• 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.
  • The Politics forum has been nuked. Please do not bring political discussion to the rest of the site, or you will be removed. Thanks.

Wii U GPU base specs: 160 ALUs, 8 TMUs, 8 ROPs; Rumor: Wii U hardware was downgraded

Status
Not open for further replies.

prag16

Banned
Jul 12, 2012
12,184
4,384
860
Wtf is this garbage. A year old thread bumped, came in here figuring there must be some kind of new info. Nope. Just a TWO year old article that has already had a mega thread here in the past.

"I don't like thing." We get it. Move on.
 

Durante

Member
Oct 1, 2006
48,836
1
0
peter.metaclassofnil.com
I can't believe people on both sides are still invested in the discussion of whether the Wii U is really fucking slow or really really fucking slow. It is, but it also has Nintendo games. Deal with it.
 

Instro

Member
Jan 14, 2009
24,476
1
705
31
California
I can't believe people on both sides are still invested in the discussion of whether the Wii U is really fucking slow or really really fucking slow. It is, but it also has Nintendo games. Deal with it.

But Durante, someone is wrong on the internet.
 

DaSorcerer7

Member
Feb 2, 2009
4,741
0
990
I can't believe people on both sides are still invested in the discussion of whether the Wii U is really fucking slow or really really fucking slow. It is, but it also has Nintendo games. Deal with it.

And bayonetta 2, that's the problem. LoL
 

Vinnk

Member
Mar 10, 2006
3,203
0
0
Japan
www.famicomdojo.tv
I don't hate the wiiu, I do think the hardware sucks for a next generation console. I always loved Mario platformers and Zelda and even said the wiiu has the best exclusives. I just hate when people make up stuff about he graphics being way better then lastgen cause they don't wanna except the fact Nintendo gave them hardware on par with last gen consoles, And honestly the lazy dev part about every wiiu port was annoying as hell, they blame the dev but can't blame Nintendo for the weak hardware.

But my question is why do you care what people think? Why does it matter? People are wrong on a internet a lot, about a lot of different things. Why does the Wii U capture so much of your time and attention? It makes up a small percentage of NeoGAF discussions and it would be an easy task to avoid topics about it entirely.

What is it about people feeling that the Wii U has better graphics than the PS3/360 do you find so troubling? Will they benefit from this lie being dispelled? Is it bad that they are happy about the way the games they are enjoying look?

Luckily for you, there is no 3rd party support any more you won't have to worry about "lazy dev" comments anymore. That ship has sailed.

You say you don't hate the Wii U but the effort you are putting into your criticism of this system and it's games seems to make that statement suspect.
 

chadboban

Member
May 11, 2013
3,336
0
0
Wtf is this garbage. A year old thread bumped, came in here figuring there must be some kind of new info. Nope. Just a TWO year old article that has already had a mega thread here in the past.

"I don't like thing." We get it. Move on.

It's also a TWO year old article that already had it's own thread.

m.neogaf.com/showthread.php?t=468841
 

kick51

Banned
Apr 18, 2013
9,817
1
0
I can't believe people on both sides are still invested in the discussion of whether the Wii U is really fucking slow or really really fucking slow. It is, but it also has Nintendo games. Deal with it.

Im going with really really, but i dont care that much.



Careful, wouldn't want to see anybody get banned for backseat modding before ninjablade does for blatant shameless trolling.


Just a prediction!
 
Sep 11, 2007
26,921
1
0
I can't believe people on both sides are still invested in the discussion of whether the Wii U is really fucking slow or really really fucking slow. It is, but it also has Nintendo games. Deal with it.

I don't believe you, because Bayo 2 looks like a PS4 game (although I only played Nintendo consoles) and has the feel of 60fps, that Nintendo introduced in the NES era. Unlike all these PS4/Xbone 30fps games in 2014, disgusting.
 

USC-fan

Banned
Oct 9, 2005
7,115
1
1,235
What does that have to do with anything I just said?

Also, the 176 Gflops theory rests on the GPU also having fixed function shaders that give it far more performance to account for the fact that ALU's on the GPU are physically 80% larger than the 20 shader units that would make it just 176's. Its not simply a 176 /end capability. I linked directly to it when you went on that tirade in my PM box using this exact thread and the exact same arguments. You are constantly ignoring any information that is posted that doesn't fit your agenda and restating the same arguments.

