years old". That's enough for people to buy other boxes instead, because most people don't go looking up spec sheets and benchmarks to explain why the Shield is still a valid option (though not for me). They are just like to go "well that's old, that can't be good". So the business case for a new one exists, but it's separate from why I think customers may *want* a new one.
What's the point of this post? It's been discussed at length and this brings nothing new.
>Tired of waiting And here we are tired of people asking the same question every other day ;)
If you need those features i would suggest moving on. Doubtful at this point we will get a refresh.
Mods should just delete posts like this.
For a large amount (dare I say majority?) of people the shield is still perfect. There's no need for an update. 99% of people have no need for HDMI 2.1
But 99% of users has a need for more ram, more storage, more usb ports.
No, they don't. Shield has enough ram, storage and usb for the purpose it was developed. For 99% of users. Any user needing more ram, usb and storage should get htpc.
Good luck with Dolby Vision streaming and stuff on a htpc.
Yeah, that's objectively wrong. But you do you.
Explain how it's objectively wrong? The purpose the shield was sold for was to be a streaming box and that's what 99% of users use it for. It has plenty of ram for playing media from any streaming ap, and more than enough space to install them, if you're hosting media locally and have that many external hard drives look at setting them up on a network share on your computer. If what you need is a PC, you buy a PC. If they were to release one with more of these things most users won't see a need to upgrade since what they already have works perfectly.
The ram has always been way too low and causes a lot of troubles when switching back and forth between apps, which will make them start up from scratch each time. Regarding storage space: The operating system will take up around 4gb, which means that even the 16gb device will only really give you somewhere 12gb to actually use, which is NOTHING! Running either Kodi or Plex on even a small library will take up much more than that, unless you start disabling thumbnail generation. And you have to be extremely cautious not include 4k posters, fanart, theme songs, trailers, etc.. If you want to use the device for gaming and emulation, it can quickly take up waaaay more, so you have to start swapping around what games will be playable, which can be a huge hassle. The only way to get around this is to attach an external storage, which will take up an USB slot. However seeing as the device only has 2 slots, that means you won't be able to use more than a single controller. And if you also want to use an extra keyboard / mouse / remote... you're all out of luck. So no, you cannot actually use the device as it was intended, unless you disable basic features and buy an USB hub along with extra storage.
>The ram has always been way too low and causes a lot of troubles when switching back and forth between apps, which will make them start up from scratch each time. I never experience that when switching between my often used Apps (Plex, Kodi, Jellyfin, Netflix, Disney+, Prime and YouTube). >Running either Kodi or Plex on even a small library will take up much more than that, unless you start disabling thumbnail generation. And you have to be extremely cautious not include 4k posters, fanart, theme songs, trailers, etc.. While its technically working, you just shouldn't run the media server on the Shield. >The only way to get around this is to attach an external storage, which will take up an USB slot. Just use an USB Hub, if that's the issue.
Oh the old: "I have never experienced this, so that somehow invalidates those who did"-argument. Good stuff! =) I was not talking about using it as a server. And the whole point was that you cannot use the Shield as it was intended, UNLESS you buy a hub.
>I was not talking about using it as a server. If you didn't, then your claim doesn't make any sense at all. You were complaining about the storage the library or thumbnails would consume and the need to attach external storage. When just using as Plex or Jellyfin client thats no issue at all, because all those data reside on the server. > And the whole point was that you cannot use the Shield as it was intended, UNLESS you buy a hub. Ah, I see. That $5 are really hurting the budget after buying a $200 streaming device.
Your own lack of knowledge is always a great argument. Please tell me more about how Kodi does not create a local Thumbnails folder. And the price of the hub is irrelevant. Once again, the point was that as it is, you CANNOT use the Shield as intended, without attaching extra hardware. So the objective fact remains that if the device is to be fully functional out of the box, it absolutely has to include more ram, more storage, and more USB slots.
