Now imagine how they would look with a more significantly powerful hardware!
I think the question that matter a lot for Nintendo is also "how much it will cost to look significantly better on a significantly better system?".
Now imagine how they would look with a more significantly powerful hardware!
Krizz comes back with the thread of shinen's response to the dowgrade rumor.
http://www.neogaf.com/forum/showthread.php?t=710932
Is there a point for this thread to go on since there's no confirmation of 160/8/8 it's still speculated and the rumor of a downgrade countered by a dev that would know?
Now imagine how they would look with a more significantly powerful hardware!
People that expected Nintendo to go from the Wii to the PS4 power-wise weren't really being realistic, in my opinion. I don't know that any company's ever made THAT huge of a leap in a single generation.
People seems to be missing the point. It's all about the price.
If you don't care about the performance of the Wii U, you should at least care about the how much it costs you. Keeping the Wii U artificially small made the Wii U far more expensive then it should have been.
We got ripped off on the Wii U because of Takeda fetish of small systems.
As a gamer I don't care too much about that (Within reason) and the PS4 is basically the same cost as a Wii U once you add in the HDD you'd need if you want to use digital a lot.Can you add MSRP bars?
History. Look at the GameCube, an engineering marvel. Look at the Wii and its motion controls and its small form factor. Look at the Wii U and its small form factor, lag-free GamePad use and the look of the titles I listed on a GPU that's rumoured to be 160:8:8.
All of the titles I listed look 'next gen' (ie beyond the capabilities of the PS3 and 360 to reproduce, not on a par with the PS4 or One), and Nintendo consoles have always been balanced systems.
Anyone that doesn't agree that Nintendo have the best hardware engineers in the business has an agenda.
Additionally, IGN has learned that the system will be based on a revamped version of AMD's R700 GPU architecture, not AMD's Fusion technology as previously believed, which will, as previously reported, out perform the PlayStation 3's NVIDIA 7800GTX-based processor. Like the Xbox 360, the system's CPU will be a custom-built triple-core IBM PowerPC chipset, but the clocking speeds will be faster.
Yup, I agree Effect.
As I mentioned in my post above if there are indeed 160 ALUs, 8 TMUs and 8 ROPs then there's a fair amount of the silicone on there that's a complete mystery.
I'm still subscribing to the opinion that Nintendo have somehow evolved the TEV Unit so that fixed functions can be easily used by modern engines. The TEV Unit gave the Wii a nonstandard rendering pipeline so ports were pretty much impossible but if Nintendo have evolved it in some way to give it a standard rendering pipeline then it would give developers and engines 'free' use of commonly used functions such as depth of field, HDR lighting etc.
There's no way that a bog standard 160:8:8 GPU should be able to run something like the Bayonetta 2 demo the way I see it.
They wanted something in between the PS4 and PS3/360. So a noticeable gap over current gen but also competitive with Xbone/PS4.People that expected Nintendo to go from the Wii to the PS4 power-wise weren't really being realistic, in my opinion. I don't know that any company's ever made THAT huge of a leap in a single generation.
Then they came back with the Gamecube which was super easy to program. Especially compared to PS2.That's not true. The N64 had loads of problems compared to PS1 at the time.
That's only part of the equation.They don't make the CPU/GPUs but they design the system and all the electronics to make the most out of those chips. Which is why Nintendo consoles are super reliable (low failure rate), they also tend to run relatively cool and quiet. Sony and Microsoft don't make their own CPU/GPUs either.Nintendo's engineers aren't the best. They don't even make their own GPU/CPU's. AMD and IBM are the ones contracted to do it.
1:1 ROPS to Texture units is not common at all and does not happen in the R730 , R770, Ceder, Caicos, Redwood, Juniper, or Turks designs. Unfortunately this probably only means people will try to make the assumption that there are only 4 ROPs.
And does anyone have any theories about why the ROPs and TMUs are the same amount..?
And again I'll bring up the weird ratio here, 1:1 TMU to ROP I have not heard of, you would normally have two TMUs to an ROP.
Now imagine how they would look with a more significantly powerful hardware!
Nonsense. They could have made a machine capable of running their current output at 1080p with AA and 16xAF, for a start.nintendo probably designed their hardware around the maximum capabilities that they, as a software developer, would have been able to put out. i don't think you would have seen many improvements even if these games were on the ps4 or a high-end pc. there are other bottlenecks to gaming development besides horsepower
Nonsense. They could have made a machine capable of running their current output at 1080p with AA and 16xAF, for a start.
Nonsense. They could have made a machine capable of running their current output at 1080p with AA and 16xAF, for a start.
i love the mental gymnastics people come up with to justify worse hardware. there is no excuse. it is what it is. if you are fine with worse hardware then cool, but don't try to make asinine arguments for Nintendos sake.nintendo probably designed their hardware around the maximum capabilities that they, as a software developer, would have been able to put out. i don't think you would have seen many improvements even if these games were on the ps4 or a high-end pc. there are other bottlenecks to gaming development besides horsepower
Maybe 160/8/8 is correct, Shin'en said nothing about that. They only said that there was no downgrade as far as they know, and they were one of the first studios to get a kit, so that rumor is probably wrong.Krizz comes back with the thread of shinen's response to the dowgrade rumor.
http://www.neogaf.com/forum/showthread.php?t=710932
Is there a point for this thread to go on since there's no confirmation of 160/8/8 it's still speculated and the rumor of a downgrade countered by a dev that would know?
