MadeInBeats
Banned
Story translation = Don't come to us for Wii U development advice.
-
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.
Eurogamer: Chat with Wii U developer about the general performance of the system
- Thread starter Vic
- Start date
walking fiend
Member
So you are disappointed because the producer says Wii U CPU is weak, but you think he is blurting out things that shouldn't be taken seriously... OK
KojiKnight
Member
Not sure why anyone is trying to over rationalize what was said. It matches all previous rumors we've had lately to a T.
CPU is less powerful outright than PS360, easily imaginable since the CPU is much lower TDP. Devs also say they think they can get more out of it. This also makes sense because it's a different architecture than PS360 and no launch window game is going to push a system.
Finally, he says that the graphics power is significantly better and that there are a lot of uses for all that extra ram. The latter we knew for a fact, the former has been heavily hinted at since the console was announced.
Why are people trying to take more out of this than what was said? Sure, Warriors Orochi and by extention dynasty warriors games all look like shit and Tecmo-Koei is terrible at pushing a system in those games but they never said "We don't think anyone can make games prettier than us" or "everyone is having problems working this CPU to make anything better than current gen". Only that they were still having problems with it.
This article breaks down to this... "A developer says the Wii U processor is slower than PS360, but that they haven't fully tapped into the system yet. The developer goes on to say the GPU is noticably more powerful and plenty of extra RAM." I think that's as clear cut as we're going to get until the system is launched.
CPU is less powerful outright than PS360, easily imaginable since the CPU is much lower TDP. Devs also say they think they can get more out of it. This also makes sense because it's a different architecture than PS360 and no launch window game is going to push a system.
Finally, he says that the graphics power is significantly better and that there are a lot of uses for all that extra ram. The latter we knew for a fact, the former has been heavily hinted at since the console was announced.
Why are people trying to take more out of this than what was said? Sure, Warriors Orochi and by extention dynasty warriors games all look like shit and Tecmo-Koei is terrible at pushing a system in those games but they never said "We don't think anyone can make games prettier than us" or "everyone is having problems working this CPU to make anything better than current gen". Only that they were still having problems with it.
This article breaks down to this... "A developer says the Wii U processor is slower than PS360, but that they haven't fully tapped into the system yet. The developer goes on to say the GPU is noticably more powerful and plenty of extra RAM." I think that's as clear cut as we're going to get until the system is launched.
Nintendo is dumb.
Because of course the CPU isn't worse than the ps360 but because of its different nature it doesn't perform as well if you are porting games/it's the first time developing on it but Nintendo had to do everything possible that this console out of the box even if handled by the worst developer on earth should've performed at least like the 360...
Nintendo it's saying that is trying to bring third parties on board but in the end they aren't doing that much and it's only babbling for the fans.
Because of course the CPU isn't worse than the ps360 but because of its different nature it doesn't perform as well if you are porting games/it's the first time developing on it but Nintendo had to do everything possible that this console out of the box even if handled by the worst developer on earth should've performed at least like the 360...
Nintendo it's saying that is trying to bring third parties on board but in the end they aren't doing that much and it's only babbling for the fans.
Well the visuals don't really tell you the whole story about what is going on under the hood. They are Unreal Engine games that look like crap, even though they have a powerful engine under the hood.
I'm sure the first thing this guy did, when he saw the dev kit, was write some internal benchmarks and tests to figure out how bhp the CPU has.
OT but saving energy is a global issue. We have finite resources. We all need to do our bit to make things more sustainable. Think of the world wide success of Japanese cars that were efficient and used less fuel. That's probably how the Big N is thinking.
grimshawish
Banned
What even is this?
----------------------------
Anyways - all this is just more to say the CPU is a bit tricky; its different. Some devs will likely manage better than others; but it might be good to be careful preordering some games before reviews come in. Least until some devs are trusted with the hardware
Each time these statements arise, I keep waiting to hear something definitive, but I usually get some disclaimer or the other - like X game is a port, or not enough time to optimize, or in this case, the developer admitting that they don't yet know how best to harness the power of the console.
Wii U's CPU is clocked slower. That's the only sure statement I get from all these comments, but we know clock-speed doesn't tell the whole story. I don't think we know enough to so boldly state that Nintendo gimped the CPU, as some are doing. Eversince GameCube, Nintendo have been very picky about having balanced hardware. I'm sure everyone remembered when the downgraded Flipper, and boosted Gekko's clock solely for that reason. Obviously, they are aware of the unique strengths of Wii U's CPU and how they intended it to be used. Is the code highly optimized for the OoOE CPU? Is the sound processing offloaded to the DSP? Are the GPGPU functions being exploited? These questions are never addressed in these comparison, and is likely too early for them to be adressed.