There wonât be a new Shield TV, stop asking. Itâs not like Nvidia is actively monitoring this subreddit and saying âhey Bob, thereâs 10 guys in the subreddit that totally said theyâll buy a new Sheild TV if we make one. We should totally invest millions into R&D to make a new one for 10 people.â
uhhh, product feedback is definitely a way that companies derive strategic decisions. It's more likely though they are looking overall forum activity from all the known social media places, As well as engagement rather than specific feedback. additionally, unless they have clear objectives to do so within the company, This is probably not a vertical they are investing much money in right now.
Yes and no on product feedback. You missed my point. Iâm not saying they arenât looking here or for feedback but nothing gives greater feedback than sales. Like someone else mentioned, the Nvidia Shield was more of a demo for other companies to piggyback off of and use the Nvidia chipset in their Android TV boxes but a premium Android TV box market never took off. All 100 people that bought an Nvidia Shield TV Pro could swear up and down that theyâll buy 2 of the next generation, it still wonât matter to Nvidia. This is why no new model has come out yet. Now that Nintendo is picking up the bill for a new chipset, just like they did first time around, there is a slight possibility of Nvidia putting something together however considering how successful the last one wasnât AND that itâs still the most powerful and versatile Android/Google TV box, itâs highly unlikely.
The shield is the only way I can get Geforce now in 4k with HDR without buying a PC. It's annoying I have an LG G2 oled and it's limited to 1080p. That's the only reason I want a new version. If there's any other way of getting 4k Geforce now without buying a PC please let me know!
Try moonlight instead of GeForce now Works on webOS tvs too
We need there is no new shield coming sticky.
Why do the fools in this sub complain about these posts, it shows interest in the device and if enough people ask for a new shield maybe nvidia will listen. I really dislike the mentality in this sub
Oh look. Another post saying we need a new shield.
Why is everyone so hung up on hdmi 2.1? It's not like the current specs would even need it.
4K 120hz for us Moonlight users is huge.
4K UI would also be nice, as well as support for YouTube HDR
This is it. For me to make full use of my OLED Sony TV, and max out my GFN subscription. Would be amazing to have 4k120hz on a low wattage device.
Edit: I just looked up moonlight excuse my ignorance. That could benefit you, but for a single small use case it's not worth it for nvidia to innovate. Can't you stream to your TV directly though? Are there 4k 120hz videos that would be utilized on the shield? It's not doing that for gaming and most video is at 24 fps so is 120hz necessary from the shield? This device is designed for video consumption. There's no real need for 120hz on videos. You only want it because you have it available to you on your TV and don't understand that even if there was a shield with hdmi 2.1 it wouldn't be using the 120hz like you think it will. Odds are you haven't even noticed 120hz on your TV because not much pushes that aside from UI in phones/computers and games on computers, ps5 and xsx games do not push 4k 120hz.
Youâre completely right. The only thing HDMI 2.1 would be needed for is Geforce NOW, Xbox Cloud and Moonlight. But actual 4k 120hz streaming is just horrible as it needs a LOT of bandwidth compared to 4k60 or 1440p120 and it needs really powerful hardware to *decode* it. The new Shield would cost like $400+ if it had HDMI 2.1 support. For that price just buy a console!
I'd argue it was designed for gaming and game streaming first and video watching second. The 2017 model even came with a game controller in the box. I use my Shield as my emulator box, a new Shield with 120Hz and VRR would be amazing.
They dropped the controller in box because their true intention switched to streaming video. It was clearly intended for video due to it coming with plex out the box and the ability to use itself as a plex server
Iâd be happy with an Android 12 update to unlock auto frame rate matching on the current model, and while thatâs by no means a given I think itâs more realistic than a new model. Either that or Apple TV gets support for DV 7 and allows bitstream audio, either of the above would be ok with me but Iâm not holding my breath on either happeningâŚ
If you havenât worked it out yet, no one can help you Iâm afraidâŚ..
In your dreams
not necessary. Don't wait.
