Shadow of the BEAST
Banned
So its basically wii all over again.
Hope that pad can carry it like wii sports could.
Hope that pad can carry it like wii sports could.
-
Hey Guest. Check out your NeoGAF Wrapped 2025 results here!
Develop Rumor: Wii U 'twice as powerful as Xbox 360'
- Thread starter Solid warrior
- Start date
Because they aren't Nontendo...
That's what all this kind of arguments reduce too.
You can't see how they might have more than 1152MB of RAM or 457.14286 MHz GPU?
SolarPowered
Member
This thread needs a few roles of Duct tape. It is falling apart.
jeez
Eighty percent of this thread didn't read the article.
jeez
titiklabingapat
Member
OP didn't read the article, can't be said enough. IGN has a far better track record than many of these 'unnamed' sources.
Nobody said final devkits were significantly more powerful. Final kits are supposedly different and exceed the initial target specs in some areas, and that's it. Not that we've ever seen the initial target specs to begin with...
Thats exactly my point. People judged WiiU on initial dev kits, and they were shooting for something considerably better, which is 2x faster than current consoles.
WiiU announced(probably according to initial dev kits)>stronger than current gen 20-30%
WiiU targeted specs>2x faster
Thus conclusion from people that didn't expect it to be so much faster.
I think you don't get what I'm saying. "Exactly 2x times faster, 100% accurate" is a joke. But if you just try to ignore that part of joke, you can see what could 2x more powerful mean.Because they aren't Nontendo...
That's what all this kind of arguments reduce too.
You can't see how they might have 1152MB of RAM or 457.14286 MHz GPU?
jim-jam bongs
Member
The short answer is that there is no way to answer that question accurately since theoretical performance and actual performance are totally different things, hence why this claim is at best meaningless and at worst a load of moldy old bollocks.
Jason's Ultimatum
Member
What were the rumors for Wii? Twice as powerful as GCN? Even when you hear the word "twice as powerful", generally, in broad terms, you'd think games like RE4 and Twilight Princess would look twice as a powerful. I've owned Wii on and off, and in the end, I really didn't see any substantial increase in power over the GCN, except for maybe say the Galaxy games looking better than SMS.
I'm just going to wait until E3, because all of these broad generalizations is killing me.
I'm just going to wait until E3, because all of these broad generalizations is killing me.
That's the problem, though: According to most rumors, the very first kits (V10001) were already roughly three times as powerful as a 360 - three times the GFLOPS (~750), three times the cache (3MB), three times the eDRAM (32MB) and two to three times the RAM (>1GB).
but but but, thats not what you initially reported is it?
Than where the hell did we get those "20-30% faster rumors". If thats truth, than Nintendo will be company that made the biggest hardware advance in terms of their last gen console. Just imagine. "50 times faster than Wii!!!!"
Shadow of the BEAST
Banned
everything else equal 2x basically means you can double the framerate.
2x is really nothing.
Basically wiiu is a current gen system.
Based on?
It's exactly what I reported initially:
http://forum.beyond3d.com/showpost.php?p=1614288&postcount=406
http://forum.beyond3d.com/showpost.php?p=1614293&postcount=408
I find this threads "A is x times more powerful than B" pretty entertaining. IMHO as a programmer it is extremly hard to measure the difference of such systems with a single factor. For example: if you got one box with 1GB and another with 2GB and the rest is the same. How much more powerful is the second box?
Because the Wii U kits at the E3 were overheating if pushed. And where did you got the 30% thing? What we got was 50% from the DS guys.
Thanks, confusing.
That could be a question of the effort put into those games though. I think the best looking games on PS3 look better than the best on 360, but if it wasn't for that handful of Sony games that do push it, I'd assume it was worse, regardless of it's actual performance.
I don't think studios really tried to push the Wii because it's direction was so counter to that mentality.
Phoenician_Viking
Banned
01net, save usssssssssssss, and leak the damn specs.
Its just an attempt to double up a 360 without doubling everything in the system (some things slightly faster, some double, some triple). It has absolutely nothing to do with WiiU, in fact both the CPU and GPU are using totally different architectures. I'm failing to see the significance here.
