Well it has less theoretical jigglyfloppages. If that means "less powerful" to you then so be it, but it's a more modern architecture with more features.
-
Hey, guest user. Hope you're enjoying NeoGAF! Have you considered registering for an account? Come join us and add your take to the daily discourse.
Wii U GPU base specs: 160 ALUs, 8 TMUs, 8 ROPs; Rumor: Wii U hardware was downgraded
- Thread starter bgassassin
- Start date
- Status
Well it has less theoretical jigglyfloppages. If that means "less powerful" to you then so be it, but it's a more modern architecture with more features.
And this is why Nintendo doesn't release specs...
ThoughtsOfSpeaking
Banned
Exactly. Fucking moronic when you also consider the size of the power brick. And how loud the the damn thing is.
Making a bigger all in one case would of made so much more sense.
shinra-bansho
Member
Doesn't this just confirm what most have already concluded. It's basically current gen+ in terms of performance.
Although, by the same token, the flops of the XB1 and PS4 are also not directly comparable to the Wii U's, I believe.
These flops aren't really the same as the Xbox 360's flops.
Although, by the same token, the flops of the XB1 and PS4 are also not directly comparable to the Wii U's, I believe.
Dictator93
Member
It does indeed mean it is less powerful to me.
More "modern" or more featured is not too big of a deal when you are so low powered that you cannot leverage it really.
My...
Happen to know about the difference in flops due to the changing of the GPU architecture from the Xenos shaders to say.. VLIW5.
Still... that power level for its price seems rather unacceptable. The GPU and CPU must cost next to nothing in manufacturing.
Crimsonclaw111
Member
Well more advanced shaders and such can go a long way in masking other deficiencies.
The Abominable Snowman
Member
I swear we came to this conclusion in the old thread.
Although that thread was absolute garb for the most part.
Although that thread was absolute garb for the most part.
JordanN
Banned
That just makes things worse.
Just saying it's related to the HD 4000 would make worlds of difference.
They also had their chance to make a game with the thing and go into details about it but they don't even do that.
This. It was never going to be as powerful as the new (almost) HD twins, so who cares. A bit more of extra power wouldn't have changed anything.
Panajev2001a
GAF's Pleasant Genius
Designing a small compact console (especially relative to the performance and power consumption target you have) is not cheap or trivial either.
ColdBlooder
Banned
Who cares anymore?
Nintendos games look really amazing and most 3rd party ports this holiday are actually better looking and/or better running on Wii U than PS360 versions. Thats all i need.
Thats also the reason why i started to basically completely ignore the gpu and cpu threads since E3. Because i could put my mind at ease since then. Nintendo showed what i wanted to see powerwise from Wii U.
Also the power of Wii U (Or any NIntendo hardware) can hardly be judged by numbers. Since they customize their stuff to the extreme.
Can't wait to see how much Nintendo can squeeze out of the box further down the road, as the hardware is only out for a year.
w1gglyjones
Member
Yet you post here?
If the hardware was downgraded to fit in a smaller box... that sort of does matter.
hooijdonk17
Member
It's a normalized graph, Wii U's specs are taken as 1 - so everything's a multiple of the WiiU stats. i.e. PS4 has over 13x WiiU's Texel Rate.
hooijdonk17
Member
Proof that numbers don't matter. We've seen some fantastic looking WiiU titles. Hell, Windwaker HD looks gorgeous and that's not even truly a current gen game. Art style > horsepower.
It's not the size of the power that matters, it's how you use it
For every windwaker, you will get 100 ugly ass ports. Actually, more likely, you will only get a couple of windwaker-like games. Welcome to Gamecube HD.
Panajev2001a
GAF's Pleasant Genius
On the other hand the SDK and tools guys would have more time to work on polishing the software sent to third parties and first parties alike. Also, developers might have less problems with their initial multi-platform ports thus leading to more polished launch titles. Given how Nintendo used their first year on the market, delaying the Wii U might have not been a super bad idea.
nordique
Member
hooijdonk17
Member
If only that post took notice of the fact that the WiiU controller Nintendo banked its money on has flopped and now it looks twice as bad because it's not even as powerful as PS360 instead of not even being close to PSBone.