First thanks to those who gave me a welcome back. Looks like my good intention was taken rather negatively by some. I guess my posting history in the WUST threads meant nothing.
i love the mental gymnastics people come up with to justify worse hardware. there is no excuse. it is what it is. if you are fine with worse hardware then cool, but don't try to make asinine arguments for Nintendos sake.
I don't know what you mean. What other important stuff? You said that Nintendo designed the hardware to match the maximum output of their staff and that any more power would be unused, or used inefficiently, as a result of this labour/productivity shortfall. I think this is wrong for a variety of reasons, but the easiest way of pointing this out is that a more powerful machine could produce better looking games without requiring any significant extra effort by the developers.
I don't know what you mean. What other important stuff? You said that Nintendo designed the hardware to match the maximum output of their staff and that any more power would be unused, or used inefficiently, as a result of this labour/productivity shortfall. I think this is wrong for a variety of reasons, but the easiest way of pointing this out is that a more powerful machine could produce better looking games without requiring any significant extra effort by the developers.what about the other important stuff though?
Maybe 160/8/8 is correct, Shin'en said nothing about that. They only said that there was no downgrade as far as they know, and they were one of the first studios to get a kit, so that rumor is probably wrong.
Crazy idea: Latte has no TMUs at all. Instead, it has multiple (eight?) TEV units. Wait, that actually kinda makes sense - the system needs to have at least one TEV either way, and a single TEV supports eight textures per pass. So eight TMUs + one TEV = 16 textures per pass. Eight TEVs = 64 textures per pass. Maybe it's just limited to eight simultaneous targets, but can apply up to eight textures/ maps to each target per pass?As I think the first person to suggest 8 TMUs, I am interested in how they are actually competing with Xenos in multiplats. Better texture cache? Or were the TMUs somehow otherwise bottlenecked on 360?
Now imagine how they would look with a more significantly powerful hardware!
How does this gel with what's currently known about how the Wii-U runs Wii games?Crazy idea: Latte has no TMUs at all. Instead, it has multiple (eight?) TEV units. Wait, that actually kinda makes sense - the system needs to have at least one TEV either way, and a single TEV supports eight textures per pass. So eight TMUs + one TEV = 16 textures per pass. Eight TEVs = 64 textures per pass. Maybe it's just limited to eight simultaneous targets, but can apply up to eight textures/ maps to each target per pass?
We don't really know how backwards compatibility was implemented. But we do know that AMD designed the chip to be compatible from the ground up by reusing ArtX technology where it made sense, instead of bolting backwards compatibility on top of a new GPU. So I actually wouldn't be surprised if they did what I wrote: A straight up combination of a modern AMD GPU and an ArtX GPU, and replacing conventional TMUs with TEVs seems like an obvious choice. That would also put the low raw shader performance into perspective to some degree.How does this gel with what's currently known about how the Wii-U runs Wii games?
Will I provide the actual SDK specs? No. Despite making this thread and having the die shot available, some are still treating it as rumor. I'm fine with that, but providing the SDK information wouldn't change things. It's still coming from me and not an actual developer allowing you to still write it off as a rumor.
I'm fine with the WiiU not being a powerhouse. What bothers me is how is it possible that they sell it 350 euros and take a loss?!? The gamepad is not bleeding high end tech for sure and don't tell me the streaming tech went through 4 years of research and development...
Is it the custom chip? So, where is the interest?
I am no techie so I really don't understand these choices...
If the TEV unit hypothesis turns out true, it would add credence to the widely-held belief that the low number of cross-ports to the Wii U is caused by its architectural differences.
Edit: So, according to this hypothesis, the purported internal config of the Latte core would be 160 shaders : 8 TEV : 8 ROP?
Yes, sorry, that was somewhat poor phrasing on my part. The issue of heavy customisation impairing porting is a widely-known one.it is more than a belief. No matter if it is true or not multiple developers have said the architecture is to blame. One developers actually said Wii U architecture is not like ps360 or bx1ps4.
It's not a technology cost issue, it's a bulk economics isssue. Consumer electronics parts are contracted in vast batches, usually paid upfront (at least partly). Selling the devices built with those components amortises the volume-based BoM. Wii U doesn't sell. The result is easy to deduce.What bothers me is how is it possible that they sell it 350 euros and take a loss?!? The gamepad is not bleeding high end tech for sure and don't tell me the streaming tech went through 4 years of research and development...
Is it the custom chip? So, where is the interest?
I'm fine with the WiiU not being a powerhouse. What bothers me is how is it possible that they sell it 350 euros and take a loss?!? The gamepad is not bleeding high end tech for sure and don't tell me the streaming tech went through 4 years of research and development...
Is it the custom chip? So, where is the interest?
I am no techie so I really don't understand these choices...