No it doesn't.....
 

KHlover

Banned
Jun 26, 2013
13,783
0
0
Wow I never seen someone go so far with a specific agenda on NeoGAF before. I suppose there is a first for everything.
Not only neogaf. This shit got him permabanned from the gamrconnect forums. With IP address trace. He really has a grudge against the WiiU.
 

shark sandwich

tenuously links anime, pedophile and incels
Jun 9, 2012
3,862
1,617
760
I dont understand what the point is in a small box if it is noisy.

People here shit on the PS4s fans but playing a game the WiiU is by and large the noisiest console of the 3.

Such a backwards way of thinking.

That's probably the DVD drive, not the fan. Up until one of the major updates like a year after launch, Wii U would spin the DVD drive at full blast at all times if a disc was in it, regardless whether you were even playing the game on the disc.

I used to take the disc out whenever I was done with it to reduce the wear and tear, not to mention the noise.
 

Aroll

Member
May 24, 2014
1,276
139
535
I don't hate the wiiu, I do think the hardware sucks for a next generation console. I always loved Mario platformers and Zelda and even said the wiiu has the best exclusives. I just hate when people make up stuff about he graphics being way better then lastgen cause they don't wanna except the fact Nintendo gave them hardware on par with last gen consoles, And honestly the lazy dev part about every wiiu port was annoying as hell, they blame the dev but can't blame Nintendo for the weak hardware.

Most of the time when folks talk about "Wii U games being better looking than last gen", they aren't inherently giving the Wii U all of the credit itself, and more so talking about Nintendo's use of that hardware, which is creating some superior looking and better performing games than last generation. Obviously some of that is possible due to the hardware, but it's mostly possible due to how well Nintendo can take advantage of their hardware. They've said this many times, but their games are so good because of the close relationship they have to the hardware. Basically, Nintendo games look better than most last gen games because Nintendo simply can take advantage of the hardware better than other devs. Seems crazy saying that since those devs have had 8 years to get it right, but it is what it is. Nintendo is producing better looking games because they are phenominal developers that have the hardware catered to how they make games.

As for the "lazy dev" remark, that's just an undeniable fact. Madden 13 wasn't the same engine as Madden 12 because of the hardware. We can try and point fingers on that if you want, but it's simply not true. Fifa that year wasn't the exact same carbon copy of the last generation game because of the hardware. It wasn't a hardware restriction here, it was a conscious development choice. This is like saying the Wii U is why x game isn't at 60 fps - which is also false. 60 fps is a choice. It existed in games dating back to the arcade days. EA could have given us better ports, they chose not too for some reason. Hardware was likely not that reasons - but sour grapes? Probably. EA already knew they were going to abandon the Wii U before it came out.

AC III ran just fine. So why did ME 3 have to have massive performance issues if AC III didn't? Because it was a shoddy port. Think about it like this; The PS3 had a lot of shoddy ports too, yet it was more powerful than a 360. It's not always about what a system is capable of, but how folks can take advantage of what is under the hood and if they feel it is worth the effort. When it came to the Wii U - Ubisoft clearly put in more effort than EA. This is why Ubisoft games have only performed better with each Wii U release while EA games always performed bad. Could Nintendo have given better hardware? Sure. Would it stop EA from not caring? Probably not.

176 Gflops is just speculation, and as I just said again, its the directly tied to the theory by the people who actually stated it and made this thread. bgassassin and Fourth Storm. The entirety of the 176 Gflops argument relies on there being fixed function. Without it, the GPU has to be more than a 176 Gflops. The shader units are simply to big to be just 176.

Bingo. This thread wasn't conclusive evidence of anything, and it still isn't. It was always speculation. Even with leaked docuements and what have, they STILL weren't 100% even if you believe the documents and die pics. Not everything has been explained about the GPU, and likely it never will be because Nintendo doesn't share that information. Everything right now is based upon assumptions, meaning it is still speculation.

That's an extremely shortsighted way to look at the situation, and I'm saying this as someone who doesn't like Nintendo or their practices.

What you and like-minded people keep forgetting is that Nintendo brought out the U after the Wii. The Wii, for fuck's sake. A double-clocked, die-shrunk Gamecube with some extra RAM thrown on. For Nintendo, the performance jump is as big as from the PS1 to the XB360. It is, in all respects save raw power, a true next generation console. Sure, not the same 'next-generation' as its competition, but for that lay the blame on late-2004 Nintendo for deciding to recycle their at-the-time current architecture.

