Rumor: Wii U final specs
- Thread starter EatChildren
- Start date
Uh, I'm not a coder of 3d engines, but aren't these numbers really off?
From what I know, 10M vert/s is less than what an Xbox can do. The first Xbox.
100 Mvert/s is more in line with the capabilities of PS360, so the storage for them should be more like 120 MB.
Also, but maybe I'm wrong in this, I've always supposed numbers like 100 Mpps thrown around by devs are, how can I say, somehow strictly related to what's displayed on the screen, not the entire amount of polygons stored in the RAM at a given time.
I suppose it's needed to keep in memory a good amount of data not immediately displayed: various versions of the 3d models for LOD, at least part of the 3d structure of the game level in use (if not all of it), objects and characters not immediately visibile but possibly used soon, etc.
If you have the time, please read my previous answers and the link to the discussions where all this ram story was revealed a few months ago.
- It's obviously not 1GB for the operating system, it's for all the system functions, so let's say between XXMB and XXXMB of files for the OS, and XXXMB for the services, the features, like multi-tasking, caching, voice/video chat, etc.
- Those additional 1GB for non-gaming stuff were completely unavailable for developers. They strictly had 1GB for their games. It means all the gaming aspect of the gamepad (the content rendered then displayed on this additional controller) is included in the 1GB of ram for games, it doesn't tap into the other 1GB pool, at least it was like that until now.
Now, maybe the online part, voice chat, camera features, if used in a game, will run on those 1GB for non-gaming purposes, leaving the 1GB of ram totally dedicated to the rendering, textures, IA, whatever, and freed from all those "side" aspects.
- It's obviously not 1GB for the operating system, it's for all the system functions, so let's say between XXMB and XXXMB of files for the OS, and XXXMB for the services, the features, like multi-tasking, caching, voice/video chat, etc.
- Those additional 1GB for non-gaming stuff were completely unavailable for developers. They strictly had 1GB for their games. It means all the gaming aspect of the gamepad (the content rendered then displayed on this additional controller) is included in the 1GB of ram for games, it doesn't tap into the other 1GB pool, at least it was like that until now.
Now, maybe the online part, voice chat, camera features, if used in a game, will run on those 1GB for non-gaming purposes, leaving the 1GB of ram totally dedicated to the rendering, textures, IA, whatever, and freed from all those "side" aspects.
Was this announced before? Was new to me, and didn't see it on the english-language sites.
http://www.nintendo.co.jp/wiiu/gamepad/index.html
Battery life for the controller is 3-5 hours, charge time of 2.5 hours.
They still don't have anything there about the range of the controller, though, as far as I can see.
http://www.nintendo.co.jp/wiiu/gamepad/index.html
Battery life for the controller is 3-5 hours, charge time of 2.5 hours.
They still don't have anything there about the range of the controller, though, as far as I can see.
Additionally, prior to the Wii U, consoles would only have one screen to worry about, the TV. Like on the iOS, you don't need as much ram, because you can do intelligent context switching, which is a fake multi-tasking. Now with the second screen, to do it right, the console has to multitask a great deal more. Not only chat, but things like web browsing while playing a game, doing other OS related duties like checking mii verse, top scores.
On the positive note, we may find that many things that games had to deal with in their shared game/OS memory (like chat, achievements, networking, etc...) now do not need to eat into "game memory". I know for PS3 specifically, as soon as you started to check off boxes for support for various OS features, you knock off 2MB's here, 1MB there, etc...
It'd be nice if they can in the future, give back a bit more memory to developers, and for launch, it makes sense to restrict it, so that developers don't get too greedy (they'll always take as much as they can get), while Nintendo has time to figure out what they actually need.
Since consumer products are all designed around a specific price point. Does anyone think this is the most powerful hardware Nintendo could have designed for a $299.00 retail price and still sell for a profit?
I guess now that there is dedicated hardware on the GPU for decoding multiple 1080p video streams. As the internet and Nintendo TVii is big part part of the Wii U. Nintendo TVii could also be the reason why the OS eats up 512MB.
I guess now that there is dedicated hardware on the GPU for decoding multiple 1080p video streams. As the internet and Nintendo TVii is big part part of the Wii U. Nintendo TVii could also be the reason why the OS eats up 512MB.
Saint Gregory
Member
Isn't that exactly the same as the 3DS? What the hell Nintendo, get a larger battery in that thing :/
Gianni Merryman
Member
Hmm, it doesn't sound good at all, hopefully something like a battery pack will show up.
Grampa Simpson
Banned
I Stalk Alone
Member
I think the 360 will break even next year for the generation. so another 7 billion to make up next gen.
gundamkyoukai
Member
What won't happen ??
