• 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.

Epic Reveals Samaritan Processing Requirements: 10x 360 at 1080p, (4.4x 360 at 720p)

Krilekk

Banned
The rumors are the new devkits have greatly increased in powe in line with what ign and the developer article stated. It is know early devkits were underclocked . I think 5x the 360 is possible.

So you're calling Miyamoto a liar? ;)

http://www.gamesindustry.biz/articl...i-u-may-not-be-more-powerful-than-current-gen

Here is the latest I could find on the subject from late January:

http://www.develop-online.net/news/39593/Wii-U-twice-as-powerful-as-Xbox-360

So the final devkits are 2x 360. And not more. Considering they have to render two screens that makes the original assumption of 1.5x 360 performance realistic.
 

KKRT00

Member
How do you create these walls and NPC's procedurally? That seems like a magic word you keep throwing here and why is that magic not in games of today. No algorythm can create good looking content on itself. See Oblivion/Skyrim.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ibUBzZe87-E&t=43

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bvV8gmwSgwI

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kz41t_pGQcY

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=N0LDnz-gq_o

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=gAQ_j23PtWc

and so on

Could be customised similar to how Xenos was.

If it would have DX11 compute shaders and tessellator, why just dont use R8xx chip?
 

mhayze

Member
While the 7970 has a theoretical peak computational throughput of close to 3.7 TFLOPs, it's VLIW architecture and other wide-use PC GPU considerations make it very hard to achieve anywhere near that in a real world situation. A console implementation would have to be much more focused on achievable performance, I would hope.
 

Instro

Member
So you're calling Miyamoto a liar? ;)

http://www.gamesindustry.biz/articl...i-u-may-not-be-more-powerful-than-current-gen

Here is the latest I could find on the subject from late January:


http://www.develop-online.net/news/39593/Wii-U-twice-as-powerful-as-Xbox-360

So the final devkits are 2x 360. And not more. Considering they have to render two screens that makes the original assumption of 1.5x 360 performance realistic.

That's not the latest news, read the actual article. In fact it's not even news to begin with.
 

zoukka

Member

So you basically just regurgitate PR videos and tech demos, and think those apply straight to any games project :D Also the ones with actual stuff running (blending textures, shaders, cracks in stone) either looked bad because there was no touching up being made or used pre-made textures and models.

So try again, and this time with actual real game examples.
 

aeolist

Banned
So you're calling Miyamoto a liar? ;)

http://www.gamesindustry.biz/articl...i-u-may-not-be-more-powerful-than-current-gen

Here is the latest I could find on the subject from late January:

http://www.develop-online.net/news/39593/Wii-U-twice-as-powerful-as-Xbox-360

So the final devkits are 2x 360. And not more. Considering they have to render two screens that makes the original assumption of 1.5x 360 performance realistic.

Games certainly don't have to output to both screens. You can duplicate visuals or only run on one at a time if you want, it's up to the developer.
 

Plinko

Wildcard berths that can't beat teams without a winning record should have homefield advantage
So you're calling Miyamoto a liar? ;)

http://www.gamesindustry.biz/articl...i-u-may-not-be-more-powerful-than-current-gen

Here is the latest I could find on the subject from late January:

http://www.develop-online.net/news/39593/Wii-U-twice-as-powerful-as-Xbox-360

So the final devkits are 2x 360. And not more. Considering they have to render two screens that makes the original assumption of 1.5x 360 performance realistic.

Come on. It's obvious you didn't even read the entire last article. Look at the last paragraph.
 

DCKing

Member
If it would have DX11 compute shaders and tessellator, why just dont use R8xx chip?
Because R8xx chips don't exist ;)
They're called Evergreen
The final unit will probably not be the part they used in the devkit because it's on an old process and uses too much power, plus it's most likely the variant that had faulty shaders. The final chip is probably something with roughly the same power. AMD's new midrange chips (7750 & 7770) are roughly in the same ballpark as the RV770 in the Wii U but clocked rather high, so the final part could be something akin to those but clocked somewhat lower. Or they could use older tech if Nintendo didn't like GCN. I'd be very surprised if the devkit part was in the final unit.