Everyone is aware that Nintendo didn't gimp the hardware out of spite. They gimped it because they were stupid and thought people would fall for a tablet interface gimmick on a controller (despite having tablets that are infinitely more functional) because they fell for the motion control gimmick (which was actually novel).
WiiU is a disaster, and no post can make it sound rational.
ColdBlooder
Banned
It dosen't matter cause the hardware is out for a year now. It dosen't matter because it dosen't make 3D World ugly all of a sudden. Or Wind Waker HD or Pikmin 3, etc...
And i specifically talk about the Wii U Latte and the CPU Espresso threads with the die shots.
Please educate as to why these metrics are particularly relevant.
I am literally inches away to not send my application to Nintendo today.
Even. Nintendo sacrificed hardware raw power in favour of a uPad and power consumption, the former being not put to good use even one year after launch.
What a catastrophe.
Otakumegane
Member
So it this a Gamecube thing where where the specs look like crap but Nintendo can pull more out of it or what.
I mean it's not less powerful than the HD twins yo, I think the games themselves have said that much.EDIT: Also I don't get the overheating issues thing. The fan air is cooler than my laptop's when browsing the internet. Did Iwata want to not take a RROD situation at all ?
I mean it's not less powerful than the HD twins yo, I think the games themselves have said that much.EDIT: Also I don't get the overheating issues thing. The fan air is cooler than my laptop's when browsing the internet. Did Iwata want to not take a RROD situation at all ?
hooijdonk17
Member
Unfortunately no. Gamecube's specs compared to the PS2 were actually favorable.
Does the WiiU have any games that look better than what the PS3 (Uncharted 3, The Last of Us) and 360 (Gears 3, Halo 4) can offer?
I honestly thought this was known to be the case all along? Aren't these the specs we've been assuming for some time now?
It's a 360+. The "+" being modern shaders, feature set, more contemporary design paradigm and better power efficiency.
Of course not. Because those games were made with 6 years of development experience on those platforms behind them. That's not really quantifiable evidence of anything.
It's a 360+. The "+" being modern shaders, feature set, more contemporary design paradigm and better power efficiency.
Of course not. Because those games were made with 6 years of development experience on those platforms behind them. That's not really quantifiable evidence of anything.
Gamecube specs were above PS2's at least. WiiU CPU output is one tenth of the PS4's.
Otakumegane
Member
If I'm not wrong didn't the PS2 sport a higher clock rate than the GC on it's GPU?
hooijdonk17
Member
Yes, but it was a GPU that wasn't capable of DX8 functions like pixel/vertex shader operations, bump/normal mapping etc. The PS2 also had significantly less RAM (32MB compared to Gamecube's 40MB)
EDIT: Actually I'm misremembering, the Gamecube GPU was at 202Mhz and the PS2 GPU was at 147.5Mhz. It seems PS2's only advantage was Memory Bandwidth.
Also quoting because it's what I want to say but I'm too lazy to type.
Otakumegane
Member
w1gglyjones
Member
gamecube did things that only the O.G. Xbox was supposed to be able to do. gamecube punched well above its own weight.
It probably would have been better for me to say "more efficient". For instance we know that the 360 GPU couldn't utilise a lot of it's theoretical Gflops. We dunno about Wii U. The Wii U had 32MB eDRAM so no tiling needed and more space for buffers in there. I'm not defending it per se, because I think the hardware is weak and Nintendo are stupid, but I don't think we need to assume it can't produce stuff better than the best of the 360 etc.
Panajev2001a
GAF's Pleasant Genius
So if I am understanding this right it's basically straight up less powerful than the Xbox 360, both CPU and GPU
Even if true, theoretical specs-wise, they probably hoped that their heavy customizations to the SoC would allow developers to still surpass both Xbox 360 and PS3 if they adapted their engines to the way that makes the Wii U sing so to speak, which is not easy for launch multi platform ports. That would be in line with what we got at launch too.
hooijdonk17
Member
By that logic Titanfall on Bone should look worse than 360?
What you say really means nothing. Common sense dictates a new system should be able to hande ports from 7 year old systems with ease and at better IQ if it's actually more powerful. The WiiU can't even handle ports from engines like Frostbite.
It's a travesty.
w1gglyjones
Member
which seems like the craziest part of this own console. in order to get the best results, you have to spend time and money tailoring your game to the hardware. OF COURSE, this is true for all hardware, but it really seems like a waste of energy for any third-party to spend resources optimizing for the Wii U.