SolarPowered
Member
I'm going to assume that if the Wii U is several times stronger than a 360 in the core areas(GPU, CPU and RAM) it should be several times stronger quite easily. Just making a 360 and adding another gig of ram wouldn't even qualify for a 2x jump as far as I can tell. What people in this thread say basically amounts to Nintendo using mostly 2007 tech with one gigabyte of RAM. It sounds ridiculous.
Would I be wrong in making that assumption?
Hcoregamer00
The 'H' stands for hentai.
Seeing all the knee-jerk reactions without putting it in the contact of the actual article is maddening.
Not to mention that using nebulous terms like 2x as powerful really doesn't mean anything. Did we forget that Nintendo is very good at engineering hardware and getting the most out of the power that they have? Even if the company did not make the console as powerful as the other two, they will definitely find ways to maximize the hardware.
Not to mention that using nebulous terms like 2x as powerful really doesn't mean anything. Did we forget that Nintendo is very good at engineering hardware and getting the most out of the power that they have? Even if the company did not make the console as powerful as the other two, they will definitely find ways to maximize the hardware.
I thought it was confirmed at E3 that the Wii U is at least 3 times as powerful as the current generation hardware?
In order to have a "point" you should write some lines of argumentation first. No, a single line of listing hardware doesn't count; especially not if that lists even includes the pile of shit called RSX.
In order to have a "point" you should write some lines of argumentation first. No, a single line of listing hardware doesn't count; especially not if that lists even includes the pile of shit called RSX.
herzogzwei1989
Banned
I honestly don't know what to believe anymore. Things are very fluid, it seems.
hardcastlemccormick
Banned
I got my GAF account at the best possible time, it seems.
EDIT: The seams, it seems.
EDIT: The seams, it seems.
If I use wishful thinking I can say its pushes twice the polygons with twice the texture resolution at 1080 p at twice the framerate. That right there takes way more than 2x the power of the Xbox 360.
How can anything regarding its power be confirmed without specs being released or leaked?
AngelSoldier
Banned
Uhm ... :lol.
Simplified, my point was that Sony was pushing tech much further then Microsoft was, at time of release.
Also at time of Release note that the RSX was in some ways better then Xbox's Xenos.
With a higher clock speed (550 vs 500) 300 minillion transistors vs 105 million ... Etc ...
You can do the comparison yourself:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/RSX_'Reality_Synthesizer'
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Xenos_(graphics_chip)
You are going to be a sad panda.
Hcoregamer00
The 'H' stands for hentai.
What will be maddening for NeoGAF is that Nintendo never releases official specs (anymore). Maybe it will change since the new hardware is very well capable of turning heads, but don't count on it. The specs will likely be leaked at some point, but it will remain hearsay until the hardware is released and a breakdown of the unit will confirm/deny the rumored specs.
Agreed, the Wii is the ONLY Nintendo hardware I have never purchased, because it was not in HD.
By virtue of having Nintendo keeping up with the other hardware, I will jump in and buy Nintendo consoles again.
JoshuaJSlone
Member
Why not? Regardless of how affordable or expensive the development is, if they were expecting X capabilities and ended up with only 0.7X capabilities or whatever, that could shoot holes in their plans.AngelSoldier said:
specialguy said:
With PS2 and PS3 Sony definitely tried to do more different things with their tech, but to the end user the result isn't appreciably different than where MS's more straightforward approach led in either generation.salpa said:
RSX in PS3 was 500MHz, though the original specs said 550MHz. I remember something about the pixel shaders being clocked at 550MHz though?
plagiarize
Banned
even if true, it wouldn't be like this gen all over again because what really crippled the Wii wasn't how many polys it could push and how many flops it could do, but that it was based on an obsolete archictecture.
the wii U isn't, and won't be in that situation making 'down ports' pretty simple even if it ends up woefully underpowered, certainly compared to this gen where you essentially had to make a whole new game that just looked the same.
bgassassin
Member
Well I can't completely blame the OP since that was the title of the article. Either the writer didn't get to select the headline since it doesn't really match the content of the story accurately, or the writer just did a bad job selecting the title.
