$ echo "scale=4; 6.10496 / 4.53022 / (1333 / 729)" | bc
.7369
I have nothing more to add than either of these
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=m_mDTLphIVY
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Hj5vERbLtYI&t=49s
Please advise. Over.
$ echo "scale=4; 6.10496 / 4.53022 / (1333 / 729)" | bc
.7369
I have nothing more to add than either of these
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=m_mDTLphIVY
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Hj5vERbLtYI&t=49s
Please advise. Over.
Broadway outperforms Bobcat by 35.7% per clock while running SIMD-heavy code, which would generally be considered the chip's weak point. Furthermore, use of paired-singles by Broadway improved performance by 167.8%.
TY. I assume that's per core, per clock?
Wow, Broadway is not nearly as weak as some people made it out to be. I'm curious on what we will find out about Expresso when we get the die pictures. One reason why people are making theories of Latte having 160sp is due to them considering the CPU to be weak and unbalanced with a stronger GPU.Broadway outperforms Bobcat by 35.7% per clock while running SIMD-heavy code, which would generally be considered the chip's weak point. Furthermore, use of paired-singles by Broadway improved performance by 167.8% over simple scalars.
Edit: Interestingly, Bobcat performs 96.3% better in the same test when utilising its SIMD capabilities compared to operating on scalars. This means that Broadway's paired-singles is actually more beneficial than Bobcat's full-fat SIMD instruction set, in this case at least.
So, this is actually Wii's CPU, not WiiU's CPU... any idea what the performance gain might be? Not much i take it, except for the larger cache? Still, that would mean 1 U-CPU core at 1.25 GHz isn't necesarilly underpowered compared to 1 Bobcat core at 1.6 GHz. And if Durango is only using 6 cores, that would mean the gap is only 2x roughly? But how representative is this specific test?
So, this is actually Wii's CPU, not WiiU's CPU... any idea what the performance gain might be? Not much i take it, except for the larger cache? Still, that would mean 1 U-CPU core at 1.25 GHz isn't necesarilly underpowered compared to 1 Bobcat core at 1.6 GHz. And if Durango is only using 6 cores, that would mean the gap is only 2x roughly? But how representative is this specific test?
U-CPU's cores are clocked ~70% higher than Broadway, has 2x cache for two of the cores, and 8x(!!) the cache in the other one. Perhaps the switch of L2 cache to eDRAM would give it performance boost too. It is probably ~6-7x Broadway.
How much more capable are Jaguar cores compared to Bobcat's?
You are not mistaken. Effectively both CPUs do 2-way SIMD, though one of them pretends it's 4-way. Jaguar should be 4-way proper.If I'm not mistaken, doesn't Bobcat do 128-bit SIMD through two passes of a 64-bit ALU? Not to take anything away from your results, but worth remembering in comparison to Jaguar, which has a proper 128-bit SIMD unit.
Part of the high gain for Broadway comes from the overall better code produced by the newer compiler. I can run the test sans paired-singles, so we can try to figure out what comes from the paired singles alone.Broadway outperforms Bobcat by 35.7% per clock while running SIMD-heavy code, which would generally be considered the chip's weak point. Furthermore, use of paired-singles by Broadway improved performance by 167.8% over simple scalars.
Edit: Interestingly, Bobcat performs 96.3% better in the same test when utilising its SIMD capabilities compared to operating on scalars. This means that Broadway's paired-singles is actually more beneficial than Bobcat's full-fat SIMD instruction set, in this case at least.
Have you actually run it?On that test about 2.3x...
Broadway outperforms Bobcat by 35.7% per clock while running SIMD-heavy code, which would generally be considered the chip's weak point. Furthermore, use of paired-singles by Broadway improved performance by 167.8% over simple scalars.
Edit: Interestingly, Bobcat performs 96.3% better in the same test when utilising its SIMD capabilities compared to operating on scalars. This means that Broadway's paired-singles is actually more beneficial than Bobcat's full-fat SIMD instruction set, in this case at least.
So now that Aliens is getting panned and it was revealed Gearbox didn't even work on the main game for the main SKUs, can we finally admit Pitchford was spouting PR bs?
(Like I said all along)
So now that Aliens is getting panned and it was revealed Gearbox didn't even work on the main game for the main SKUs, can we finally admit Pitchford was spouting PR bs?
(Like I said all along)
So now that Aliens is getting panned and it was revealed Gearbox didn't even work on the main game for the main SKUs, can we finally admit Pitchford was spouting PR bs?
(Like I said all along)
What was he spouting?
So now that Aliens is getting panned and it was revealed Gearbox didn't even work on the main game for the main SKUs, can we finally admit Pitchford was spouting PR bs?
(Like I said all along)
That the WiiU was more powerful than the consoles of this generation.