The Wii U will most likely come out somewhat under that 1.1TFLOPS target at 720p30. Some further downscaling is needed, wonder how much that is going to show.
 

themadcowtipper

Smells faintly of rancid stilton.
So you're calling Miyamoto a liar? ;)

http://www.gamesindustry.biz/articl...i-u-may-not-be-more-powerful-than-current-gen

Here is the latest I could find on the subject from late January:

http://www.develop-online.net/news/39593/Wii-U-twice-as-powerful-as-Xbox-360

So the final devkits are 2x 360. And not more. Considering they have to render two screens that makes the original assumption of 1.5x 360 performance realistic.

From the poorly writtten devolop article

However, yesterday a separate insider source told IGN that the next generation Xbox will be “six times as powerful” as its predecessor – the key addition being that this will mean it yields a “20 per cent greater performance than Wii U”.That unverified calculation, if true, echoes claims from the Develop source who claims the Wii U is far more powerful than current expectations.

That unverified calculation, if true, echoes claims from the Develop source who claims the Wii U is far more powerful than current expectations.
 
Until a couple of years into the gen I expect the vast majority of lighting effects to still be prebaked. I think the least intensive effects are the most likely to be used in full off the bat. Reflections, normals, specs, and after a couple of years that list to include global illumination, true subsurface scattering, and well coded tessellation usage.

I agree with your assessment since I pretty much see it the same way.

If it would have DX11 compute shaders and tessellator, why just dont use R8xx chip?

The reason why is definitely something up for discussion. With the info we know, Nintendo has created a conundrum in what the final is supposed to look like.
 

Madridy

Member
Just saw the Samaritan demo for the first time, and I like it. Would be nice getting that kind of graphics in the early next-gen games.

Kinda off-topic and speculative:

Assuming that the Samaritan is Epic's new IP, what kind of genre do you guys think it'll be?

- RPG (it has Deus Ex:HR vibe)
- Super Hero (Batman:AC, InFamous - Linear/Open-world?)
- Open-World action (Crackdown, GTA, Assassin's Creed)
- Linear TPS ala Gears -
hope not :p
- Sci-Fi FPS


Yeah, I'm Impressed with the demo and wish that it develops into a full fledged game. :p
 

KKRT00

Member
So you basically just regurgitate PR videos and tech demos, and think those apply straight to any games project :D Also the ones with actual stuff running (blending textures, shaders, cracks in stone) either looked bad because there was no touching up being made or used pre-made textures and models.

So try again, and this time with actual real game examples.

First video shows walls from Crysis 2, last shows destruction from Force Unleashed.

...
 

gatti-man

Member
Which could be said about anything happening in your life really. You probably eat shit food because you don't know any better. But videogames are escapism and pure entertainment. Your average consumer is there to plug in the machine and play the damn game. Not to fiddle around with the settings or learn all the intricaties of videogame graphics technology. Those days of consumer avareness are gone and forgotten my friend.

The amount of processing power we get should be the amount that developers need. Not some crazy arbitary box that costs too much, is cryptic to work on and only a few devs can utilize it to the fullest. Progress should happen so that we can get better games. Consumers do not know what that progress should be, only the devs do.

A lot of high end games this gen aren't just held down by tech, there's a true lack of resources in making everything consistent with the best assets especially in big game worlds. People expect everything to just blow up, cities growing in size and detail, hundreds of clever NPC's running around... this all requires bigger studios and more money.

2nd paragraph is half wrong 3rd paragraph is entirely wrong. When will everyone understand most games are already made with high res assets. Better textures and effects dont have a price tag attached to them on the developers side only on the og hardware.
 
