11 Nintendo Switch 2 Screen Protector Options to Help Keep Your Shiny New Console Scratch-Free
For those who've managed to get their hands on a Nintendo Switch 2, there are few larger worries than accidentally scratching the screen of your shiny new toy. With the console being so hard to get in the first place, the last thing anyone wants is to scuff it up during their first few days of ownership -- and it's easy to cause screen scratches if you're not careful.
Note that the Nintendo Switch 2 comes with a preinstalled screen film that is designed to remain in place. It doesn't provide particularly great scratch resistance, though, and is more designed to protect against splinters of glass should you crack your screen.
Fortunately, even at this very early stage, plenty of accessory makers have released Nintendo Switch 2 screen protectors to keep things in tip-top shape for as long as possible. We've not had a chance to test all of these yet, but we've rounded up plenty of options that are in stock, easy to install and cover a variety of prices.
Best Nintendo Switch 2 screen protectors
Official Nintendo Switch 2 Carrying Case and Screen Protector
The official option here is likely your safest bet. It's $40, which is more than some others, but it also comes with a hard carrying case to make it easier to transport your Nintendo Switch 2. It's currently out of stock online at the major third-party retailers, but you may find local stock if you're lucky. Alternatively, you can order via Nintendo if you have an active invitation to shop there.
Details
Check local stock $40 at Nintendo $40 at Best Buy $40 at Target
Close
Dbrand Prism 2.0 Screen Protector
Dbrand's Prism 2.0 set comes with two screen protectors and promises to be idiot-proof in terms of installation. That's a bit over-the-top, but we've all applied a screen protector wrong at least once, and these bad boys aim to avoid that issue. Plus, you get two screen protectors in the box if you want a spare or if you were lucky enough to get ahold of two Switch 2s in your household.
Details
Easy installation $35 at Dbrand
Close
GameStop Screen Protector for Nintendo Switch 2
GameStop is offering its own branded Switch 2 screen protector. It's $15 for one tempered glass screen protector that promises to "maintain pristine clarity and touch responsiveness with Anti-Scratch resistant for a clear and epic gaming experience." We haven't tested it out yet, but at least you can grab one of these in store and go back there to complain if it doesn't live up to the billing.
Details
GameStop own-brand $15 at GameStop
Close
Spigen GlasTR EZ Fit for Nintendo Switch 2
A lot of the early accessories on offer come from brands that may be unfamiliar to you, but Spigen is a reputable name in the tech space. It is offering two tempered glass Nintendo Switch 2 screen protectors for $25 and includes its auto-alignment installation kit for "effortless" application.
Details
Reputable brand
$25 at Amazon
Close
Onn Glass Screen Protector for Nintendo Switch 2
Walmart's budget Onn brand has released a Switch 2 screen protector and it's an affordable option at under $13. It's made with glass from Corning, the same company that makes iPhone screens, and should be easy to align correctly with the included application tray.
Details
Walmart own-brand $13 at Walmart
Close
Jsaux tempered glass screen protector, 3-pack
It's always a good idea to have an extra screen protector on hand. This affordable pack of three ensures you'll have backups. The Jsaux screen protectors are made with tempered glass and come with a guiding frame for easy installation. Be sure to click the on-page coupon to save an extra 10%.
