I still thnk the same, gpu power is not the only thing you need to see.
-
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 technical discussion (serious discussions welcome)
- Thread starter blu
- Start date
I still thnk the same, gpu power is not the only thing you need to see.
Since you're here lherre there's something I tried to ask you a few times that never got answered and it still interests me. Originally you said WiiU's CPU cores were dual threaded, but it turns out they're single threaded and couldn't have possibly been dual threaded due to their nature (based on Broadway cores).
My question is why did you think they were dual threaded? Was there a change in CPU at some point?
My question is why did you think they were dual threaded? Was there a change in CPU at some point?
Sure. Neither was that the situation with Dreamcast & Xbox. (In fact, the difference in GPU there would have been a lot more dramatic)
No, it was an error/misunderstanding in my account, I thought I had corrected my error later, but I see I forgot about it, but it always was the same cpu in devkits. Sorry if I didn't correct this before.
As far as feature set goes there's no way the gap will be close to as big as Dreamcast vs XBox, as far as power goes? Its very hard to quantify, Dreamcast and XBox were very different, much more so than WiiU and any other next gen console will be. You're comparing a fixed function tile based renderer to a programmable immediate mode renderer. Or if you compare CPU's you're comparing RISC to CISC and also you have to consider that Dreamcasts GPU had no hardware T&L therefore its CPU had that extra burden compared to XBox. I think its a nearly impossible comparison IMO.
Well, we're talking about the overall package, so yes, feature set counts. And personally, with the limited understandig i have, i find that statement hard to believe, in light of recent revela(i)tions.
Fourth Storm
Member
I think the most we can hope for, after hearing about the rumored specs for Durango/Orbis, are 480p versions of multiplatform titles running in off-tv mode. I really hope many titles incorporate this feature, as its absence is the main reason why I am not making much progress in Zombi U. IMO, the whole second screen thing hasn't proven to be that groundbreaking of a feature in any single player titles thus far.
Is this even remotely realistic to expect, though? Are you suggesting such ports to feature 480p graphics being displayed on either the TV or the controller? Or suggesting spruced up graphics on the controller, with effects missing as soon as you switch to TV? (Essentially a low/high setttings difference between 720P on TV and 480P on the pad?)
Not sure what you're referring to. But Dreamcasts GPU was basically DX6 fixed function and didn't even support basic fixed function hardware transformation and lighting. XBox was programmable DX8 pixel and vertex shaders. Not only was it two DX versions ahead but they were two extremely important releases, taking graphics from the graphics chip to the GPU (addition of T&L) to the programmable GPU.
WiiU is a DX10.1 programmable unified shader architecture. PS4/XBox3 will be DX11 programmable unified shader architectures. WiiU will have less features but it won't be anywhere near the kind of difference we saw from Dreamcast to XBox.
Schnozberry
Member
Based on the Durango/Orbis leaks, they are closer in architecture to the Wii U than they are to the PS360. We might just see some competent ports after all. They probably will have to shave off detail and resolution, but it won't be like Dead Rising 360 vs. Dead Rising Wii, for instance.
I do wonder how a lack of backwards compatibility would affect early sales of the new consoles, though. I'm just speculating, but the differences in architecture make hardware based BC unlikely, and software based BC in consoles is always a roll of the dice.
OG_Original Gamer
Member
Its weird reading the Orbis and some Durango news. Particularly the discussion about Durango, its memory configuration. Its obviously similar to WiiU, assuming its a fact, but there is no "oh whoa its me" attitude being displayed.
I just hope Nintendo went for a big bus for bandwidth concerns. Please be 550gb/s.
I just hope Nintendo went for a big bus for bandwidth concerns. Please be 550gb/s.
Fourth Storm
Member
More like the latter, I suppose. I'm thinking more like upscaled subHD resolutions on the tv screen, but optimized specifically for the controller. That optimization could entail better framerate or added effects, as long as the image is being rendered natively at 480p and not a downscaled HD image. Is it realistic? Who knows. It depends on how Nintendo and developers choose to view Wii U once the other two consoles hit the market. I think that such a scenario would play to the machine's strengths rather than expose its weaknesses, as downgraded 720p ports are likely to do.
Schnozberry
Member
The difference between 10.1 and 11 is a small hop compared to the chasm we saw between the Dreamcast and the Xbox.