But we know the difference between 360 and XBone is huge compared to 360 and WiiU. Or didn't you know that? It is, to clarify.
Read the rest of my post (not just the bit quoting your post). WiiU is effectively a 360+. It has some advantages, but it's a completely different platform which will take more than a year to get the most out of. Expecting it to instantly surpass the the very best graphical showcases of ps360 is misguided given what we've known for 1.5 years now. We won't ever see graphics hugely superior to those games you mentioned, but we'll see evidence of a slightly more capable console than 360/ps3 over the course of WiiUs life.
Bill Rizer
Member
I'm no tech at all, but is it possible a future firmware that unlocks some "reserved" power / overclocks cpu-gpu?
I was amazed at that 3ds fw update some months ago that boosted framerate on almost all games.
I was amazed at that 3ds fw update some months ago that boosted framerate on almost all games.
Not in anyway surprising. Actually, just how nice looking the best games look is surprising. But that's not saying much really. This news is no surprise. This is the same philosophy from the Wii. The Wii U is in every way the Wii's sequel. The reason it hasn't caught on, IMO, is that the audience has moved on. Sure some may disagree, and it wouldn't surprise me if Nintendo thinks the same. They'll say lack of software and marketing killed the Wii U.
I think there is no audience to the Wii U. Even if it got a steady stream of titles from launch, it wouldn't be faring much better. It was DOA one way or the other.
I don't blame Nintendo for thinking the Wii U would be a success. But its a disaster. The question is now, what will they learn from it?
I think they really believe that Japanese sensibilities are the key to capturing the casual crowd. The untraditional, unconventional gamer. They've all gone. All casuals are on smartphones and tablets. They could not care less about a box attached to their TV anymore. There are no more gimmicks like motion control to set the world alight. If they really want to remain unconventional, the only way is to sell real, real cheap and make their console an impulse buy.
What will Nintendo do next?
I think there is no audience to the Wii U. Even if it got a steady stream of titles from launch, it wouldn't be faring much better. It was DOA one way or the other.
I don't blame Nintendo for thinking the Wii U would be a success. But its a disaster. The question is now, what will they learn from it?
I think they really believe that Japanese sensibilities are the key to capturing the casual crowd. The untraditional, unconventional gamer. They've all gone. All casuals are on smartphones and tablets. They could not care less about a box attached to their TV anymore. There are no more gimmicks like motion control to set the world alight. If they really want to remain unconventional, the only way is to sell real, real cheap and make their console an impulse buy.
What will Nintendo do next?
hooijdonk17
Member
I know. But the best conclusion we can draw from all this is that the WiiU can be only marginally better than the 360 even after 6 years of development on the system. Worst case is that it's even worse. With that said, people are already voting on this revelation with their wallets..
OminoMichelin
Member
Even though I was on the side of the ''believers'', this reflects what I thought for a few months. God knows why nintendo thought a small box would have been a good idea, but for the masses, the combination of slightly better textures+lighting than the current gen consoles might be enough. Now all they need is games and positive marketing, and a lot of it.
The lower power only matters, in terms of perception, if the media makes people believe it matters, we are not talking about PCs. I thought that would have been clear after 8 generations.
The lower power only matters, in terms of perception, if the media makes people believe it matters, we are not talking about PCs. I thought that would have been clear after 8 generations.
I thought this was known for over a year now. Whether that's what you want from a console is obviously subjective, of course. But that's what WiiU is. Nintendo didn't do this by accident though. They took this decision to keep the cost down whilst incorporating a usp (the gamepad). Hasn't paid off at all so far and looks like a considerable misstep. But considering the alternative (going toe-to-toe with Sony & MS on cutting edge loss-leading hardware) it might have been their only real option*
* I don't mean this exact hardware set up was their only option, I mean going for USP/Price over raw power.
Nikodemos
Member
This is the main reason for lack of ports, the ridiculously hyper-customised architecture. Do remember that, of the ports actually released, in direct comparison the Wii U versions are by no means inferior to the other two, and in a select few cases actually appear better-looking.
Thats it, Im buying a PS4 and building a good game-pc. Im baffled by theire design of the wiiu, the gamepad is way to expensive, and the console has wii written al over it, compared to 360/PS3, albeit better/newer instruction sets.