It's still very early in the console's life(heck, it's not even out yet), and it seems that impressions vary a bit - naturally. While this developer seems to be blaming a weak CPU for the (lower)number of animated characters they are able to manage on screen in comparison to what they can do on PS3/Xbox360, this next developer implies that such a feat is a breeze for the console.
"The Wii U hardware has a great architecture and, most importantly, it is easy for developers to utilise its power. For instance, we have a very action-heavy game with literally thousands of animated objects, but had no problems rendering the complete gameworld, twice, for the Wii U controller display in two-player mode."
http://digi.vg/topics/214723/shinen...etro-wii-games-in-hd-would-look-better-than-m
Thousands of animated objects? No problems rendering world twice? Easy to utilize it's power? What is this developer doing differently with Wii U that others are not? Could be a host of things! Point is, these types of statements are much better appreciated once the developer had enough time to utillize the strengths of the hardware.
Wii U's CPU is clocked slower. That's the only sure statement I get from all these comments, but we know clock-speed doesn't tell the whole story. I don't think we know enough to so boldly state that Nintendo gimped the CPU, as some are doing. Eversince GameCube, Nintendo have been very picky about having balanced hardware. I'm sure everyone remembered when the downgraded Flipper, and boosted Gekko's clock solely for that reason. Obviously, they are aware of the unique strengths of Wii U's CPU and how they intended it to be used. Is the code highly optimized for the OoOE CPU? Is the sound processing offloaded to the DSP? Are the GPGPU functions being exploited? These questions are never addressed in these comparison, and is likely too early for them to be adressed.
It's still very early in the console's life(heck, it's not even out yet), and it seems that impressions vary a bit - naturally. While this developer seems to be blaming a weak CPU for the (lower)number of animated characters they are able to manage on screen in comparison to what they can do on PS3/Xbox360, this next developer implies that such a feat is a breeze for the console.
"The Wii U hardware has a great architecture and, most importantly, it is easy for developers to utilise its power. For instance, we have a very action-heavy game with literally thousands of animated objects, but had no problems rendering the complete gameworld, twice, for the Wii U controller display in two-player mode."
http://digi.vg/topics/214723/shinen...etro-wii-games-in-hd-would-look-better-than-m
Thousands of animated objects? No problems rendering world twice? Easy to utilize it's power? What is this developer doing differently with Wii U that others are not? Could be a host of things! Point is, these types of statements are much better appreciated once the developer had enough time to utillize the strengths of the hardware.
manueldelalas
Time Traveler
LOL, we are now discussing next gen graphics based on a Warriors game... the game with the best graphics ever made by the most technically capable developer out there...
I think the Wii U is in the best position right now, will probably dominate Japan completely (as it has DQ and MH confirmed exclusives, if they are not in the future, it doesn't matter, because right now they are), just like the 3DS, and it will probably dominate next gen.
It will also help that gamers have unrealistic expectations about the next PS and Xbox, so Sony and MSFT are on a loose loose situation here; they are launching much later (are there even dev kits out there?) with a ridiculously expensive machine to try to meet those expectations (they won't); and they'll have a stupid high price or loose billions of dollars launching at a good price. Either way they loose.
Next generation is going to be interesting, because studios will stop pursuing graphics; games will be more about innovation and new markets. Sure, a few developers will push graphics, but they will be not important at all; just like what happens with 3DS and VITA. The VITA is more capable, but you struggle finding games there that look better than RE Revelations, and nobody cares about that.
I think the Wii U is in the best position right now, will probably dominate Japan completely (as it has DQ and MH confirmed exclusives, if they are not in the future, it doesn't matter, because right now they are), just like the 3DS, and it will probably dominate next gen.
It will also help that gamers have unrealistic expectations about the next PS and Xbox, so Sony and MSFT are on a loose loose situation here; they are launching much later (are there even dev kits out there?) with a ridiculously expensive machine to try to meet those expectations (they won't); and they'll have a stupid high price or loose billions of dollars launching at a good price. Either way they loose.
Next generation is going to be interesting, because studios will stop pursuing graphics; games will be more about innovation and new markets. Sure, a few developers will push graphics, but they will be not important at all; just like what happens with 3DS and VITA. The VITA is more capable, but you struggle finding games there that look better than RE Revelations, and nobody cares about that.
MadeInBeats
Banned
LOL, NeoGAF.
iamshadowlark
Banned
Wait what?
Durante already covered both in this thread.
Damn, it's kinda scary how closely Wii U resembles the Wii when compared with current gen. consoles at the time.