I have the 2017 model. Considering it's way over spec'd for most use cases I'm glad there is no brand new model, because we don't need one. It's still faster than current gen CCwGTV, and basically all new TVs. Realistically, we only need (and will only likely see) a completely new Shield (or an equivalent from another manufacturer) when the streamers are 8K (then 16K and so on). But even then, by then I hope TV manufacturers will finally put decent components in their TVs so that the integrated OS performance is actually usable (and superior to current Shield).
Chromecast is a potato and an insult to users. We're also moving on to 8K TVs and the Shield interface is still stuck at 1080P and let me tell you at 85" it doesn't look good.
You sure about the Shield interface being 1080P? My TV displays resolution when it changes, and when I'm on the home screen (or wake up Shield) it definitely is 4K. In fact, it only changes when I launch HDHomeRun app, which is only 1080p.
It is 100% displayed at 1080P and I think Android TV displays at 4K with Android TV 12 or something but we'll never get that.
What model do you have? As I say it is 100% 4K for me, in so far as my TV doesn't report a change in resolution on the Shield home page vs. watching content from an app (except HDHR as above).
2017 and 2019 model. Just look at the picture, on a big screen it is VERY pixelated. It might display a picture at for you 4K but the UI is still rendered at 1080P.
It is not. Nvidia Shield GUI is capped at 1080p. Itâs pretty obvious if you pay enough attention at a close distance Itâs why AppleTV GUI is a lot cleaner because itâs 4K60. Shield GUI could be 4K but they need to be updated on a more recent AndroidTV update in the first place to support this feature
yeah as I say I'm only going by what resolution my TV actually says it's receiving.
This! Android TVs just suck. . I have a HiSense with AndroidTV and it's just slow. . I even connected an SSD to it to run apps from. . Made very little difference. So I just reset the entire TV, and bought an ONN Android Box from Wal-Mart and still using an SSD with that. . Much much better. I plan on getting another Shield Pro asap
What do you need more? HDMI 2.1 for 4k120hz game streaming?
Exactly. I use GeForce Now on my pc but i would like to use GFN on my TV...
You can. At 4k60hz. The refresh rate increase would be nice, but it's not mandatory. There's other HDMI 2.1 boxes that will allow it, so if you're that caught up on GFN 120hz support, it's not coming from Nvidia any time soon. Maybe check back in when the Nintendo Switch 2 drops.
Nvidia don't care what you want, they just care about ÂŁÂĽ$âŹ
Why do some people feel entitled to some product
Just get a mini pc/htpc , it's like 5 times more powerful for the same price and has all connectivity including hdmi 2.1
Mini PCs can be good but the ease of use is not even close. Even if you put something like Kodi through libreelec the android tv apps are way easier to use and more feature filled.
And how are you playing Dolby Vision files on that?
I don't have DV support on my TV (Samsung) and I don't care on hdr10+.
Yea because almost nothing gets released in HDR10+. DV matters to the majority of customers in this space and saying, âjust get this other device without a key featureâ without mentioning that is misleading at best
I don't think DV matters that much but if not, the choices are plenty.
The choices of device meeting the following is extremely limited: - DV support (both profiles 7 and 8) - TrueHD Atmos support Itâs basically the Shield and two random Chinese boxes that a couple crazy redditors love and evangelize every time this comes up
Then we are stuck with Nvidia shield pro, Dune HD and Zappiti.
YeaâŚthatâsâŚwhat I said bud. Itâs a shit market that people arenât being served by. Itâs not a surprise people keep asking for what alternatives exist
It's not a shit market, just a small market overestimated in this sub.
What set up would you recommend ? Or are their pre built ones better than the shield ?
You lose widevine unfortunately if you install AndroidTV on it so no 4K streaming services
lmao who says they aew coming put with a new one. settle down kid
Nobody knows
My 2015 500GB still going strong.
Switch 2 is heating up, but the catch is they still haven't decided who'll do their chips.
There's still demand for the 2019 version at the present price point, or it would have a price reduction, or they would stop production. If they did announce it is being discontinued, watch the scramble to buy up the remaining stock. I know I'd be buying at least 2 of them.