DeuceGamer
Member
In my mind, ZombiU is an average game without the GamePad but for me it became one of the best game experiences I've had in a long time with the GamePad...
I'm not sure what other genre's will benefit as much as the survivor horror genre though. Off-tv play is an excellent feature and Nintendo needs to do more with it and more to educate people on it. I also think Nintendo would benefit from developing Technology similar to "PlayOn", but in HD, and incorporate it into Nintendo TVii. I'm not sure what type of challenges they would have to overcome, but I wouldn't think it would be too difficult???
Well, i was referring to both feature set and flopcount. Also CPU's that are being developed for tablets. Sure, there is a large discrepancy in RAM, but this was also the case between xbox and Dreamcast. But again, i'm no tech-expert, it just doesn't add up especially taking into account that any technological advancements make
Yep, the way graphics pipelines worked basically changed completely between DX6 and DX8. DX10.1 to DX11 is definitely a very small change in comparison.
As I said its almost impossible to compare GPU or CPU power between DC/XBox due to their extremely different architectures. So any further comparison two WiiU and XBox3/PS4 is equally impossible IMO, opinion is fine but I wouldn't personally even try with such a comparison.
My comment was about architecture and feature set differences only. Believe me there's no comparison between going from DX6 to DX8 and going from DX10 to DX11. The former is a chasm in comparison.
Proof is already out there that they did not. Proof is in the games. IF this was the case then they wouldnt have this problems.
500 glfop is a pipe dream. Lucky to get to 350 for the wiiu
I was talking about lherre's statement concerning the gap being bigger between WiiU/Durango than Dreamcast/xbox. I wasn't talking about any of your statements.
You mean the ports?
Edit: I don't believe the deus ex machina mega bandwidth thing either, but I do believe we'll see fantastic results that will paint a better picture than what we have ATM, once (if) the hardware is leveraged.
I have a feeling you do not understand the meaning of the word "proof". Not that i want to insinuate one thing over another. But ports having problems, is hardly proof of anything.
Oh, sorry, just when you quoted me and said "I find that statement hard to believe" I thought you meant my statement
Schnozberry
Member
Since we don't really know the FLOP counts of any of the consoles in question, and we know all three appear to be using mobile parts (at least if rumors hold up), it would seem to me that the gap is closer than we might have thought. It's still pretty large, but I think Nintendo made some smart architectural decisions that should make some ports possible.
The really interesting thing to me will be the economics of it. Will Microsoft and Sony have to push the price of games up again? Will Nintendo be able to make a price cut for next Holiday Season? What price point will MS and Sony be targeting? It doesn't seem big to gamers who are use to paying the cost of being an early adopter, but if both Sony and Microsoft enter the Market at $400+, I could see Nintendo selling the Deluxe Wii U for $299 next Christmas and being highly competitive if they have the right software ready to go.
http://www.eurogamer.net/articles/df-hardware-orbis-unmasked-what-to-expect-from-next-gen-console - Eurogamers Orbis article
So, what does this mean for Wii U.
looks like wii u 30fps 720p and durango/orbis 1080p 60fps. it certainly doesn't look like they're to a level where ports would be unimaginable.
so basically downports of PS4/720 games to the WiiU should be possible, by reducing resolution and framerate, and cut a few effects (lower res textures also), but because of the similar architecture developers don't need to code a completly new game? Also these multiplats could exceed PS360 in the visuals. Actually, I'm ok with that.
The only problem is that third partys won't do it
The only problem is that third partys won't do it
Schnozberry
Member
Probably depends on installed base. The 360 and PS3 will probably still get ports for s several years.
JordanN
Banned
Some people need to understand not all ports are going to be the same. The level of downporting is going to be a case by case basis.
Why would a Rayman built for PS4 or 720 need to have 4x the graphical content removed for Wii U when it's possible it wont need to rely on the graphical heavy hitters (i.e tessellation)?
Same may apply to fighting games where all the action is usually budgeted to just the two characters on screen.
Why would a Rayman built for PS4 or 720 need to have 4x the graphical content removed for Wii U when it's possible it wont need to rely on the graphical heavy hitters (i.e tessellation)?