Wii = Double RAM of Xbox
Wii-U = Double RAM of Xbox360
Wii = CPU weaker than Xbox's CPU
Wii-U = CPU weaker than Xbox 360's CPU.
:/
Wii = Double RAM of Xbox
Wii-U = Double RAM of Xbox360
Wii = CPU weaker than Xbox's CPU
Wii-U = CPU weaker than Xbox 360's CPU.
:/
As an OoOE processor, should it not be more forgiving of less-than-optimised code than those CPUs in 360 and PS3?
I never heard developers complain about performance deficits when porting back multiplat games to PC because the CPUs there are also 'different'.
I'm sure there's more optimisation to be done than many launch game devs can afford right now, but architecturally I doubt we're talking about some Cell level of esotericness, where with time devs will find a lot of headroom to tap. It's probably a fairly vanilla symmetric multicore Power.
I think in the heel of the hunt it sounds like there is underlying performance gap on the CPU side. That would have been unsurprising vs PS3 with heavy compute workloads (indeed, other new systems' CPUs are unlikely to be roundly better than Cell here), but it's slightly more surprising vs 360. It is not too surprising in light of the power draw Iwata mentioned, though.
huh? Don't tell me that you guys are thinking that this situation doesn't affect even a little the will of third parties to develop on WiiU? It's not the first time we've heard that the cpu is giving developers some troubles...
The first thing you do to appeal developer on your machine is to make it easy as fuck to develop for it, now we have developers that thankfully are good enough to port their games in matters of days and others that are struggling to have performance they would
how can you even argue with this is beyond me...
Remember when I said that I was keeping my expectations low and that it wouldn't surprise me if Nintendo gimped their system to the point that it may be even weaker than the PS360 and you guys said I was out of my mind, that there was no reason to believe this even though precedent was already set?
Well what now, bitches?
Well what now, bitches?
That was pure marketing BS. The main reason they down clocked the GPU was because of yield issues at NEC manufacturing. So they up clocked the CPU to compensate.
And as of late Nintendo has been making some odd design choices. Recent Nintendo hardware like the 3DS has not been as elegant as the Gamecube was.
sure. You buy one for Nintendo games first, and perhaps in the first year you might buy some of the multiplatform games for it, but then likely switch to PS4/720 in 2014.
For those that are single console buyers though, they are potentially in a better position with WiiU. If they're Nintendo fans first and foremost, then with Wii they've suffered with lack of access to most 3rd party multiplat titles. At least they're starting on the right foot this time. If you're willing to accept that your multiplatform titles won't be the most beautiful, you'll be fine. Thats similar to having a lower end PC that you like to game on - you accept the compromises
This man is well informed and makes a very reasonable statement.
You forgot to add that those thousand diffrent animatad object means nothing if they are the same or are ruled y same AI for groups.
For example Heavenly Sword had xxxx enemies on screen but only closest to played had individual AI.
Lair had in one moment above 10k and most of them had only group AI.
GPU can render it as he said but CPU is the one that process AI. If you gimp on CPU it will create problem because GPU can't utilize it's power to full extend.
For my HD4850 on PC i need something like 3Ghz dual core for my HD6870 i need something like 4core 4Ghz to be used fully in high res.
And aside from those comments of Wii U CPU we simply see gameplay for Wii U which isn't anything above this generation.
If Wii U had power it would run Darksiders 2 in 60FPS@720p or 30FPS@1080p. resolution isn't something hard to change which means it just doesn't have power above this generation and looks like it is only small improvement.
We see Zombii U as best looking game for Wii U and it isn't best looking console game currently. Name it as you want early game , 1st gen developers don't know hardware yet but truth is that when Wii U will release it;s second gen games there should be next generation on market already and all that graphical upgrade with 2nd gen games will be meaningless.
Trust me if Wii U had power to begin with Nintendo wouldn't run Nintendo land in 720p.
In my opinion Wii U controller is problem here. Game need to render something for Wii U controller and it's taking it's tool for overall performance of system. Without it games would look a notch better but overall it would be a lot better with this notch already.
DaSorcerer7
Member
SquiddyCracker
Banned
Cheaper electricity bills (which is also good for the environment).
I guess this doesn't register as a bullet point for most people, unfortunately.
Haunted
Member
Bam, make it a sticky.
walking fiend
Member
I am convinced some people are just desperate to use whatever possible as approval to their obviously uninformed and hypothetical knowledge which were initially based even on more expectations from Nintendo's archaic hardware direction.
Basically no one here knows shit about Wii U CPU and specially development for Wii U, yet they state their opinions/biased beliefs as scientific facts.