Details
Budget pick
$8 at Amazon
Close
More Nintendo Switch 2 screen protectors:
How we choose the best Nintendo Switch 2 screen protectors
We've not had a chance to test all of the options yet, as the Nintendo Switch 2 is still so new, so we're looking at reviews and the general quality of the brands making each screen protector. It's because of this that the official option is currently our top pick, but that could change as we get a chance to test every option.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
The Verge
27 minutes ago
- The Verge
PCIe 7.0 is coming, but not soon, and not for you
The PCIe 7.0 specification has now been released, while many of us are still waiting for PCIe 6.0 to materialize in consumer products. The PCI Special Interest Group (PCI-SIG) announced on Wednesday that PCIe 7.0 is now available to members of its organization, delivering a theoretical maximum bandwidth speed of 512GB per second in both directions, across a x16 connection. 'PCIe technology has served as the high-bandwidth, low-latency IO interconnect of choice for over two decades and we are pleased to announce the release of the PCIe 7.0 specification, which continues our long-standing tradition of doubling the IO bandwidth every three years,' PCI-SIG President Al Yanes said in the announcement. 'As artificial intelligence applications continue to scale rapidly, the next generation of PCIe technology meets the bandwidth demands of data-intensive markets deploying AI, including hyperscale data centers, high performance computing (HPC), automotive, and military/aerospace.' You may have noticed that consumer computing devices weren't included in that statement — the specification is targeting data-driven applications like cloud and quantum computing datacenters for now, and will take some time to even appear in those markets. PCI-SIG says that PCIe 7.0 will be backward compatible with previous PCI Express versions, but there's no mention of plans to bring it to everyday desktop SSDs or GPUs any time soon. That shouldn't be surprising, given the PCIe 5.0 spec that launched in 2019 only started trickling into consumer hardware two years ago, and is still fairly uncommon. Image: PCI-SIG
Yahoo
28 minutes ago
- Yahoo
Cynthia Lummis Proposes Artificial Intelligence Bill, Requiring AI Firms to Disclose Technicals
Senator Cynthia Lummis (R-WY) has introduced the Responsible Innovation and Safe Expertise (RISE) Act of 2025, a legislative proposal designed to clarify liability frameworks for artificial intelligence (AI) used by professionals. The bill could bring transparency from AI developers – stoping short of requiring models to be open source. In a press release, Lummis said the RISE Act would mean that professionals, such as physicians, attorneys, engineers, and financial advisors, remain legally responsible for the advice they provide, even when it is informed by AI systems. At the time, AI developers who create the systems can only shield themselves from civil liability when things go awry if they publicly release model cards. The proposed bill defines model cards as detailed technical documents that disclose an AI system's training data sources, intended use cases, performance metrics, known limitations, and potential failure modes. All this is intended to help help professionals assess whether the tool is appropriate for their work. "Wyoming values both innovation and accountability; the RISE Act creates predictable standards that encourage safer AI development while preserving professional autonomy,' Lummis said in a press release. 'This legislation doesn't create blanket immunity for AI," Lummis continued. However, the immunity granted under this Act has clear boundaries. The legislation excludes protection for developers in instances of recklessness, willful misconduct, fraud, knowing misrepresentation, or when actions fall outside the defined scope of professional usage. Additionally, developers face a duty of ongoing accountability under the RISE Act. AI documentation and specifications must be updated within 30 days of deploying new versions or discovering significant failure modes, reinforcing continuous transparency obligations. The RISE Act, as it's written now, stops short of mandating that AI models become fully open source. Developers can withhold proprietary information, but only if the redacted material isn't related to safety, and each omission is accompanied by a written justification explaining the trade secret exemption. In a prior interview with CoinDesk, Simon Kim, the CEO of Hashed, one of Korea's leading VC funds, spoke about the danger of centralized, closed-source AI that's effectively a black box. "OpenAI is not open, and it is controlled by very few people, so it's quite dangerous. Making this type of [closed source] foundational model is similar to making a 'god', but we don't know how it works," Kim said at the time.
Yahoo
29 minutes ago
- Yahoo
Robotaxi wars: How Waymo got the edge on the competition, and Tesla (so far)
'We are being super paranoid about safety." That's what Tesla CEO Elon Musk said after revealing the company's robotaxi test would start on June 22, later than expected, adding that the date could 'shift' beyond that. Meanwhile, betting site Polymarket lists only a 30% chance that Tesla (TSLA) launches the service before July, highlighting Musk's rosy predictions on self-driving that have been constantly pushed back. While Tesla is on the verge of starting a new chapter for the company, Alphabet's (GOOG) Waymo has been quietly racking up mile after mile, trip after trip, providing actual paid robotaxi rides to customers in San Francisco, Phoenix, Los Angeles, and Austin — where Tesla's test will begin. At stake is a huge opportunity for companies like Waymo, Tesla, and others. Goldman analyst Mark Delaney estimates the market for traditional ride-hailing in the US is worth approximately $58 billion currently, but could be worth more than $330 billion by 2030, with robotaxi-type services pushing the industry forward and reducing costs by — among other factors —not requiring a human driver. Waymo has an early lead, and it seems a big one. Rivals like Argo AI and GM-backed Cruise are gone, leaving only smaller players like Zoox (backed by Amazon), China's