Same may apply to fighting games where all the action is usually budgeted to just the two characters on screen.
phosphor112
Banned
I don't see that happening. The ram differences alone are staggering.
that is true, but the last weeks I had the impression for most of GAF WiiU downports (good ones, no Dead Rising Wii) seemes out of the question. Now it seems, like downports are possible, with far better results than in the current gen and also with less effort
But only future will tell, if WiiU will get some competent ports. I believe because of the similarities in architecture nextgen verion ports to WiiU could bring a better performance than PS360 version ports, but if the WiiU will get third party ports they propably will port the 360 version with bad performance...
I see that as a pretty big thing. If these new consoles have a premium price tag, devs are going to have to spread their games across both generations for a good time, for longer than it has been in previous gens, with how high budgets are. Since there will not be much installed user base on Next gen systems. This will only benefit WiiU.
As long as devs actually do it, and don't use the lame excuse that all their games must take advantage of all the unique features of the system/gamepad.
If you're trying to imply Durango/Orbis will only be 4x Wii U you couldn't be more wrong.
PS4=~10 Wii Us ductaped together.
JordanN
Banned
Downports were always possible. The Wii U would have to stop being a console for that to happen.
It's more about effort that comes with downporting that obviously being too far from a certain target spec can prove to be painful.
The 360 held back the generation with DVD and the 2GB hard limitation on XBLA titles. If everyone is basing projects off at least one-layer-capable BD discs, you'll have improvements just from the floor jumping considerably for the amount of data variety you can have. Once the 360 is left behind, digital XBLA-style venue titles will see improvements because they won't have to cram themselves into the space the 360 allows.
Everyone starting with BD Drives alone will, at minimum, bump everything up.
JordanN
Banned
It was actually a response to the Wii U games running in 480p (where I assume PS4/720 was 1080p).
As for the actual difference, it's impossible to tell. Again, certain games could either be marginally to look no better than Wii U and others could be reaching 4-8x territory or whatever number is considered significant to developers.
Schnozberry
Member
It's probably closer to 4 than 10. The Wii U is comparable to a mid range gaming PC from 2010. The Durango and Orbis are comparable to mid range gaming PCs from 2012. If all of our hardware leaks are remotely accurate.
Nope, with a CPU that laggs behind a poor performing one from 2005 (Xenon) and a GPU that probably isn't much better than Xenos and RSX, that simply isn't the case.
Your fist mistake is stating that those two are comparable. And define "much".
heh I'm actually okay with that.
for one second, let's enter fantasy land where there is a Wii U version of every 3rd party 720/PS4 games
If the content is the same and the only hits are fps and the resolution, I might just go with the Wii U version most of the time + having some decent gamepad use like a simple inventory screen or maps. Except for action games, that has to be 60 fps and if the Wii U ver isn't 60 fps, gonna get the 720/PS4 ver.
Fourth Storm
Member
Then you should have quoted me rather than saying "some people." It's only proper etiquette.
I naturally assumed we were talking about games like Watch Dogs and CoD. Of course the necessary concessions will vary on a per title basis. We are all intelligent enough to understand that. I am not sure about your example of fighters, however, considering that even Tekken required some finagling to match current gen standards.
Cool. A new insider. Just have the mods confirm your status and we're good to go with your assumptions.
frankie_baby
Member
So you are saying the Wii u is equivalent to a couple of pocket calculators duct taped together, think I better sell mine now
phosphor112
Banned
No, a midrange PC from 2010 can run COD at 1080p with 60fps.
But you're right it is closer to 4.
frankie_baby
Member
I'd wager good money the Wii u could too, if any time, money and effort was put into the port
John Harker
Definitely doesn't make things up as he goes along.
I don't think you have to be that concerned. Not all games will likely be ported depending on feature sets, but I imagine that for the first two years at least, games are going to be coming out on X720, PS4, X360, PS3, and PC. Those games will also have a Wii U version, in all likelihood. So what do you consider that? A down port? An up port? Parity?
Who cares, choice is always good.
There's a problem with that, they show a graph showing RAM latency increasing by frequency, but that shows a misunderstanding of how RAM works. Higher clocked RAM may take more CYCLES, but not more time, because more cycles pass in the same amount of time as the slower RAM.
Midrange then was what, HD 5670? Or 4670? And at the same 1280x720 as the Wii U? I'd say very easily, yes.
Similar threads
- Poll
- Poll