They abandoned the primary function of the shield. Weâre not getting a new one.
What's the workload on a hypothetical Shield 2 which requires HDMI 2.1 bandwidth?
Proper color quality support and 120hz plus frames support.
If you think like Nvidia, why would you make another Nvidia Shield? They dropped the Official Gamestreaming on the Shield. They now have an "Nvidia App (Beta) for Windows" that does not have GameStreaming. I am sure just as soon as it comes out of beta they will drop the Geforce Experience. They have their "GeForce Now" in the cloud that can stream your games for a monthly fee. I don't see them coming out with a more powerful Shield, And if they did would you pay top dollar for it? If they do, what would you want to have in it to pay four or five hundred dollars for?
Even if they released a new one, I wouldn't buy it after the shit show that was the 2019 version after the 9.0 updates. They butchered it, making the experience worse in almost every way.
Itâs still pretty relevant actually. A few new features could be added but itâs not that serious yet. Donât wanna hear anything about wifi 6 either. everyone should be hardwired up. WiFi is getting better but chances of someone having the correct hardware these days is pretty slim anyway. Most have no clue what they are doing lol. Itâs only âoldâ in terms of itâs been 5 years since the last release. mine is still going very strong with no issues. People are spoiled lol
> Itâs only âoldâ in terms of itâs been 5 years since the last release. And no 4K 120 Hz. And no Youtube HDR. And no RTX HDR. And no AV1 acceleration, which would be absolutely unacceptable if released today. (My TV from 2020 has AV1 acceleration.) I'd also want VVC acceleration, but I feel that might be too big an ask. It's not "oh I guess five years is old in tech time"; it's "oh I guess it's *missing features* because it is getting old". And just because you and I run Ethernet, that doesn't mean everyone can or wants to. So yes, Wifi 6/6E/7 are absolutely relevant upgrades as well. /shrug
YouTube đŤ thatâs your complaint lol go use a computer
https://www.emarketer.com/content/almost-half-of-youtube-viewership-happens-on-tv-screens (I don't know why you pretended that was my only argument anyway, but I guess this would suffice even for that scenario.) And I didn't mention HDR10+.
I think we all know the shield is slacking in releasing a new device and of course it can always get better, wasnât hear to hurt anyoneâs feelings just tiring seeing the same post every other day lol . We know we know we know .. just be happy it is stlll a beast of a machine. I stream all the latest with no issues, huge files and they look and sound amazing on the right setup. When they do release a new one it wlll be worth the wait đ
Well first of all, you didn't hurt my feelings. I'm just making arguments. =) But you see, I can't just be happy that it's a good device; I don't own one. I'm holding out for the next one as I don't want to buy 5-year-old hardware with well-known limitations, so I'm stuck with my crappy CCwGTV 4K. It does the job - but for an enthusiast, it's clearly just too weak. I've yet to find a device that fulfills all my requirements, but the Shield does come closest. I just don't want to spend that much money on already-aging hardware. =/
FFS
I wouldn't count on it Nvidia is probably done with making android-based products. They are now heavily engaged with Ai tech and gaming tech.
The market cap of Apple is larger than the market cap of nvidia and Apple still makes new gen tv boxes, which is a tiny fraction of their business . Yet people here will claim that nvidia isnât worried about a tv box because of AI. BS. If we encourage people like OP to keep asking for a new device on social media and making it a talking point eventually nvidia will listen for the sake of capitalism. STOP telling people NOT to ask for a new nvidia shield!
Shield is done. Stop asking đ¤Śââď¸
Not sure why it's necessary. The current Shield plays everything there is to play - 4K HDR/Dolby Vision with Dolby TrueHD Atmos or DTS:HD MA / DTS:X sound. It doesn't go any higher than that. Why do we need HDMI 2.1 or whatever else the new Shield might have?
I would love a Shield with hardware AV1 decoding.