Sure, but answer me this, why are you so determined to make the WiiU seem weaker than current generation? Same goes to USC-fan.
What does the Aliens being critically panned have to do with system power?
I don't follow Van Owens logic
Facts speak for them selves in the end.
it's just an unreliable comment randy pitchford almost a year ago where he made some vague claim about the wii U version of Aliens: CM being graphically superior due to "newer hardware" - people have been clinging to it for various reasons.
So are you saying it will look better due to competent developers?
So are you saying it will look better due to competent developers?
We know the GPU is weaker than the standard desktop variants of what its based onBecause we don't know the power
We know the GPU is weaker than the standard desktop variants of what its based on
We know the GPU is weaker than the standard desktop variants of what its based on
I'm not sure how that particular game being shit or TimeGate doing most of the development work has any relevancy to the topic at hand?So now that Aliens is getting panned and it was revealed Gearbox didn't even work on the main game for the main SKUs, can we finally admit Pitchford was spouting PR bs?
(Like I said all along)
After looking at the die, we don't even know what it's based on.We know the GPU is weaker than the standard desktop variants of what its based on
On that test about 2.3x...
The biggest difference really is the HSA support on jaguar. I think that is one of the main reason they both went with that chip.
Sure, but answer me this, why are you so determined to make the WiiU seem weaker than current generation? Same goes to USC-fan.
Why do you guys respond to them?
I left the scrolls to bind them back under their bridges in my car. I'm really sorry about that.
So now that Aliens is getting panned and it was revealed Gearbox didn't even work on the main game for the main SKUs, can we finally admit Pitchford was spouting PR bs?
(Like I said all along)
This isn't even true. While TimeGate think they did about 50% of the final SP game (plus some additional content) they haven't even played the finished product, so they don't know what content is in there.
Gearbox made most of this game.
Who said i was? I been getting flak from the fanboy since way before e3. Crazy thing I even way over shot the performance of the wiiu. I was called all kind of name so it nothing new.
Facts speak for them selves in the end.
I'm not. I think it's the same mostly.
I believe the issue is that you two spend way more time "poo-pooing" on Wii U than you do talking about the other consoles.
For example in the two current Wii U threads, Van Owen you have 14 posts while USC has 68. In four or five of the most recent PS4/Xbox3 threads, you two have a combined five posts that USC made in only two of them.
We know the GPU is weaker than the standard desktop variants of what its based on
Who said i was? I been getting flak from the fanboy since way before e3. Crazy thing I even way over shot the performance of the wiiu. I was called all kind of name so it nothing new.
Facts speak for them selves in the end.
Have you actually run it?
Not a bad ratio for me.
I wouldn't say I'm poo pooing Wii U, just being realistic about its capabilities, as I've always been while others think is a noticeable leap over current gen. Alrhought the current lineup does blow until Pikmin and 101 and its troubling that its struggling to get current gen ports.
Can't really hate on something like Orbis with what we know now. It seems to be very capable.
No, we don't. We don't even know what its based off of yet. In fact, there seems to be less certainty about it than before, plus more mystery about it.
See, this is kind of ridiculous. We can be certain it's not more powerful than a desktop equivilant, and there's not some secret Nintendo magic inside that is going to suddenly increase visual quality in games to any discernible level.
But we haven't found out what the desktop equivalent is yet.....
Maybe there isn't one.
Who cares. Either way, it's not a big enough unknown that we can't estimate what Wii U is capable of overall.
So, this is actually Wii's CPU, not WiiU's CPU... any idea what the performance gain might be? Not much i take it, except for the larger cache? Still, that would mean 1 U-CPU core at 1.25 GHz isn't necesarilly underpowered compared to 1 Bobcat core at 1.6 GHz. And if Durango is only using 6 cores, that would mean the gap is only 2x roughly? But how representative is this specific test?
See, this is kind of ridiculous. We can be certain it's not more powerful than a desktop equivilant, and there's not some secret Nintendo magic inside that is going to suddenly increase visual quality in games to any discernible level.
Some do, others disagree. Some (like Omega Force and 4A) say it's weaker, others (like Sumo and Rebellion) say it's clearly more powerful. Nobody has detailed hardware docs. We've seen what's inside, and got more questions than answers.The people developing games for it don't think it's a huge mystery and think its equivilant to current gen. Why would anyone ekes think otherwise?
And Espresso has lots of cache, potentially even atomic and multiversioned.Durango would be using Jaguar, not Bobcat, yes it's derivative but Jaguar has a lot of FPU enhancements. The FP unit gets 128-bit processing and a 128-bit wide data path, and 256-bit AVX processing. The boost to FP performance should be substantial, it will be more like the big chips (Core/FX) than a low power core in that regard.