Pony AI (PONY) and WeRide (WRD), and of course Tesla. Waymo (before it was even called that) started off as an in-house startup as part of Google's X initiative way back in 2009. After some testing and securing of permits, the project officially became Waymo in 2016, and it started testing its Pacifica hybrid vans kitted out with cameras, LIDAR laser sensors, and radar. In 2018 Waymo and Jaguar paired up, using the British automaker's I-Pace EV for its testing; these are the vehicles most users are accustomed to seeing. Waymo's combination of vision, radar, and LIDAR, which the company calls its 'multimodal' approach, has the company claiming it has the best, and safest, robotaxi solution. Since 2020, anyone in a service area can download the Waymo app and hail a fully autonomous car. Waymo says it has the most robotaxi miles driven and that the company performs around 250,000 trips a week. A Waymo spokesperson said that the company has not yet seen a vision-only system that can achieve the levels of safety its current system has achieved, asserting that multiple sensors with overlapping fields of view are the best solution. Experts tend to agree. 'Waymo is undoubtedly the leader in autonomous driving technology, with their self-driving software (SDS) being widely regarded as best in class,' said University of San Francisco engineering professor William Riggs, an expert in autonomous technology. 'They have been around the longest, had patient capital and have the most miles on the road proving that self-driving tech works.' Riggs believes Waymo's software strategy combined with its diversified sensor suite, along with its manufacturer partnerships such as Chrysler, Hyundai, Zeekr, and Toyota, allowed Waymo to maintain a strong presence in the market and adapt to different vehicle platforms. Autonomous expert Katie Driggs-Campbell of University of Illinois' Grainger College of Engineering agrees. 'Initially, I believe their strength came from the computer vision/learning and compute expertise from Google,' Driggs-Campbell said, noting that Waymo has now 'blended real-world experience, recorded data, and simulation [generated] data to form a reliable system.' Waymo also touts its safety record, as well as how open it's been with data. 'We have an incredibly rigorous safety framework in place, and our safety record speaks for itself,' Waymo's spokesperson said, adding that the company has been voluntarily sharing safety performance data with the public, which goes beyond regulatory requirements. Waymo's approach could not be more different from Tesla's, and that has contributed to the dominant lead it sees currently. Tesla did not immediately respond to Yahoo Finance when seeking comment. But per Musk biographer Walter Isaacson, Musk was enamored with Tesla's vision-only, neural network-powered self-driving system when it was presented to him. He deemed it superior to Tesla's prior system, which ran on millions of lines of code using a rules-based system fed by data coming from radar and LIDAR sensors. Tesla's current FSD (full self-driving) and robotaxi software use only a vision-based system powered by a neural network 'brain' that is constantly training itself using videos collected by millions of Tesla vehicles. (And as opposed to Waymo, Tesla has reportedly asked the city of Austin to block release of safety records related to its robotaxi launch.) While Waymo holds a big early lead, what could stop the pioneer from growing more could be its operations and manufacturing ability. Riggs believes building vehicles at scale remains a significant hurdle for Waymo. 'Currently, they operate between 700 and 1,000 vehicles in their major markets and are producing roughly 1,500 vehicles annually. This relatively modest production volume could become a bottleneck for scaling their operations further,' he said. The other challenge for startups like Waymo in general versus Tesla is that their costs per vehicle are higher. Waymo's self-driving tech and sensors reportedly cost $100,000 plus the cost of the vehicle itself (for example, the Jaguar I-Pace retails for $73,875 in the US). While some of those costs have come down, scaling to new cities and providing enough vehicles to take on Uber, for example, will require more than the 1,500 vehicles currently produced a year. Tesla, meanwhile, has the ability to produce 2 million or more EVs a year, which include the hardware necessary for its FSD and robotaxi software. Tesla also has millions of vehicles on the road that could be converted for robotaxi use, though that would require the company's Hardware 4 autopilot software, which only started rolling out in early 2023. 'AI runs off of data. Waymo is trying to close that data gap with more sensors per vehicle; Tesla is looking to win with more vehicles with targeted data specific to their vision-only approach,' said Ken Johnston, vice president of data and analytics at tech consulting firm Envorso and former exec at Ford and Microsoft. 'Companies like BYD and Tesla also cannot be ruled out, as they continue to innovate and expand their capabilities in this space,' Riggs added. Xiaomi is also testing autonomous driving in China, but the company has suffered from safety issues in early trials. Johnson is bullish on Tesla's robotaxi offering, but the company faces a big challenge in surviving its safety test. Uber's self-driving unit and GM's Cruise could not overcome high-profile accidents. Testing the service without any accidents in a semi-urban environment is not easy. And unlike Waymo, Tesla is under federal investigation for its autonomous software. It also still needs to provide NHTSA with answers to how it plans to roll out its robotaxi program. Meanwhile, Waymo is plugging along, adding more cities to its list of current operations, with Atlanta, Miami, and Washington, D.C., coming online in 2026. Being backed by Alphabet helps too, giving Waymo capital runway for growth, investment, and long-term community outreach. Waymo's technological lead and strong backing from Alphabet clearly have the service in pole position. But this race is far from over. Pras Subramanian is the lead auto reporter for Yahoo Finance. You can follow him on X and on Instagram. Sign in to access your portfolio