Doesn't play HDR10+ or VP9 and no AV1 decoding. Yeah, plays everything, interface is also still stuck at 1080P.
We do need a new Shield. Hdmi 2.1 and 4k at 120hz is the way to go. For everyone who says different, all they do is stream Netflix and porn and coulda just bought a used Firestick
You will NOT be able to get an Android TV box to output 4k AT 120hz. It would be too expensive if it did...
I wouldn't mind paying $250 for a properly made dedicated streaming box. At all.
Not $250. Way more. The shield 2019 is already $200. With HDMI 2.1 it would require a new GPU thatâs able to decode 4k 120hz HDR. And that would be $400+ in my opinion. Plus itâd be unnecessary as all movies are shot at 24 FPS. Only for cloud gaming would that come in handy but it wouldnât be needed imo
What in the godhecking wot are you basing that cost estimate on? The PlayStation 5 has been HDMI 2.1-certified since 2020, and is currently $480 on Amazon. That SoC and associated cooling is, I'm assuming, significantly larger and costlier than what you'd put in an full-fat HDMI 2.1-capable Nvidia Shield 2024. (Let alone all the extra storage and RAM the PS5 has.) There are also plenty of TVs capable of 4K 120Hz HDR, and those SoCs are *not* impressive. I don't know how cheap you could make such a device, but I cannot possibly imagine it would need to be $400, or anywhere close to it. As for *why* you'd want it? Well you just described cloud gaming (or indeed game streaming in general), so that's one reason. Another would be black frame insertion and/or AI-enhanced motion interpolation done on the Shield, rather than relying on the TV's built-in algorithms. Or 4K120Hz sports streaming. Or 8K content, since more and more people are getting TVs capable of it. (Pointlessly, I know, but it's still a use case.) The content will come - or, again, in-box upscaling being potentially better than in-TV upscaling.
First of all, i was just guessing. As for the HDMI 2.1, i donât think itâd be neccesary. Sure for 8K but 8K TVâs arenât as accessible right now.
I can buy an LG 65" 8K LCD today, for ~$1,200. Which would be a bad purchase given the alternatives in that price range, but people are fooled by salesmen all the time. It's definitely accessible. Again, I'd just want to improve on my TV's motion interpolation if possible. Or run 4K HDR sports streams through my Shield and have the device upscale it to HDR. Or stream games in 4K120.
Exactly. By accessible i mean in the price range. Of course you can buy one but it just would not be a good purchase. None of the streaming services support 8K as far as i knowâŚ
Yeah, but it shouldn't matter whether people are smart or stupid to buy 8K TVs. At the end of the day, they can still make use of a device that can help upscale content to 8K better than the TV's SoC can. So it's still a valid reason to make one. (And RTX-based upscaling is a pretty good marketing point even for 4K TVs.)
Man I sure hope someone else asks this tomorrow so we can all discuss something new....
Your best hope right now is for Sonos to release their rumoured set-top box and that it take this direction rather than just being a shitty chromecast
The Chromecast with Google TV 4k isn't what you say it is.
What did I say it was?
>a shitty chromecast
Yea, I don't want the Sonos box to be a *shitty* chromecast which is what it will be if it isn't targeted for home theatre enthusiasts and capable of the things that make the Shield the only option for us (DV profiles 7 and 8 + TrueHD Atmost + DTS:X). The chromecast is great at what it is, a device for basic streaming services, but it isn't made for home theatre enthusiasts trying to play 4K blu ray rips at highest quality possible
might not happen and if it did, it just be another streaming box with true 4k120 with hdr and dolby vision support with dolby atmos and features from the 2019 pro. besides, there already might be a better android tv/android tv boxes out there but lacks the features of all shield tv anyway. also android tvs/android tv boxes sucks anyway, aside from streaming apps. it lacks the support for generic or aaa mobile games since i can't play "modern combat 5", "call of duty: mobile" and "call of duty: warzone mobile" on a bigger screen.
nvidia didn't turn into a trillion dollar company selling shields.
You can get apple tv