Sure, that's a fair statement. Nintendo obviously made the right call with the Wii however. What the wrong call was was waiting until 2012 for the Wii HD. Should have hit in 2009 while the Wii was just starting to come off it's high horse.That would ahve given them 4 years of viable marketability and when that started to sink, they would have a new console maybe this year that is closer to what the others have.

Lol you think neogaf would allow this thread to exist if it was just speculation. the 176 Gflops count is pretty much a fact.

Uh, what? As an avid reader of NeoGaf since these forums have been around (reader, only a more recent member) there are tons of threads on here that are all about speculation - this being one of them. Yes, the title now claims that it is 160 ALUs, but even the folks that make those claims would tell you that it's not definitive, just the most likely scenario - not that ALU's are literally everything that matters of course, but you keep bringing it up.

The only thing noisy about my Wii U is the disc drive. When playing digital download games the console is silent.

You could have a dust problem. I use this on my electronic devices to clean out the dust.

Yeah, I'd look into the dust issue. My Wii U is nearly silent, and that's using a disc. I can only hear it spin if I get up close to it. By no means should the Wii U be really noisy at all. It could be a faulty drive (even if it still works) or it could be a dust issue. The one time mine did make noise, I used the official nintendo wii u cleaning kit and it vanished, so I assumed it was dust. I can't hear the thing at all and I have it on pretty frequently.

This is literally in the first post.


Its only fact assuming the rest of what I pointed out was true. The theory is that its either 160 ALU(176 Gflops) with fixed function shaders taking up the rest of the space in the ALU or its 320 ALU(352 Gflops).

I'm not going to continue repeating the same things which you just completely ignore entirely.

This leads into the whole point of this thread - it IS speculation, admitted by the people who created it. That this "fact" is based on an assumption, rather than hard facts. This thread can exist as speculation like many other threads do. We don't 100% know for certain what makes the Wii U tick. That's a fact. Not knowing means that the 160 ALU claim is still speculation. The fact the OP itself points this out already defeats your argument. We're not telling you who or who not to trust, we're saying that the people you do trust are admitting it's an assumption based ordeal. Thus, speculation. Not fact.

My point isn't that this is wrong. I think that Wii U GPU has 160 ALUs indeed. My point was that you claimed that it wouldn't be here if it was speculation.
And I'd say that, as of today, we still don't know some things about this GPU.

Bingo, and the people he trusts state as much. We don't know everything and assumption are made. It's almost as if HE doesn't read the people he trusts on this matter as much as the rest of GAF is doing. Instead, he focuses on people he doesn't trust, even when he brings up the exact same points the people he trusts do, where they openly admit there is speculation involved.

yes I claimed this thread wouldn't exist if it was just based on wishful speculation, clearly it not, it backed by facts and the leaked documents.

But it is based on speculation. The leaked documents and die shots, combined with dev remarks, only go so far. Heck, even dev remarks don't tend to help much, because if they don't have proper documentation from Nintendo they aren't going to be able to really see what the hardware can do. None of this adds up to knowing what exactly is in the GPU, and even the folks that claim 160 ALU will tell you that it's not defintiive. It's not a fact. It's an educated theory, but not proven. Facts are things that are undeniably true. 160 ALU is not undeniably true, just a likely outcome.

Setting all of this aside...

The real question is why it's worth you constantly trying to tear down the system. If you don't want to feel the graphics on Nintendo games are any better than what we got last generation, that's your choice. Other places like Digital Foundry tend to disagree, constantly pointing out aspects of the games that are doing things better than what similar games did last generation - and even if that better wasn't a giant leap forward, it was still better, suggesting that the more modern hardware design is in fact capable of doing stuff the old hardware can't.

There's that one dev remark claiming the Wii U can punch above it's weight - that it does more than meets the eye in many regards, evne if it has downfalls. In other words, the Wii U does a few things very well - better than last gen - and other things worse. Thus it's very unique in how it is put together, but as we have seen from Nintendo... it seems directly catered to how they make games, which is why they seem so "impressive" to many people. It's catered to Nintendo design, not 3rd parties (which is what the Xbox One and PS4 are catered towards).
 
Status
Not open for further replies.