This is the exact reason to go gpgpu. Use the gflops of the gpu.
Gemüsepizza
Member
What? This may be true for the PS3, but not so much for the Xbox 360. Of course there is a trend to utilize the GPU more, but that does not mean that PS4 and Xbox 3 won't have a powerful CPU which absolutely destroys current CPUs including the Wii U. And having such a weak CPU certainly does not help the Wii U with getting PS4/Xbox 3 ports.
..........
"Not nearly as strong" we don't know anything about next gen consoles. Not nearly can be changed in future to far worse..
walking fiend
Member
Honestly, I would be totally surprised if Nexbox/PS4 doesn't destroy Wii U graphic capabilities even if they use a 360/PS3 CPU, merely their GPUs may be powerful enough to ensure 3x jump. It's just a given the CPU will be quite more powerful too.Gemüsepizza;42383553 said:
However, it doesn't contradict what he says, which is basically that Wii U CPU may not actually be a bottleneck for the system if the codes are optimized for its architecture.
MadeInBeats
Banned
You're out of your mind.
I did actually, I was strictly referring to the CPU. As I said, we know the Wii-U has double the RAM, and if we're lucky, maybe a more powerful GPU.
I'm generally pro-Nintendo, for the record.
Haunted
Member
I had to buy a new freezer because my old one just used up energy like some sort of black hole. Will get that cost back within 5 years with the new machine. Electricity is fucking expensive, man.
That said, since consoles are luxury items that aren't on all day I'd rather take a hit on power consumption if it means more power.
Then just go with
Better GPU
Gimped CPU
More RAM
walking fiend
Member
I didn't say you are hating Nintendo or have some agenda, but disregarding the last paragraph of the interview while clinging to "compared to PS3 and Xbox 360 is the CPU power is a little bit less", stated by a producer of a team that is known NOT to be technically efficient with hardware, sounds illogical.
I don't believe being pro-Nintendo means approving whatever bullshit they pull-off, it may actually be more discouraging for some fans
[Clark Gable]
Banned
Do people in here honestly believe that Wii U will be lead platform for next gen titles? Are you out of your fucking minds? Have you not read the writing on the wall? Just look at the Stars Wars 1313 thread update, that's all you really need to know. Keep your expectations in check.
You need to l2read. Let me make it as clear as possible.
Producers usually aren't good with specs.
If they indeed comment on them, they have learned this from their team.
Producers don't want to piss off anyone.
=
Why would a producer downplay the WiiU?
Or should we call it just current gen ? It's not like most of people will notice difference between games for Wii U and standard x360/PS3 games.
I think Nintendo is trying to recreate succes of Wii introducing new gamepad and gimping hardware. Problem is people don't care now for montion gaming or touch screen as they used too.
2 years ago that move would be amazing that would coexist with new tablets but now when most of casual gamers are just buying games for 0.99$ and are feed with games for their tablets and phones i don't see them jumping on Wii U like it was hot new thing.
We see that already Wii as console lost it's apeal and x360 and Ps3 are still going strong.
What will decide thought fate of Wii U as good console overall will be third party support. Publishers and devs right now are in difficult position:
Wait a year and focus right now on current platforms or change dev pipe to Wii U and hope that next consoles will be not that much different.
One thing is sure if new consoles from both MS and Sony will be vastly more powerfull it will only mean one thing for Wii U. Shitty ports as we saw that on Wii.
Graphics Horse
Member
It will be current Gen once it's released, and Wii will finally be last gen. so not long to wait.
It needs to be said again that the Wii U GPU is a GPGPU (and that it has a standalone DSP which, if properly used, saves a lot of CPU power).
I.e. a GPU that can do what is traditionally CPU work.
I.e even if the CPU is slower it doesn't matter until we know what the GPU is capable of.
This source isn't very reliable either. It does seem to further confirm that the CPU is on the weaker end however.
EDIT: Fixed spelling and wrong assumptions.
I.e. a GPU that can do what is traditionally CPU work.
I.e even if the CPU is slower it doesn't matter until we know what the GPU is capable of.
This source isn't very reliable either. It does seem to further confirm that the CPU is on the weaker end however.
EDIT: Fixed spelling and wrong assumptions.
it's not the Wii all over again because the Wii was just a revision of the GameCube.
Wii U is a "Gen leap" over the Wii but the problem is the Wii wasn't a "Gen Leap" over the GameCube.
Hahaha I like this idea. Last gen, PS3's GPU was so weak that it regularly needs help from the CPU to perform like the 360.
Now the WiiU has the opposite problem.
Wii had 88 mb of memory. Xbox had 64. Last I checked....not double!