Wii U has 2GB of DDR3 RAM, [Up: RAM 43% slower than 360/PS3 RAM]

So for the less techie... what would one expect to give better results... 1GB of 17GB/s RAM or 512MB of 22.4GB/s RAM?
That depends entirely on what you are trying to do, and in this case also significantly on the rest of the memory hierarchy (that is, the flexibility and speed of both systems' eDRAM pools).

E.g. one might give you better texture variety while the other gives you better filtering quality.

I'm having trouble understanding this, you guys are saying its weaker then the 360 and PS3?
In terms of main memory bandwidth, yes.
 
Now you calm down, we still have no idea what is going on with the GPU.
So... The GPU is the only thing that could possible outperform the PS3 and 360?

Damn!

We were first promised around 4x the power of current, which was pretty awesome, then more news came and we were told to lower the expectation to about 2-4x Which was still fine. Then we were told about the CPU problems, becoming a potential bottleneck for the system...

... Now its only the GPU? The hell? I really am not that big on specs but still, how does Nintendo even intend on capturing the third parties when the competition releases their consoles?
 
That pad isn't cheap. Hopefully by their next system they'll go all out with hardware since the tech behind the pad should be cheap enough to allow for more wiggle room somewhere else.
bah. they'll just figure out some other gimmick to try and sell it with. Now that they've done 3d, motion controls, and screen-on-controller, I'm curious as to what they think the next 'big' gaming fad will be.
 
Any guesses as to why they went with 2GB DDR3 instead of say, 1GB GDDR5 or even GDDR3?

I'm going to assume Nintendo engineers aren't incompetent so they must have a good reason for gimping the memory so hard.
 
Slow memory is even worse on an unified memory system, as all system components are going to feed from the same place.
At every point in time, the CPU, GPU, DSP, etc are all going to be splitting up that same bandwidth.
 
Will be interesting to see if either Sony or Microsoft follows the same route for cheaper costing ram. A DDR3 4x2 GB (8GB total) running at 1600 (faster than WiiU's ram) can be bought for 50 bucks.
 

cyberheater

PS4 PS4 PS4 PS4 PS4 PS4 PS4 PS4 PS4 PS4 PS4 PS4 PS4 PS4 PS4 PS4 PS4 Xbone PS4 PS4
A next gen system with a memory pool slower then 7 year old hardware. How is that possible Nintendo.
 
Can't say that I'm surprised. Nintendo playing it cheap. Ugh. Sure the gamepad is nice, but if the tradeoff is gimped RAM and a console equivalent to 7 year old hardware, then I have to wonder what Nintendo was thinking. Wow.
 
So... The GPU is the only thing that could possible outperform the PS3 and 360?

Damn!

We were first promised around 4x the power of current, which was pretty awesome, then more news came and we were told to lower the expectation to about 2-4x Which was still fine. Then we were told about the CPU problems, becoming a potential bottleneck for the system...

... Now its only the GPU? The hell? I really am not that big on specs but still, how does Nintendo even intend on capturing the third parties when the competition releases their consoles?
Nintendo doesn't care if you buy third party games. They want to sell 70 million consoles and 20 million copies of Mario, Mario Kart and Nintendoland. Those games don't need good specs. They want to sell the system at a profit sooner rather than later. This isn't really new.
 
So... The GPU is the only thing that could possible outperform the PS3 and 360?

Damn!

We were first promised around 4x the power of current, which was pretty awesome, then more news came and we were told to lower the expectation to about 2-4x Which was still fine. Then we were told about the CPU problems, becoming a potential bottleneck for the system...

... Now its only the GPU? The hell? I really am not that big on specs but still, how does Nintendo even intend on capturing the third parties when the competition releases their consoles?
The 'magic' of the gamepad,i guess.
 
... Now its only the GPU? The hell? I really am not that big on specs but still, how does Nintendo even intend on capturing the third parties when the competition releases their consoles?
judging by the 3ds, they probably only have their eye on japan, and hope to be the inexpensive alternative to other next gen consoles or something. i don't think a lot of companies are going to build teams to figure out this rubix cube though.
 
Nintendo doesn't care if you buy third party games. They want to sell 70 million consoles and 20 million copies of Mario, Mario Kart and Nintendoland. Those games don't need good specs. They want to sell the system at a profit sooner rather than later. This isn't really new.
Except one of the main points of the Wii U, as stated by Nintendo, is that they are trying to re-capture the interest of 3rd party developers with this new machine, we'll see I guess.
 
Nintendo doesn't care if you buy third party games. They want to sell 70 million consoles and 20 million copies of Mario, Mario Kart and Nintendoland. Those games don't need good specs. They want to sell the system at a profit sooner rather than later. This isn't really new.
Ofc they care about third party games,why do you think they got bayonetta 2,wonderful 101,ng3:razor's edge as exclusives?
 
Except one of the main points of the Wii U, as stated by Nintendo, is that they are trying to re-capture the interest of 3rd party developers with this new machine, we'll see I guess.
Spoiler: they're saying shit their hardcore want to hear to make them feel confident about reinvesting in the system.

Ofc they care about third party games,why do you think they got bayonetta 2,wonderful 101,ng3:razor's edge as exclusives?
...that's your lineup to prove they care about third parties?

Where's GTA5?
 