Still before we talk about Wii U get ports we need to get a better idea of PS4\720 specs.
and 500MB/frame is an ideal situation (a single streaming consecutive data set), once you factor in seek times if data is fragmented on the disk, or worse, trying to do multiple streams then performance is greatly hampered. Disk layout makes a huge difference in disk throughput performance. And given these are interactive games, there is no perfect layout.
Which is you're point really, throwing more to memory leaves the disk throughput available for less critical things like soundtracks / video.
Grampa Simpson
Banned
XtremeXpider
Member
The "x" jump is not only ram or power.
blu
Wants the largest console games publisher to avoid Nintendo's platforms.
Ok, perhaps I should've used a different metric than vert/s. Basically, I meant static mesh assets after various pre-GPU culling (that's why I used those exact vertex attribs - those are normally artist-authored). A contemporary game can use 1M such verts/scene, but not all of those reach the GPU (and the GPU culls a good deal of those too, but apparently that occurs post BW costs). On the RSX, for instance, you have a hard limit of 275Mtri/s at the trisetup engine, so that means that you can be infinitely fast in all other stages of the pipeline, 275Mvert/s is all you gonna get (assuming a good vert/tri ratio). Keep in mind in that number you have to include all possible reuses of a vertex, incl shadow generation and what now. The thing is, the trend for increasing the static mesh asset complexity has reached its peak this current gen, and the new trend is toward on-the-fly synthetic techniques - tessellation with displacement maps, with some really advanced techniques being introduced where a complex mesh can be sent off to the GPU as a quad and a displacement map.
Again, we're not after the absolute vertex prowess of the GPU, but what portion of those start off from RAM in a 'fat', artist-authored format. That means that we don't include anything coming from the GS (could be particles, hair, etc) or the tessellator.
Just a correction: polys are not stored, vertices (and occasionally indices) are. But to get to the point..
Yes, but all those 'extra props' you mention may also carry their corresponding texture assets. Regardless, not all of those travel over to the GPU. But you're right - all those assets can occupy RAM.
Grampa Simpson
Banned
Thought the CPU was confirmed to be 45nm by IBM in their press release.
I don't understand what you mean. You say games designed for the PS4/720 will benefit the Wii-U as well but when asked if it would be easy to port those games down, you say no. Am I missing something here?
What do you think the Wii-U will be able to do that the more powerful systems could not and why do you think this? Honest question.
Not that I care to get in this feud between the Wii-U fans and those that pray for the system to fail, but everyone using "x times" should realize that using vague multipliers is pointless.
Grampa Simpson
Banned
Stop trying to bring reason into it.
Metroid Hunter
Banned
I just realized... you got your November 13 claim wrong!
XtremeXpider
Member
It is the sum of a lot of things. CPU power and GPU power, CPU and GPU capabilities, ram quantity and speed, buses, etc.
It will easily happen, the Wii U is not that powerful.
It has double the RAM (available to games) than a 7 year old machine, that's low.
A tri core CPU that is not much more (if at all) faster than a 7 year old machine, that's not so good.
and a GPU based on a chip from 5 years ago (with a few bells and whistles), not great for a "next gen" machine.
Wii U is overpriced for the tech, tech that is not that impressive when compared to a 7 year old machine that cost $299 (arcade) at launch.
Believe it when people say that the next MS and Sony machines will be vastly better in terms of technology than the Wii U.
Nintendo have done a 3DS, cheap hardware that is overpriced.
blu
Wants the largest console games publisher to avoid Nintendo's platforms.
Not all of those games will use the more powerful CPUs at full load, and of those that do, not all will do that in a way unreproducible on the WiiU in some form.
The CPU/GPU-shared edram is a very interesting feature, which allows for various CPU/GPU interactions at latencies potentially unreproducible on paltforms which don't have that feature. 'More powerful' here means nothing in the general case - the PS2 could do things the PS3 could not.
Don't count on it.
I'm sorry, I keep forgetting that logic has no place at GAF. =P
That's exactly what I was implying in my previous post, actually.
Wrestlemania
Banned
A 4GB Xbox 360 with Kinect (very roughly analogous to a Wii U with the GamePad) is $299. It's really not overpriced.
frankie_baby
Member
Personally I'd say a 360 with kinect is far worse value(for the tech) than wii u
Wrestlemania
Banned
Given how shitty Kinect has been in my experience, I'm inclined to agree. Even if the Wii U console is only marginally more powerful than a 360, it's still priced competitively with the closest 360 bundle.
What do you mean at full load? Every core will be used, ounce of power will be used, even at launch. That doesn't mean the systems will be used efficiently, but there is no such thing as not using a system fully, even at launch.
Also without knowing the gap in performance between the Wii-U and ps4/720, how do you know that the Wii-U will be able to produce everything the higher end consoles are doing?
Sorry but it seems like you are thinking what you want to happen instead of being open about the realistic possibilities.
The ps3 could not do things exactly the same way as the ps2, but it can do the same (or better) function in a totally different way that is tailored for the system's architecture.
