DeuceGamer
Member
Wow, very classy ChipWorks. Thanks a lot!
-
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.
WiiU "Latte" GPU Die Photo - GPU Feature Set And Power Analysis
- Thread starter Thraktor
- Start date
- Status
Wow, very classy ChipWorks. Thanks a lot!
False again. And READ. It was the LOW END of realistic expectations.
SquiddyCracker
Banned
Oh, alright, my bad:
Are we finally getting close to a compare spec comparison between all three next gen consoles?
Wii U!
352 Gflops GPU (???)
2GB T1 SRAM @ 12.8 GB/s (???)
32MB eDRAM @ 140 GB/s (???)
1MB sRAM/eDRAM (???)
???? CPU (???)
Durango!
1.200 Gflops GPU (3.4x more than Wii U)
8GB DDR3 RAM @ 78GB/s (4x more than the Wii U, 7.8x faster than the Wii U)
32MB eDRAM @ 100GB/s (Same amount as the Wii U, 0.7x slower than the Wii U)
???? CPU
Orbis!
1.800 Gflops GPU (5x more than Wii U; 1,5x more than Durango)
4GB GDDR5 RAM @ 176 GB/s (2x more than Wii U, 15x faster than Wii U; 0.5x less than Durango, 2.5x faster than Durango)
0MB eDram @ 0MB/s (Infinitely less than Wii U; Infinitely less than Durango)
???? CPU
Question:
The smaller eDRAM pool is said to be much higher density than the larger one. If the configuration of the memory banks are the same as the larger pool... wouldn't that put it at 8MB, rather than 4MB?
(there are 16 'squares' consisting of *16x16 tiny blocks @ a likely 2KB each)
I'm assuming the configuration is the same(2KB per block). Reason being: What would be the the point of the "much higher density" comment from Chipworks if each block actually has 2x less capacity(1KB each, for a total of 4MB)?
Can someone clarify?
The smaller eDRAM pool is said to be much higher density than the larger one. If the configuration of the memory banks are the same as the larger pool... wouldn't that put it at 8MB, rather than 4MB?
(there are 16 'squares' consisting of *16x16 tiny blocks @ a likely 2KB each)
I'm assuming the configuration is the same(2KB per block). Reason being: What would be the the point of the "much higher density" comment from Chipworks if each block actually has 2x less capacity(1KB each, for a total of 4MB)?
Can someone clarify?
Fourth Storm
Member
Yes, it's old, and yes, I think it's custom. It has to be, it doesn't seem to use any of the three macros listed on the site. As I wrote, there are no 4MB macros on the site to begin with.
For the bus, I was just counting pins. Figured that if it works for external memory, it should work for eDRAM as well.
Hmm. Were the configurations you listed just for the UX8LD variation? Do we really know that UX8GD is available in the same configs? The speed of UX8LD is also more in line w/ Flipper/Hollywood's. Perhaps the main pool is the GD and the smaller is LD?
ambientmystic
Member
PS4 is just Sony returning to its roots in terms of providing monster bandwidth to its chips. The PS2 had insane bandwidth for its time (48 GB/s for it's embedded GPU EDRAM which dwarfs the PS3 RSX's 22.4 GB/s)
ScepticMatt
Member
If you look at the die shot again you can see that 1MB of the smaller eDRAM already uses much less surface area than 1MB of the larger one. (4 mall squares < 2 big squares)
Nope, the little blocks in the smaller pool are probably about 512 or 1024 bits each. This means that there is a greater ratio of bandwidth to size, which is what he meant by higher bandwidth.
Thunder Monkey
Banned
SquiddyCracker
Banned
Thunder Monkey
Banned
I know!I even threw in question marks for good measure
I'm not even sure how to take it.
*weeps*
shinra-bansho
Member
Yes, I read. What's your point? I'm talking of general expectation.
Even recently, it was the most pessimistic of possibilities in an environment of unwarranted optimism; that became progressively more unwarranted but still remained.
You're telling me the most pessimistic of possibilities was the general expectation? Again, nonsense revisionist history.
SquiddyCracker
Banned
JohnnySasaki86
Member
Orbis is 176gb/s not 192. And once again Wii U memory isn't DDR3. Its T1 SRAM or somethin, but you got the bandwidth right this time.
