It's clocked at 500MHz, in-sync with the GPU (ROPs).
Rumor: Wii U final specs
- Thread starter EatChildren
- Start date
It's clocked at 500MHz, in-sync with the GPU (ROPs).
Smurfman256
Member
Ah, you're right. I got it confused with the L2 cache on the CPU.
Smurfman256
Member
Just out of curiosity (if anyone remembers) what did the GameCube's controller launch at (US$)?
Apophis2036
Banned
I seem to remember you saying you didn't even believe WiiU was more powerful than current gen consoles originally350-450 Gflops is a bit more reasonable, though I'm still expecting 400-500 personally.
Now you just need to remove the "its a R700 because it started development from R700" idea from your head and our expectations may finally overlap.
I can't for the life of me see Nintendo sending the console out to be slaughtered by PS4 & 720 with a GPU performing as low as 350 GFLOPs, i think it will be around the 600 GFLOPs mark and ensure that down ports from the 1.5 - 2 TFLOP GPU PS4 / 720 games are possible.
Nintendo know what developers are targeting next gen, they would not make the same mistake they did with the original Wii by releasing a machine that makes it impossible to get the big next gen Triple A multi platform ports.
Also don't listen to a word USC says, this is the guy that went on and on for months in the main WiiU thread with the whole 'Lol Wii U will not have a GPGPU, stop dreaming' statements..., when some of the first words out of Iwata's mouth on the September WiiU Nintendo Direct were GPGPU i almost pissed myself laughing imagining his reaction
.I can't for the life of me see Nintendo sending the console out to be slaughtered by PS4 & 720 with a GPU performing as low as 350 GFLOPs, i think it will be around the 600 GFLOPs mark and ensure that down ports from the 1.5 - 2 TFLOP GPU PS4 / 720 games are possible.
Nintendo know what developers are targeting next gen, they would not make the same mistake they did with the original Wii by releasing a machine that makes it impossible to get the big next gen Triple A multi platform ports.
Also don't listen to a word USC says, this is the guy that went on and on for months in the main WiiU thread with the whole 'Lol Wii U will not have a GPGPU, stop dreaming' statements..., when some of the first words out of Iwata's mouth on the September WiiU Nintendo Direct were GPGPU i almost pissed myself laughing imagining his reaction
I agree, Nintendo has done stupid things before but when they do they always fix it, Nintendo knows making the Wii U much weaker than the PS4/720 like the Wii would not help them this time, 600gflops is what I'm hoping/expecting.
KojiKnight
Member
I see people assuming Nintendo making an assumption based on the assumed specs of a sony or microsoft system...
Assumpception?
Assumpception?
Also don't listen to a word USC says, this is the guy that went on and on for months in the main WiiU thread with the whole 'Lol Wii U will not have a GPGPU, stop dreaming' statements..., when some of the first words out of Iwata's mouth on the September WiiU Nintendo Direct were GPGPU i almost pissed myself laughing imagining his reaction
LOL.
The funny thing is he's trying to spin it now saying that "I never said it wasn't possible the Wii U would have a GPGPU"
Apophis2036
Banned
Neither Sony or MS will be able to release a system in late 2013 / early 2014 that is any more than 4x the WiiU specs (2TFLOP GPU, 8GB's of Ram) without incurring massive financial loses per console sold.
MS might be able to afford it but Sony certainly can't.
PS4 / 720 will be 6 x PS360 and 3 x WiiU specs for me.
That's pretty funny since we all saw him say it.
Didn't the leaked Xbox 720 document also say "6x the power of Xbox 360" as well? And IGN (I know IGN) said sources have said the next Xbox will be 6x the 360.
Glorified G
Member
Bullshit multipliers on top of baseless speculation on how much losses will incur without any clue on R & D spent or insider knowledge on how much Ms or Sony is willing to invest.
That's a lot in one post.
I prefer wishful thinking.
Just to keep my expectations in check, I dont think the Wii U is gonna hit those numbers. I would think that a system would have SOMETHING to show for itself if it could do that but nothing has been shown that makes me think the Wii U is (much) more powerful than the HD Twins. Don't get me wrong, I want to believe, but i'd think Nintendo would show anything that would make people notice a difference. When has a launch of a new system ever had games that didnt look noticeably better? All I can think of is one and that was the original Wii. Rather, it seems we have a situation where the Wii U is gonna be pretty weak compared to the(theoretical) 720/PS4 but have a similar and modern architecture?/shaders?.
Either way, I'm excited to have an HD Nintendo system.
...and I hope I am wrong.
KojiKnight
Member
This. People in general assume too much (not in terms of what they'll accomplish, but the amount of things they plan on doing)...
Apophis2036
Banned
It's called having an opinion, sorry if you can't handle that son.