I'll be highly surprised if the Wii-U is able to do anything the other two cannot.
But the 360 is horribly overpriced.
nordique
Member
blu, I must say, I love how you appreciate tech on a whole other level than simply "more power"...its awesome. Love reading your posts. Great insight into things too.
I have no idea what could benefit the Wii U from a shared eDRAM set up over the other two next gen systems though, and it may be so that they too will have shared eDRAM
The Abominable Snowman
Member
I agree that its a better value, minus the software available for it vs Wii U, but the 360 and PS3 are in far better positions to drop price before Wii U launch.
nordique
Member
Exactly.
Plus the "deluxe" pack comes with a game.
Sentiments over the price are a little unfounded in this regard, though I do understand why some people wish it were cheaper.
Nintendo isn't going to sell the thing at a loss though. If that BOM from way back was true regarding the Wii U components (I think it was over $170 to manufacture or something like that), after the manufacturing -> retail chain of command is made, they are a probably profiting a bit on the systems or at least breaking even. It seems to be a reasonable price, but apparently some people think it isn't so.
I won't argue with that, if they feel that way. I personally think it is fine and a fair price for the system.
But if others think its too expensive, in a reasonable way, then that is how the market works.
nordique
Member
Unfortunately, that's just how it is.
Nintendo isn't looking to compete with the 360 and PS3 anyways...they already have a system doing that at $149.99, even if technically the systems (PS3, 360 and Wii U) will be competing with each other in terms of prospective purchaser dollar
nordique
Member
But is it?
In terms of your perception, given its age, tech etc... relative to your perceived value it probably is
Yet the market is still purchasing it in large numbers. It is not overpriced, technically speaking, if its market value isn't responding the same way ( that it is )
Compared with how much it probably costs them to make the system, I agree they are making some profit, but my point is your logic regarding its price and what it should be priced is not one and the same
AranhaHunter
Banned
So confirmed to have 2GBs of RAM, 1GB for system and 1GB for games. Why that much RAM for memory? Is it because it has to render the same screen twice? Or always has to render two different images?
Grampa Simpson
Banned
I think they are probably bullish on features that will happen in the OS. They're limiting the RAM available to games right now because of it. I think that in a couple of years they'll have the feature set pretty static, and will be able to increase the amount of RAM available to games. For now they need that ram to be available for features that haven't been developed yet.
blu
Wants the largest console games publisher to avoid Nintendo's platforms.
That's exactly what I meant - full load while stalling the pipeline is not much a full load in my book.
I don't think I said what you think I said. Let me try again: some games will not use those CPUs at full load, and of those that do, some of the things those CPUs will be busy with will be done off-CPU on the WiiU. Like on the sound DSP, for instance.
The realistic possibilities that somebody will be inefficient on the Durango/Orbis? Why, yes, I'm willing to accept that chance.
Aren't you shifting the subject a tad? For what it's worth, the things PS2 could do were used in actual shipped products. Does that mean the PS3 could've never achieved something to a similar effect as in those shipped products. No. But it you tried to really exploit those unique PS2 features, and ship a product that heavy relied on those, then tried to port that to the PS3 you would've choked the pipeline. Case in point: the GS could use its current render target as a source for tex fetches. The RSX cannot pull such a stunt at all. G80 introduced something similar, but not as flexible, with the shader-based ROPs, but that's a product a generation later.
Why? Are you expecting similar edram pools on the other two? Otherwise how do you expect a 'more powerful' machine could compensate for a low-latency path it simply might not have? By 'more power'?
Huh?
Grampa Simpson
Banned
I think that we'll see some of that ram get released when a major multiplat threatens to not be made available for the Wii because of a lack of available RAM. Expect it before the first COD or Madden that won't also be PS360.
AranhaHunter
Banned
Brain freeze, should say why that much RAM for the system.
They don't know how much will be needed by the system in total... think of it as Vram (video graphics card's pool of memory) and System Ram (like the ram in your PC) right now devs are forced to only use Vram, but once most of the extra features are in place (the OS, voice chat, netflix, and whatever else the system allows you to do while playing games) they will release more to developers.
Considering what the 360 does with 512MB of total system ram, and nothing that the Wii U does really exceeding that from a media feature set, I think it's safe to assume that Wii U's developers will likely get 512MB of ram freed up from that second pool, perhaps even more. Of course this is probably after XB3/PS4 launch, but honestly that is the right time to "upgrade" the system and it's smart to lock away some resources like this to make sure that these features have enough ram to run right now since they will not be very optimized out of the gate.
frankie_baby
Member
Madden and COD will be on ps360 for many many years to come
XtremeXpider
Member
It will depend on what Nintendo is putting on this 1gb, even they can be cautious for future features on O.S. Nintendo 3DS is not really the same case than Wii U.
A lot of Wi U threads today...
It will not happen before Xbox 720/Ps4 release.