JohnnySasaki86
Member
Yes I remember when I said that Wii U's GPU wouldn't be anything more than 450glfop, with my 420gflop my betting number, and people wanted me stoned. Everyone(maybe mainly because of bgassassin) were all saying 600ish gflops.
Apophis2036
Banned
As someone who read almost every post of the WiiU speculation threads and the later two threads (one of which is still going), the expected specs went from -
WUST 1 - 3 -
1TFLOP GPU (lots of random people, no one with 'sources').
3GB's of Ram.
WUST - 4 -
600 GFLOP GPU (Bgassassin).
2GB's of Ram.
WUST - 5 (After E3 2012) / EC's Thread / Blu's Thread -
400 - 600 GFLOP GPU (worked out by the guys that brought you this thread) -
2GB's of Ram confirmed, 1GB for Games.
To Ideaman's credit he always said it would end up being around 1.5x an Xbox 360 + whatever was displayed on the controller.
I think Ideaman and BG both has legit sources, as someone else said BG had the PS4 / 720 specs months before any of these websites started to leak them.
Orbis is 176gb/s not 192. And once again Wii U memory isn't DDR3. Its T1 SRAM or somethin, but you got the bandwidth right this time.
Wii U memory is gDDR3 (not GDDR3)
That doesn't even make sense. The general expectation ranged from the pessimistic outlook to the optimistic outlook. Obviously. And i'm not talking about a couple of nutjobs, but about people carrying the threads. Ideaman was always saying "not just xbox360" but 1.5-2x more powerful (guess how much 352 is from 240 and take into account new features, and how much 2GB or even 1GB RAM is from 512MB), and both Wsippel and BGassassin have considered these low expectations as explained before. And this was MONTHS ago.
But you seem to not have really followed the threads like you claim you did. Nonsense revisionist history indeed. But by yourself obviously.
CoffeeJanitor
Member
It's still garbage. Those guys should get a ton of flak.
This is pretty accurate. A prediction of 400gflops hasn't seemed unusual since some time shortly before launch. Of course, people were hoping for more. Expectations were revised down across the board after the launch, though some were still hopeful for 600gflops.
shinra-bansho
Member
This is a relatively accurate description: the progressive decline of expectations as new information emerged, with general sentiment still being more optimistic than this final outcome.
You don't see a difference between the most pessimistic of possibilities and the general sentiment in those threads. Okay. Whatever. You've been vindicated, the GPU is clearly exactly what you thought it would be all along.
Rose color glasses. You are so wrong its funny.
Orbis is 176gb/s not 192. And once again Wii U memory isn't DDR3. Its T1 SRAM or somethin, but you got the bandwidth right this time.
Where did you get this info, I must have missed this. 2 GBs of 1T-SRAM would be pretty good compared to DDR3 - or am I wrong here? Can someone explain how it is?
If people want to set up a thread to debate what people may or may not have thought about the Wii U's hardware, they're more than welcome to. This thread, however, is for discussions of the actual Wii U hardware we have right in front of us. It couldn't be more irrelevant what people used to think.
KojiKnight
Member
I think we're all missing the REAL question in this topic....
Can it play pong?
Can it play pong?
Yes, how insane, narrowing down the numbers with new information. Obviously, with Nintendo, people should start with 1 Gflop and work their way up, amirite?
Sorry.
I was the most accurate poster in the WUSTs.
To be fare it seems like all of the next gen console spec expectations changed over the course of time.
ambientmystic
Member
Thraktor bringing the voice of reason. No need to rehash WUST vendettas here fellas. Many of us here just want the upcoming in depth neutral analysis of the pictures we currently (and will) have.
Proelite
Member
Fixed.
Apophis2036
Banned
It's all just numbers on a page just now, as many people have said the proof will be in the games, let's wait until we see a major next gen multiplatform third party game across all three platforms before we go jumping to conclusions (we should see at least one at E3 in June).
Even if the WiiU GPU is at the low end of guesses so far, 176GFLOP GPU is still a 14.6x leap over the original Wii GPU with the console also having 22x more system Ram and 32MB's of eDRAM (i don't know how many times more powerful the WiiU CPU is than the Wii CPU).
Im sure Nintendo and the third party developers that work to the strengths of the system will create some astounding looking games just as Nintendo did with Mario Galaxy 1 & 2, Skyward Sword, Retro did with Metroid 3 and Monolith Soft did with Xenoblade Chronicles on near decade old hardware.