I honestly think that gimping on the hardware this much is a huge mistake, because with this weak of a hardware, they essentially force me to buy a good PC/PS4 for all the multiplatform titles/3rd party support, and isnt that what they wanted to fix? The difference with wiiu and PS4/PC multiplats will be HUGE in 2-3 years. And I dont fucking care about the gamepad, I'd rather have a evolutionised gamecube controller, like MS did with the xbox (rumble in triggers? thats just awesome).
I really hate nintendos stance on competitve graphics, and I feel like this will hurt them a lot with wiiu in the long run, especcially regarding 3rd party support; I just wont be a multiplat-title for the wiiu...ever.
I honestly think that gimping on the hardware this much is a huge mistake, because with this weak of a hardware, they essentially force me to buy a good PC/PS4 for all the multiplatform titles/3rd party support, and isnt that what they wanted to fix? The difference with wiiu and PS4/PC multiplats will be HUGE in 2-3 years. And I dont fucking care about the gamepad, I'd rather have a evolutionised gamecube controller, like MS did with the xbox (rumble in triggers? thats just awesome).
I really hate nintendos stance on competitve graphics, and I feel like this will hurt them a lot with wiiu in the long run, especcially regarding 3rd party support; I just wont be a multiplat-title for the wiiu...ever.
Yeah and it contradicts what seemed like Nintendo's MO at the start of WiiUs development: making it easy for 3rd parties to jump in and to avoid the Wii situation all over again. Bizarre really. I guess along the line somewhere they just ditched that philosophy and went back to looking after their own development first and foremost.
Either that or they were genuinely second guessing other next gen specs and they got it wrong/the goalposts moved? Durango was originally rumoured to be much less powerful than it ended up after all...
Fire Iwata, develop other platforms and (probably) alienate, if not offload on the long run, their current staff. And thus end up becoming yet another entertainment software company that will compete for mediocre margins.
Or they can break new grounds anew.
In any case, the time to decide is now.
Nikodemos
Member
A little from Column A, a little from Column B...
I also suspect that Nintendo wanted to make a true Game Pad (a gaming tablet with proper controls), but the tech wasn't (and still isn't) there (and not at the pricepoint they desire, anyway). So the next best thing (in their opinion) was to make a pseudo-tablet tightly linked to a small, unobtrusive box that can be discreetly tucked away in a corner. In order to better prepare themselves for the fully-portable challenge, they went for as low-powered hardware as they could fit within their design and creative roadmap.
It didn't really work as planned, due to a plethora of reasons, but this approach kinda made sense to 2010-era Nintendo.
EatChildren
Currently polling second in Australia's federal election (first in the Gold Coast), this feral may one day be your Bogan King.
To be fair, anybody buying a Wii U to play in that ballpark of software needs to get their head checked. If you're buying a Wii U you're doing so for similar reasons as the Wii: the exclusive software (and maybe the bottom-of-the-barrel ports to top things off) justifies the investment. Same for any system. If you want the kind of software that will end up on PS4/Xbone/PC, banking on a Nintendo system is just foolish. Deciding if you want to buy a Wii U is its own issue, not quite the same as deciding if you want (for example) a PlayStation 4 or Xbox One.
RE downclock rumour: honestly, I'm not sure it will matter in the long run, largely because of the above reasoning of why you'd ever invest in a Nintendo system. If the hardware was downgraded I do wonder what, if any significant the original clocks were compared to Xbox One and PlayStation 4. Having stronger harder at your disposal is beneficial to both gamers and developers, but I suspect the originally planned specs (should the rumour be true) was still distant from what Sony and Microsoft have thrown out, and wouldn't put the platform in a much more favourable position when it comes to ports and the like.
If Nintendo did indeed lower hardware specs simply to meet case size requirements I do think they probably made the wrong move, simply because case size doesn't appear to be working towards any significant advantage, and doesn't overcome other issues with the platform.
cyberheater
PS4 PS4 PS4 PS4 PS4 PS4 PS4 PS4 PS4 PS4 PS4 PS4 PS4 PS4 PS4 PS4 PS4 Xbone PS4 PS4
How was it possible to release a next gen games machine in 2012 that had less flops then the GPU from a machine released in 2006.
Nintendo. You are a joke.
Nintendo. You are a joke.
- Status