The thing is 600Gflops is what I think and some reliable sources on Gaf say, Nintendo plays a different park than Sony and Microsoft, where Sony and Microsoft do "LOOK AT THESE GRAPHICS!" Nintendo does "LOOK AT THIS NEW CONTROLLER AND GAMEPLAY!", Nintendo could make a console that could do Avatar like graphics but they still wouldn't praise the graphics like Sony and Microsoft would.
Glorified G
Member
More like making definitive statements based on nothing.
Apophis2036
Banned
All we have seen so far is fast ports (Batman, ME3 ect), Wii up ports (Pikmin 3, MH3U), low budget multi platform exclusives (ZombiU, Rayman, 101) and a 2D Mario game, the console is capable of far more than those games show.
I agree tho even if WiiU was just a 360 in power terms i would still be super excited to finally have Nintendo games in HD and running on hardware that isn't 10+ years old.
Instead of comparing the WiiU to a PS3 or a 360 why not compare it to Nintendo's last console, we are going from a 12 GFLOP GPU to a 400 - 600 GFLOP GPU, 88MB's of Ram to 2GB's of Ram and a super charged 3 core version of it's CPU.
Nintendo games built from the ground up with a decent budget are going to look jaw dropping.
Well he's a "developer", but he isn't a WiiU developer.
Anyone who knows the actual specs of the final machine isn't leaking anything to their buddies in the industry. Hardware companies have been known to tell developers slightly different information, so that if there is a leak then they can trace the leak back to a specific source. No one wants to risk that.
soulassssns
Banned
Sounds like the average opinion to me.
superkid_86
Banned
This^. The big N has some of the best artists in the world, and I can't wait to see what they can do with more power.
I guess I see it more from a marketing perspective. If the Wii U can do things that are very noticeably better than the PS360, than there is little reason not to sell that. If the Wii U was marketed for a year as being more powerful than any other console, I cant see how that would hurt them later when the other systems are released. For a while, I thought maybe Nintendo is waiting to pull out demo's of something that will blow gamers away but what would the point of waiting be?
Nintendo's just a weird company, their was no reason for them to wait till September to announce Bayonetta 2 where they could of shown it at E3 2012 with The Wonderful 101, Nintendo just likes to do things differently.
KojiKnight
Member
Concurred, which is why I'm with Nintendo when they say specs don't really matter... I know the games will be there, and whenever I feel the urge to get off on some good graphics, I have my PC...
Though to be fair, some "realistic" games even now already give me migranes... Specifically FPS games that do a lot of motion blur and bob up and down when your character runs... -_- I don't need my game to simulate that stuff, it just creates a disconnect with what my body feels and what I see. Only time in the world I can get motion sick.
superkid_86
Banned
I think there are several factors as to why they are waiting. The first being...they have nothing complete enough to show. Let's face it, Nintendo are the king of delays..if they don't have something up to par to show..they won't show it. Another factor is there ninja like secrecy. They don't like to show things early and recently have been waiting until a year or less before launching a game before they introduce it.
Gemüsepizza
Member
Can we please stop this "Sony can't afford it" nonsense? Have you seen how much money they have spent recently? If it is necessary, they will built a powerful PS4. And building a powerful console is NOT expensive. Microsoft did it with the Xbox 360. The price of the PS3 was only so high because of exotic tech and silly features, not because of the raw power. And we won't see such a thing this time.
I think Nintendo has never tried to sell hardware on graphics alone, except possibly the SNES. Even when the Gamecube had a clear advantage over the PS2, they downplayed the specs and tried to play up Luigi's Mansion, connectivity, and a Super Smash Bros. sequel. They even had the graphical showcase that was Rogue Leader and it still took outside sources to hype that game up.
From what I see now, I would at least be very excited to see DigitalFoundry get its hands on NintendoLand which is in my opinion probably the most graphically impressive Wii U game.
superkid_86
Banned
Gemüsepizza;43246194 said:
Yea, a lot of people don't realize the amount of assets Sony has. Looking at yearly financial data means nothing considering how large of a company Sony is.
Well, who knows whether or not Nintendo could have announced Bayonetta 2 at E3? Maybe they were securing the publishing rights at the time.
Either way, logically, if it looks like an apple and tastes like an apple, it's probably an apple.
I understand that Nintendo works a little differently than other companies. I respect that about them....but they are a company in business to make money. If what you believe is true and Nintendo is holding off for some calculated Yamauchi-esque reasoning, I'll be overjoyed, I just can't fathom the reasoning for it.
Apophis2036
Banned
Gemüsepizza;43246194 said:
I never said Sony couldn't build a powerful console, (6x PS3 is extremely powerful !), there are however some people on these boards expecting a 4Ghz CPU, 8GB's of Ram and a 3 TFLOP GPU PS4 tho which is beyond silly for power, temperature and cost reasons.
There will never be another $600 console, esp from Sony.
A 4 Core AMD CPU, 2TF GPU, 4GB of Ram PS4 (6x PS360 / 3-4 x WiiU) sold for $400 with a small loss for the first year before becoming profitable is the best direction for Sony to take for PS4 at the current time imo.