It's really cheap, and this way they can reserve a lot for OS functions.
PS3/360 OS can already do a lot using a much smaller pool of RAM. Other than being cheap, how much could they possibly use for the OS features they have announced? Even if it has a lot of OS features, it's a gaming console so I don't think OS features are going to sell many Wii U consoles.

If Wii U is going to end up around the same or worse than 360/PS3, are they hoping to appeal to developers by making 360/PS3/WiiU releases viable deep into the next generation? Is their strategy to draw developer support with a potentially huge install last gen base that can take WiiU ports and make them ignore next gen?
 
It would be nice if we could get an official look at the entire spec sheet, confirmed down to the bone. This thread just feels like more speculation. We got a Wii U - Final Specs thread already LOL
 
PS3/360 OS can already do a lot using a much smaller pool of RAM. Other than being cheap, how much could they possibly use for the OS features they have announced? Even if it has a lot of OS features, it's a gaming console so I don't think OS features are going to sell many Wii U consoles.
Maybe Nintendo is banking heavily on TVii?
 
.. Now its only the GPU? The hell? I really am not that big on specs but still, how does Nintendo even intend on capturing the third parties when the competition releases their consoles?
I suppose the idea was to use the tablet to give third-parties a way to innovate their games outside of just throwing money at improved graphics.
 
Spoiler: they're saying shit their hardcore want to hear to make them feel confident about reinvesting in the system.



...that's your lineup to prove they care about third parties?

Where's GTA5?
Yes that is my lineup to prove they care,rockstar doesn't want to port GTA5 i guess due to the wiiu having a different architecture.
 
Except one of the main points of the Wii U, as stated by Nintendo, is that they are trying to re-capture the interest of 3rd party developers with this new machine, we'll see I guess.
I think what we'll see is a ton of ports. I just can't see devs investing much in it when they won't be able to port it any where. I mean, why risk the dev resources. Nintendo's going to have to go balls out if they want this system to be viable for more than the next 6-12 months. I'm talking new major releases like Zelda, F-Zero, Star Fox, etc within the next year or two.
 
PS3/360 OS can already do a lot using a much smaller pool of RAM. Other than being cheap, how much could they possibly use for the OS features they have announced? Even if it has a lot of OS features, it's a gaming console so I don't think OS features are going to sell many Wii U consoles.
I guess it's mostly about multitasking, e.g. running a web browser and game at the same time.

It would be nice if we could get an official look at the entire spec sheet, confirmed down to the bone. This thread just feels like more speculation. We got a Wii U - Final Specs thread already LOL
This thread is based on the part numbers of shipping units. It's the exact opposite of speculation.
 
Spoiler: they're saying shit their hardcore want to hear to make them feel confident about reinvesting in the system.
Companies say a lot of things. The weird business between Nintendo and EA recently surrounding the Wii-U seems to suggest otherwise.
Not entirely true though, other than the specs Nintendo really seemed to cater to third parties MUCH more than usual. That's why this news caught me off guard.
 
So... The GPU is the only thing that could possible outperform the PS3 and 360?

Damn!

We were first promised around 4x the power of current, which was pretty awesome, then more news came and we were told to lower the expectation to about 2-4x Which was still fine. Then we were told about the CPU problems, becoming a potential bottleneck for the system...

... Now its only the GPU? The hell? I really am not that big on specs but still, how does Nintendo even intend on capturing the third parties when the competition releases their consoles?
Well the GPU is probably the major component though I was expecting the RAM to be a lot faster. I've held the belief that next-gen engines should be scalable enough to support the WiiU, though with the news about the RAM, maybe not.

An important question, does having the GPU and CPU on the board sort of compensate for the lack in bandwidth? Nintendo seemed pretty keen to go that route, but what are the actual advantages?
 
Instead of being lazy, why not refute it with facts. Oh, and please don't use Durante's post and rearrange some words.
I honestly don't know what the answer is, but I just wanted to point out that post doesn't work when you don't post any fact to back up your own claim.

That post works when you post some analysis backed by facts and then someone just says "no." Then you can call them out on it. Not when both of you post essentially nothing.
 
I guess it's mostly about multitasking, e.g. running a web browser and game at the same time.

This thread is based on the part numbers of shipping units. It's the exact opposite of speculation.
I can't see people browsing GAF on their Wii U during the loading time between levels. Multitasking on a gaming console seems really pointless beyond a friend chat system.
 
PS3/360 OS can already do a lot using a much smaller pool of RAM. Other than being cheap, how much could they possibly use for the OS features they have announced? Even if it has a lot of OS features, it's a gaming console so I don't think OS features are going to sell many Wii U consoles.
The XMB on the ps3 has a fast if not the fastest response time. It is also 1080p. This is because of the speed of XDR main memory connected to cell itself.

Basically RAM size matters but also what type of RAM, whether it is split or unified and how it is used.
 
Well the GPU is probably the major component though I was expecting the RAM to be a lot faster. I've held the belief that next-gen engines should be scalable enough to support the WiiU, though with the news about the RAM, maybe not.
Next-gen engines will easily be scalable enough. They'll probably scale to cell phones. The issue is, will next-gen AAA console games be scalable enough without major cuts?
 
I suppose the idea was to use the tablet to give third-parties a way to innovate their games outside of just throwing money at improved graphics.
The innovation of the gamepad comes from added convenience, not by expanding gameplay.Maybe it could be very innovative in multiplayer games, but otherwise the great aspect of the Gamepad is the off screen play. At least that's what I humbly believe.