Other than that I just see selective reading going with some here in the thread so I guess I'll bail out now.
Other than that I just see selective reading going with some here in the thread so I guess I'll bail out now.
Kai Dracon
Writing a dinosaur space opera symphony
No, this isn't Wii all over again.
One of the primary reasons the Wii ended up looking so poopy compared to the HD twins is there in the name: HD. Even image quality on the Wii was inferior to the output of the PS360 because Wii's technology was built for a previous generation of consumer electronics - not just a previous generation of game consoles.
Wii U, however powerful it is, will natively support HD output. It will also support contemporary rendering and shader technology, and have the ram to support the kind of expansive western developed games that dominated starting this generation.
No matter how powerful the PS4 / Xbox Next are, they're still going to be outputting 1080p like Wii U, and still going to be using technology that is "only" comparable to PCs of the last 2 years or so. Comparing Wii U to the next game consoles will not be like comparing Wii games to PS360, where even the basic resolution the system output made games look bad on HD displays.
The batshit panic and speculation over Wii U is mainly fueled by a mindless adherence to the meme that "NINTENDO IS NOW ALWAYS LAST GEN LOL", without people even thinking about the context of that notion.
But then, there's also going to be fireworks when Sony and MS' next consoles appear and the hot grafix don't look 100x better than Battlefield 3 on PC.
Hcoregamer00
The 'H' stands for hentai.
Bingo, by virtue of having Nintendo's Wii U use shaders and a programmable GPU that is compatible with the newest Open GL releases, the console could easily mitigate the biggest issue that they had with the Wii, which was not having equivalent ports for mutiplatform 3rd party games.
Nintendo missed out on so many ports this generation because it would have costed so much money just to make a Wii equivalent due to the different GPU architecture. With it being more standardized expect much more ports from the other consoles or be the benchmark console for a mutiplatform game if the Wii U has large marketshare.
-Pyromaniac-
Member
yeah this thread is pretty disgusting lol jesus christ. READ it line by line people. There is a line in there of importance that 99% have missed.
Wolves Evolve
Member
1. Developer hears from developer friend about Wii U's power.
2. Developer friend has opinion about relative power, uses relative term
3. Purple Monkey Dishwasher
2. Developer friend has opinion about relative power, uses relative term
3. Purple Monkey Dishwasher
People want and need to believe Nintendo will always be far behind the tech gap against a tech giant like Microsoft... only 20% more powerful? Not good enough, but if Nintendo is only 2x than 5x then that sounds more believable because Nintendo are tech idiots and cheapskates apparently
Plinko
Wildcard berths that can't beat teams without a winning record should have homefield advantage
Actually, it says "late last year," no? Wouldn't that be only a month or two ago?
majortom1981
Member
How are they getting the twice as powerfull as xbox 360? Double the ram? Double the clock speed?
If they go with two gens ahead cpu or two or three gens ahead gpu and say double the ram it could be More then twice as fast as xbox 360 if you actually program for it,
a cpu bump alone can be twice as powerfull but add a gpu that is twice as powerfull and say double the ram it could be more then that depending on how you look at it.
I would like to know how this source says twice as powerfull. Are they looking at just the cpu ? just the gpu ? All parts are twice as powerfull does not average out to be twice as powerfull for the whole system.
If they go with two gens ahead cpu or two or three gens ahead gpu and say double the ram it could be More then twice as fast as xbox 360 if you actually program for it,
a cpu bump alone can be twice as powerfull but add a gpu that is twice as powerfull and say double the ram it could be more then that depending on how you look at it.
I would like to know how this source says twice as powerfull. Are they looking at just the cpu ? just the gpu ? All parts are twice as powerfull does not average out to be twice as powerfull for the whole system.
Plinko
Wildcard berths that can't beat teams without a winning record should have homefield advantage
Those weren't the final devkits. Recent reports suggest that developers found the final devkits had more power than they originally anticipated.
Plus, look in the Wii U thread at what Zelda demos we've gotten and what the final games actually looked like. It's not even close.