I'm fine with the WiiU not being a powerhouse. What bothers me is how is it possible that they sell it 350 euros and take a loss?!? The gamepad is not bleeding high end tech for sure and don't tell me the streaming tech went through 4 years of research and development...
Is it the custom chip? So, where is the interest?
I am no techie so I really don't understand these choices...
Yes, sorry, that was somewhat poor phrasing on my part. The issue of heavy customisation impairing porting is a widely-known one.yeah it is just sad how naysayers want to try and put down the console at any turn... Like look it is not native 720p on Ghost... CONSOLE MAXED OUT CONFIRMED ON SAME LEVEL AS 360. It take a great engine, developers, and artstyle to make a great looking game no matter what console. i remeber people talking so much crap about PS3 perfomance and then uncharted 2 came out and blew the gaming industry away. Give the Wii U time.
The Wii U is fundamentally not capable of generating graphics dramatically better than Uncharted 2. Better yes, but not drastically better.
yeah it is just sad how naysayers want to try and put down the console at any turn... Like look it is not native 720p on Ghost... CONSOLE MAXED OUT CONFIRMED ON SAME LEVEL AS 360. It take a great engine, developers, and artstyle to make a great looking game no matter what console. i remeber people talking so much crap about PS3 perfomance and then uncharted 2 came out and blew the gaming industry away. Give the Wii U time.
Seems like there could be two decisions here working in parallel, not necessarily one as a result of the other. Solving two birds with one stone might have made sense.
What do you mean here specifically? They worked with IBM and AMD on components in the past. And agreed regarding the overheating.
The only problem there is that the other consoles aren't going to be stagnant. The bar will be set higher than the Wii U can achieve, and only go up from there. When a game comes along that blows away everything that came before (like Gears / Uncharted / Killzone), it's going to be on a Sony or MS system.i remeber people talking so much crap about PS3 perfomance and then uncharted 2 came out and blew the gaming industry away. Give the Wii U time.
This starts into a slippery slope.The Wii U is fundamentally not capable of generating graphics dramatically better than Uncharted 2. Better yes, but not drastically better.
The only problem there is that the other consoles aren't going to be stagnant. The bar will be set higher than the Wii U can achieve, and only go up from there. When a game comes along that blows away everything that came before (like Gears / Uncharted / Killzone), it's going to be on a Sony or MS system.
Didn't Apple ditch IBM because they couldn't get CPUs that scaled well without getting hot? I know it's not the same, but still.
The only problem there is that the other consoles aren't going to be stagnant. The bar will be set higher than the Wii U can achieve, and only go up from there. When a game comes along that blows away everything that came before (like Gears / Uncharted / Killzone), it's going to be on a Sony or MS system.
Apple ditched PowerPC in favor of x86.
Crazy idea: Latte has no TMUs at all. Instead, it has multiple (eight?) TEV units. Wait, that actually kinda makes sense - the system needs to have at least one TEV either way, and a single TEV supports eight textures per pass. So eight TMUs + one TEV = 16 textures per pass. Eight TEVs = 64 textures per pass. Maybe it's just limited to eight simultaneous targets, but can apply up to eight textures/ maps to each target per pass?
Given realities of the WiiU ecosystem I don't think this is much of a problem anymore.This.
When your platform is not only considerably weaker but also more exotic, you've got problems.
This starts into a slippery slope.
Nothing on PS4 looks dramatically better than Uncharted 2. Higher res, better texturing more pixel accurate effects. But nothing Earth shattering. Closest would be The Order and it's using a funky res and modest framerate to achieve the look.
Nice to see fairly impressive subsurface scattering going on in a console game though.
I think one thing that can be said for the Wii U is that the games at the end of the gen will look better than the launch games by a larger amount than the other two consoles. There's more room to improve there due to the complex architecture and lack of documentation that was rumoured when launch titles were being developed.PS4 is quite a bit more powerful than X1 and yet Ryse looks amazing. Wii U can't even blow the doors off ports from older machines, while these new systems are coming out of the gate with some pretty impressive looking games that blow it away in terms of technical ability. Looking closely at specs one can readily assume it has only started. Same cannot be said for the Wii U.
Personally I think 3D World is the best looking cartoon stylized game of any hardware to date. It's achieving it through meager means but I think it's a lot prettier than Knack. Which is visually trying too hard to be many different games. Certain assets almost looking like dumped assets from Uncharted.PS4 is quite a bit more powerful than X1 and yet Ryse looks amazing. Wii U can't even blow the doors off ports from older machines, while these new systems are coming out of the gate with some pretty impressive looking games that blow it away in terms of technical ability. Looking closely at specs one can readily assume it has only started. Same cannot be said for the Wii U.
Personally I think 3D World is the best looking cartoon stylized game of any hardware to date. It's achieving it through meager means but I think it's a lot prettier than Knack. Which is visually trying too hard to be many different games. Certain assets almost looking like dumped assets from Uncharted.
WiiU doesn't really have it's own Second Son to make the comparison stark.
edit: I mean I see where you're coming from.
But you're still talking about something theoretically weaker (through efficiency gains though more powerful) with an exotic architecture and limited development focus.
I think it's safe to say we haven't seen a fraction of what's capable while also knowing not to expect miracles.