I bought the WiiU for exclusive games (PS4 / 720 will be my consoles for multi platform games) so i for one am truly excited to see the major exclusive games at E3, can't wait !
.The Abominable Snowman
Member
@320SPs/352GFLOPs, what kind of TDP envelope are we working with here? It can't be derived from R700 then.
Apophis2036
Banned
I think the 1TFLOP GPU predictions came from the tech demos at E3 2011 and people not expecting Nintendo to create a new console like the Wii which was considerably weaker than Sony and MS's new consoles.
For what it's worth i still think the Bird tech demo is really impressive, if that was done on the very first dev kits (which were upgraded several times over the next year) then at least first party developers will be able to create some astounding looking games for WiiU.
Looking forward to the final analysis. Thanks to Chipworks for donating their time, expertise, and the very expensive pictures to help with the analysis, and thanks to the posters in this thread helping with the analysis and trying to keep the forum's collective head on its shoulders.
SquiddyCracker
Banned
Thank you!
You know it's next-gen time when spec comparisons start getting thrown around.
The Wii U doesn't look that bad to be honest, all considering (such as its size and power usage). If a gen jump is usually a ten-fifteen fold improvement across a bunch of factors, then the Wii U is actually a half-gen jump by being only 5-8 times less powerful than the Durango.
I wasn't exactly on top of the WUST. But I can at least confirm the accuracy of this post. I'm not tech savvy at all but I also witnessed the decreasing numbers between the threads, it was very apparent.
This doesn't seem too bad though, I thought it would be much worse actually
They came from early rumors about what GPU was in the devkits (iirc a 4850) and a falsely interpreted translation from a Japanese interview.
Apophis2036
Banned
Definitely, there were several people in the onQ123's PS4 thread talking about a 4TFLOP system as recently as December.
I think people just get excited and why not, it only comes round once every 6 or 7 years
.All three consoles will output amazingly stunning visuals imo no matter what the stats say, history has proven that, esp with Nintendo and what the Gamecube / Wii could output.
Howard Ballou
Member
First of all, big thanks to the Chipworks folks for doing this pro bono!
Now, I have a question for the qualified techies in this thread. Given what we know about the hardware, are we going to see noticeable improvement from high-end current generation games throughout the Wii U's life?
Obviously, I'm not expecting them to ever look as good as what we'll see on Orbis/Durango. I'm thinking more along the lines of Halo 3 vs Halo 4.
Now, I have a question for the qualified techies in this thread. Given what we know about the hardware, are we going to see noticeable improvement from high-end current generation games throughout the Wii U's life?
Obviously, I'm not expecting them to ever look as good as what we'll see on Orbis/Durango. I'm thinking more along the lines of Halo 3 vs Halo 4.
Apophis2036
Banned
Ah yes, you are 100% correct on that one.
People also thought the CPU was based on the Watson CPU aswell.
Schnozberry
Member
Do we know as of yet what % of the GPU is made up of the unexpected "extra" logic that was assumed to be fixed function hardware of some kind? Do we even know what it is?
The usual consensus/excuses with Nintendo owners is people buy them for Nintendo games, and get other systems for multiplats.
But I really want to see some good multiplat support on the system, because I want the option for off tv play, which looks like it wont be available for the other consoles. So I think there is a good enough interest and reason to want and expect off tv play supported ports, even at the cost of IQ.
I really wish Nintendo made it easier for devs to do this. Hopefully the custom hardware isn't too much of a barrier.
But I really want to see some good multiplat support on the system, because I want the option for off tv play, which looks like it wont be available for the other consoles. So I think there is a good enough interest and reason to want and expect off tv play supported ports, even at the cost of IQ.
I really wish Nintendo made it easier for devs to do this. Hopefully the custom hardware isn't too much of a barrier.
not too long ago, I seen people in the Sony speculation threads guessing 2.5GFLOPs minimum for both next-gen consoles. just like it was in the WUST, it was just a bunch of random people being excited and saying shit they wanted to say. i honestly can't believe all of the grudges people have held against those speculation threads - it blows my mind. i was in and out of the threads the entire time and nowhere did i get the impression that the specs would be much higher than they are now.
Estimates on the CPUs are 12 GFLOPs for Wii U and 102 GFLOPS on Orbis and Durango.
About 15 watts left on wiiu to power this chip. It will be tough at 40nm.
Unless the 550 was not correct. That seems likely...
- Status
Similar threads
- Poll
- Poll