Was this Digital Foundry case volume analysis ever brought up in Wii U discussion and considered as a valid determinant of its likely performance?

http://www.gamesindustry.biz/articles/digitalfoundry-in-theory-can-wii-u-offer-next-gen-power?page=1

If Wii U has 2.5x smaller the case volume of 360 S, subtracting the HDD space, isn't something at most 50 to 60 watts a reasonable guess for Wii U's power consumption (360 S - 90- 85 watts)?

So, people expecting Wii U to be more powerful are expecting a case size increase for E3?
 

snesfreak

Banned
One commonality I've noticed in these threads (and I've been following them closely for months) is it's almost always Nintendo fans (DCKing, StevieP, and others) who are trying to downplay the potential for next-gen graphics in a thinly veiled attempt to damage control the Wii U's specs. Try to be a little less transparent.
Can't counter our arguments so you insult us, holy shit.
Here is the latest I could find on the subject from late January:

http://www.develop-online.net/news/39593/Wii-U-twice-as-powerful-as-Xbox-360

So the final devkits are 2x 360. And not more. Considering they have to render two screens that makes the original assumption of 1.5x 360 performance realistic.
Ah you pick and choose BS articles to backup your claims, just another specialguy clone.
 

Corky

Nine out of ten orphans can't tell the difference.
Just saw the Samaritan demo for the first time, and I like it. Would be nice getting that kind of graphics in the early next-gen games.

Kinda off-topic and speculative:

Assuming that the Samaritan is Epic's new IP, what kind of genre do you guys think it'll be?

- RPG (it has Deus Ex:HR vibe)
- Super Hero (Batman:AC, InFamous - Linear/Open-world?)
- Open-World action (Crackdown, GTA, Assassin's Creed)
- Linear TPS ala Gears -
hope not :p
- Sci-Fi FPS


Yeah, I'm Impressed with the demo and wish that it develops into a full fledged game. :p

I'd kill for a sci-fi tps. Sci-fi as in the same setting as samaritan, bleak blade-runnery future.
 
2nd paragraph is half wrong 3rd paragraph is entirely wrong. When will everyone understand most games are already made with high res assets. Better textures and effects dont have a price tag attached to them on the developers side only on the og hardware.

No, but higher poly counts do. As does more geometry, more advanced lighting, bigger game worlds, more realistic animation, etc.

This gen wasn't just ps2 in high definition. A lot of things improved, and all that cost a shit load of $$$.
 
Was this Digital Foundry case volume analysis ever brought up in Wii U discussion and considered as a valid determinant of its likely performance?

http://www.gamesindustry.biz/articles/digitalfoundry-in-theory-can-wii-u-offer-next-gen-power?page=1

If Wii U has 2.5x smaller the case volume of 360 S, subtracting the HDD space, isn't something at most 50 to 60 watts a reasonable guess for Wii U's power consumption (360 S - 90- 85 watts)?

So, people expecting Wii U to be more powerful are expecting a case size increase for E3?

It was brought up, but that case should be able to handle more than 60w. I'm expecting around 100w.

360 S and PS3 Slim could be smaller than what they are.
 
Just saw the Samaritan demo for the first time, and I like it. Would be nice getting that kind of graphics in the early next-gen games.

Kinda off-topic and speculative:

Assuming that the Samaritan is Epic's new IP, what kind of genre do you guys think it'll be?

- RPG (it has Deus Ex:HR vibe)
- Super Hero (Batman:AC, InFamous - Linear/Open-world?)
- Open-World action (Crackdown, GTA, Assassin's Creed)
- Linear TPS ala Gears -
hope not :p
- Sci-Fi FPS


Yeah, I'm Impressed with the demo and wish that it develops into a full fledged game. :p

It isn't... Fort Night is... unless they have announced multiple new IPs...
 

Karma

Banned
Doesn't really matter, the people thinking that next gen is going to be 1080p60fps standard are going to be disappointed as fuck. If MS and Sony don't mandate it, it won't be a standard and you'll see many games at 720p easily.

