Raonak
Banned
that sound right.... i think.
-
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 has 2GB of DDR3 RAM, [Up: RAM 43% slower than 360/PS3 RAM]
- Thread starter Horse Armour
- Start date
that sound right.... i think.
I'm buying all my movies on URay disks from now on. It'll be like when I bought all those GBA carts that played really shitty looking cartoons! Only, I guess they'd look better. Who knows!
Which means is going to be an smashing hit. GAF is always wrong.
SolarPowered
Member
A 43% reduction in speed? Jeez
I'm guessing there is some good news on the OP? News is coming in relatively fast.
I'm guessing there is some good news on the OP? News is coming in relatively fast.
GraveRobberX
Platinum Trophy: Learned to Shit While Upright Again.
Holy Shit @ Update, thread title change
WAT!?!.....
WAT!?!.....
DonMigs85
Member
Just realized that it's only double the bandwidth of the original Xbox's 64MB unified RAM.
BomberMouse
Member
What are the odds of a next revision with better ram bandwith? I think we are way past the era of relying on low hardware hacks so I don't think that's out of question.
Still, shitty to see a company releasing this crap at $300.
Still, shitty to see a company releasing this crap at $300.
Horse Armour
Member
0. It's a console so it's specs are locked down to whatever the launch systems ship with.
BomberMouse
Member
Not really, the PSP2000 had double the ram. Games still used only half of it, the other half was used as a cache and was handled at OS level.
chaosblade
Unconfirmed Member
~17Gbps was the maximum it could have been, not what was expected. Especially since they are apparently focused on latency and not bandwidth.
Other people know more about RAM than me, but as far as I know latency/timings will be lower at lower RAM speeds.
Other people know more about RAM than me, but as far as I know latency/timings will be lower at lower RAM speeds.
DonMigs85
Member
Increasing clock speeds is a no-no for consoles.
By the way, do we know for certain it's not dual-channel?
Doubling the RAM to use as a disc cache has nothing to do with changing the speed of one of the main parts of a console.
AwakenedCloud
Member
Unreal. How much could they have saved by halving the RAM speed? How could they think it was a good trade-off?
No console manufacturer has really done this yet exactly, but Apple is doing something like it with their iphone and ipad. It could potentially happen, but we shall see.
Opus Angelorum
Member
It's quite incredible, I can't understand how the hardware engineers thought it would suffice.
It's definitely not a cost saving measure.
I'm still waiting for the real, custom Wii U games. However, it seems to mean its going to be that much harder for 720/PS4 downports.
My mind is struggling to accept they'd gimp the RAM bandwidth so much.
Canis lupus
Member
Probably a couple dollars, definetly not in the tens.
Horse Armour
Member
Yes it is, what else could it possibly be?
Thunder Monkey
Banned
Yes.
This is now final. They might be able to free up RAM once that monstrosity of an OS is nailed down, but it will always have that bandwidth. Not insurmountable limitation... but a limitation all the same. Given the CPU speculation it probably won't be a limiter for it, but that GPU. If it really is expected to be the consoles strength... that bandwidth does it no favors. Probably where the 32MB eDram scratchpad comes in.
Am I just stringing together a bunch of words into a cogent whole? We'll see when people start responding.
ThoseDeafMutes
Member
Power saving measure? Reduced heat? Somebody with actual technical expertise would have to shine some light on this.
Karsticles
Member
Is it 43% slower overall, as in the system has 43% less power in its RAM?
Thunder Monkey
Banned
Apparently they never intended to. But we haven't seen much of how it comes together. We can clearly see it no likely PS3/360 games.
One dollar saved per unit is a fortune gained in the long run.
EatChildren
Currently polling second in Australia's federal election (first in the Gold Coast), this feral may one day be your Bogan King.
Try as I might, I simply cannot fathom Nintendo's logic here. Not for pricing, not for future proofing, not for performance, not for anything. On paper it just seems bafflingly illogical and unnecessarily crippling, to the point where I instinctively assume I'm missing something critical because of how silly this is.
I just don't understand this hardware or what Nintendo expects *shrug*.
I just don't understand this hardware or what Nintendo expects *shrug*.
A design choice.
Thunder Monkey
Banned
It does what they think they can afford going forward. The same uncertainty that inspired Wii technical specifications methinks.
So just in case it bombs they can afford to profit on it.
Opus Angelorum
Member
Well it's the old argument of 'more ram versus faster ram', and Nintendo have went with the former.
As a general guide:
More RAM = Better multitasking
Faster RAM = Superior performance (CPU related)
The GPGPU will save us.
Or Nintendo is really just concerned with whether or not it can run a Mario game. Either or.
Thunder Monkey
Banned
And I meant profit in both the hardware and in development costs.
Because so far their floor is 21 million users. Given the rise in dev costs can Nintendo survive going too high?
Because so far their floor is 21 million users. Given the rise in dev costs can Nintendo survive going too high?
Wolves Evolve
Member
"Lateral Thinking on Withered Technology".
Kabuki Waq
Member
So does this mean its terms of ports wii u owners will feel like how the ps3 owners feel now? Or is it even worse?
But...they're NOT profiting on this, which is the confusing part. With the Wii, as disappointing as it was, I could see how it was financially very viable, but not the Wii-U based on how they created it and priced it.
I'm gonna say in a couple of years Wii U owners will feel a lot like Wii owners now.
It makes me think there absolutely HAS to be something that they know/are thinking that we don't or are not hearing. It almost seems like they are intentionally gimping the hardware with very little to gain from it. I have a feeling there is a reason behind it, I'm just not sure it is a good one.
EatChildren
Currently polling second in Australia's federal election (first in the Gold Coast), this feral may one day be your Bogan King.
Yeah, I'm thinking something like this, but from what I know faster RAM wouldn't have been much more expensive, especially in bulk for manufacturing that Nintendo would purchase them. And, correct me if I'm wrong, RAM has actually been one of the better qualities of past Nintendo consoles.
This is just really slow, super cheap RAM seemingly not suited for the kind of console they're making. Slow PC RAM dumped in a console box, not good for handling textures and assets, and limited in comparison to the Xbox 360 and PlayStation 3, even when considering the quantity.
I don't know. My technical knowledge has it's limitations, so like I said I feel like I'm missing something. But everything about this, more than anything, screams aimless and dumb to me. And I guess that's just how it's going to be.
IrishNinja
Member
it's pretty puzzling, i can only assume the tablet cost way more than they'd budgeted for & looked at weird angles to shave costs? i keep thinking the biggest deciding factor for this next gen will be when UE4 takes off & seeing how big a gap the WU version is from the other 2, both in fidelity and porting costs.
Kabuki Waq
Member
Well thats a given. I mean how will the wii u ports fare until next gen systems arrive?
StoppedInTracks
Member
TheFLYINGManga_Ka
Member
Sorry, but I'm just not tech-savy. But can anyone give a little example how this slower RAM can effect games?
Seeing how Batman Arkham City and Darksiders 2 plays well, so from my understanding, current-gen games that are out right now will work well on the Wii U. But going forward, future PS4/720 games will be in trouble if they were down-ported, is that about right?
So we'll see a lot of Wii HD remakes and a bunch of current-gen GOTY/Ultimate editions?
Seeing how Batman Arkham City and Darksiders 2 plays well, so from my understanding, current-gen games that are out right now will work well on the Wii U. But going forward, future PS4/720 games will be in trouble if they were down-ported, is that about right?
So we'll see a lot of Wii HD remakes and a bunch of current-gen GOTY/Ultimate editions?
I hope you werent planning on watching a Blu-Ray....
Nintendo are clearly aiming for a gaming console more then a half baked media system like the 360. And I honestly applaud them for going that route.
I feel that some people here just want this system to BOMB because they dont want to invest in a new system.
The things that went wrong in the GB quicklook seems like things that will be ironed out in time. The PS360 UI's have been going through alot of change in their timespan.
Its the same with this ram issue. Lets wait and see the games perform. (Not talking about sloppy lazy ports like Batman here)
I never owned a Wii simply because Nintendo went catering for the wrong crowd with that. WiiU seems like more of a step in the right direction.
That it has lauch hick ups should not surprise anyone. At least noone who has ever owned a console...
SkyMasterson
Member
....
50 million units sold later and they would have saved $150 million. Assuming they saved $3 per unit.
Though Nintendo shouldn't be skimpy with this type of stuff.
perfectchaos007
Member
Well, I'm sure Nintendo's game development teams will be willing to spend the extra needed time, effort, and money to optimize what the machine offers, but 3rd party developers wont. Just like Wii this system is destined to have some polished looking 1st party games, but most 3rd party offerings will probably look rushed compared to the PS3 and 360 counterparts.
Makes me wonder how long Nintendo expects the systems lifespan to be. It will probably be only as long as 3rd parties are still making PS3 and 360 games which could be as long as 3 years from now. Unless the system has a respectable user base by then, I don't see 3rd parties throwing money at a watered down port of a PS4 or Nextbox game. 3rd party exclusives will probably be similar to the 3rd party exclusives we've seen on Wii. A few great games and a whole lot of shovelware.
I hope I'm wrong though, my WiiU is under the tree so I want to see it do well.
Makes me wonder how long Nintendo expects the systems lifespan to be. It will probably be only as long as 3rd parties are still making PS3 and 360 games which could be as long as 3 years from now. Unless the system has a respectable user base by then, I don't see 3rd parties throwing money at a watered down port of a PS4 or Nextbox game. 3rd party exclusives will probably be similar to the 3rd party exclusives we've seen on Wii. A few great games and a whole lot of shovelware.
I hope I'm wrong though, my WiiU is under the tree so I want to see it do well.
Thunder Monkey
Banned
Within a year they should have the hardware within manageable reach. If not well into profitability. And I'd bet Mario is what they hope to be the saving grace.
Mario kind of has a lot on his shoulders this time.