You think that is bad? I have read some people saying they think 4K is possible.
 

Madridy

Member
It isn't... Fort Night is... unless they have announced multiple new IPs...


To my understanding, Samaritan was only demoed on UE3 because UE4 wasn't ready yet.

It was a demo made in about 2 months by 12 people.

UE4 however is unveiling this year, and whatever their actual next game will be will probably be demoed on it, since they said they were unveiling another new IP this year as well.

This. Link
 

gatti-man

Member
No, but higher poly counts do. As does more geometry, more advanced lighting, bigger game worlds, more realistic animation, etc.

This gen wasn't just ps2 in high definition. A lot of things improved, and all that cost a shit load of $$$.

Yes to bigger game worlds and kinda to animation the rest is not true at all. Higher poly counts already are made same with geometry. Only if we are talking about a need of more quantity of assets would there be an increased cost. Honestly many of you are way over estimating next gens costs.
 
That article quotes the other articles already referenced and is clearly an opinion piece. Not sure what you're referring to. Could you be a bit more specific?

Is their case size analysis a valid determinant of likely power?

wiiu_volume_comparison.jpg.jpg


The really interesting comparison is the Xbox 360s up against the Wii U, both of which have external power bricks: we're seeing that Xbox 360s casing has around 2.6 times the volume of the new Nintendo console. The only real differences are that the 360 additionally houses a 2.5-inch hard drive and Wii U is almost certainly using a smaller, slimmer slot-loading drive compared to the more standard-sized unit in the Microsoft console.

Now, the latest Xbox revision is a good, reliable design - but it can still get very warm to the touch. So the question is simple: how can Wii U be twice as powerful as the Xbox 360 when it's got to cram in more advanced silicon with millions more transistors into an area that's tiny by comparison? Won't it overheat horribly? Where's the room for the substantial cooling assembly it would require?

360 S is a 85-90 watts console.. So, what does that say about Wii U's power consumption (based on this case volume analysis)? And then what can you draw from that to say about it's overall performance?
 
Is their case size analysis a valid determinant of likely power?

wiiu_volume_comparison.jpg.jpg




360 S is a 85-90 watts console.. So, what does that say about Wii U's power consumption (based on this case volume analysis)? And then what can you draw from that to say about it's overall performance?

Isnt Wii U lacking a HDD, which takes up a hefty space? And how could GCN get comparable graphics to the XBox given its size? The console size doesn't necessarily dictate its power capabilities.
 

Plinko

Wildcard berths that can't beat teams without a winning record should have homefield advantage
Is their case size analysis a valid determinant of likely power?

wiiu_volume_comparison.jpg.jpg




360 S is a 85-90 watts console.. So, what does that say about Wii U's power consumption (based on this case volume analysis)? And then what can you draw from that to say about it's overall performance?

Thanks for clarifying.

No, for 2 reasons:

1) Lack of an internal hard drive.

2) We haven't seen final form of console yet. Judging anything off last year's E3 is foolish, especially with the latest rumor about the devkits.
 
Is their case size analysis a valid determinant of likely power?

wiiu_volume_comparison.jpg.jpg




360 S is a 85-90 watts console.. So, what does that say about Wii U's power consumption (based on this case volume analysis)? And then what can you draw from that to say about it's overall performance?

Gaming laptops are smaller than a ps3 or a 360 yet very powerful .
 

DCKing

Member
Yeah, the small casing is definitely what's limiting the Wii U. His point is pretty moot as a a lot of laptops with internals smaller than the 360S run circles around it (in graphics power). Tech from 2011/2012 is just faster for less power. All stuff we've seen suggested as parts seem to fit just well enough for a small console (laptop parts equivalent to the devkit part have been around for almost 3 years). The Wii U could probably be substantially more powerful if they would have used a bigger box though...
 
Top Bottom