I would personally say that 101 and especially Rayman already look mighty impressive. I honestly don't think I've seen a 2D game look better than Rayman, and what get's to me is that it looks like a significant improvement over Origins.
We might end up running into another Gamecube situation at worst though: A few exclusive games on that system looked amazing in their time, but most developers just didn't care enough to really show what the hardware was capable of. I feel like Wii U would have to get really dominant sales in order to avoid that fate, enough to become the baseline spec for multiplatform development going forward.
I agree, Nintendo Land looks great and that's pretty much the Wii Sports of the Wii U launch, Imagine what 3D Mario and Retro's game is going to look like.
I agree, their are tons of times where I wish Nintendo would act like Sony and Microsoft but I know they wouldn't.
KojiKnight
Member
SNES did try to sell on graphics, but the difference was back then was that the graphics DID make for new and interesting games.
When before the only way to simulate 3d environments was by simple ray projections or vector 3d, then suddenly you get something that has true depth and looked marvelous like Mode 7 did, suddenly you could have TRUE gameplay innovations in things like flight simulators and effects that really popped out at you from the screen.
On top of that, innovations like the SuperFX chip took it a step further bringing true 3D polygons onto a home console for the first time. Yes, that was Nintendo touting it's graphics capabilities, but it came with the added incentive of bringing NEW types of games.
The PS4/720 graphics power won't bring new types of games, Nintendo knows this and that's part of the reason they couldn't give a rats ass about it... I don't personally agree with it, as I've said before... I'm a big Nintendo fanboy, but I also have my awesome gaming rig to fall back on for the things I know Nintendo won't be getting... and by the time those games start hitting, they'll already look better on my PC then those consoles anyways.
Apophis2036
Banned
I agree, i think ZombiU, W-101, Pikmin 3 and Rayman Legends all look really nice but they are not a generational leap for most people.
Until WiiU shows off a real game that blows something like Uncharted 3 away there will always be people who say 'lol, on par with PS360', it will go from that to 'lol PS4 / 720 blow it away' when Nintendo finally show off the big budget Triple A exclusives at E3 that blow PS360 games away, they can't win lol.
I personally think we will see a massive Nintendo first party WiiU game premiered at the Spike VGA in December that will close a lot of peoples mouths regarding it's supposed 'lack of power'.
Why do you think at VGA? Only if your talking about Geoff saying "look at next generation" comment.
Apophis2036
Banned
Yes, i think we will see three trailers, one from each next gen system. I also expect a lot of crying when PS4 / 720 launch games don't blow the Wii U games away.
The thing is why would any company announce a new console at a Video Game Award Show?
Apophis2036
Banned
I don't think they will announce what they are running on, just a quick taste of what is to come at E3 2013.
The Spike VGA's are just as mainstream for the gaming press as E3 imo.
That is true, Reggie did say we might be seeing Retro's game before E3 but I'm not hyping just in case, this is the VGA after all lol.
KojiKnight
Member
Honestly, I'd say the VGAs are better in this instance... Gaming press is really designed for the likes of Gaf and "hardcore" who follow gaming information on at least a weekly or daily or (gaf case) minute by minute basis.
VGAs have a good TV advertising budget, and they are aimed at the general public. It goes all the way into hitting the people that consider themselves gamers, but really only buy 1-3 games a year.
Nintendo and Iwata have on multiple occasions likend the Wii U's development and engineering approach to that of the Gamecube's.
The Gamecube imho was one of the best designed console's of all time. The CPU with its high amount of l2 cache was loved by developers, the inclusion of edram, the incredibly low lantecy system RAM, and its friendly and easily to develop for architecture and APIs.
If you judged the Gamecube simply based on its gigaflop performance it'd have been the weakest console of its generation. Yet reality and history shows us that the Gamecube easily surpassed the PS2, and was not that far behind the beasty Xbox. The Gamecube's efficient and friendly architecture allowed developers to make games on it that far suprassed what raw numbers suggested it could do.
As for the Xbox 360 and PS3, Microsoft and Sony both quote their GPUs as exceeding the 200 gigaflop mark. That number however is based on synthetic and best case benchmarks, not real world performance. While i don't know for sure, i doubt very much any Xbox 360 or PS3 game comes anywhere close to consuming 200 gigaflops of power. Also Microsoft state the Xbox 360 is capable of 200 million polygons a second, someone please tell me how many Xbox 360 games exceed 40 million polygons yet alone 100 million.
Even if the Wii U's GPU is at the low end of the measuring stick at 400 gigaflops, i am confident real world performance will put it more then 2x ahead of the Xbox 360/PS3.
The Gamecube imho was one of the best designed console's of all time. The CPU with its high amount of l2 cache was loved by developers, the inclusion of edram, the incredibly low lantecy system RAM, and its friendly and easily to develop for architecture and APIs.
If you judged the Gamecube simply based on its gigaflop performance it'd have been the weakest console of its generation. Yet reality and history shows us that the Gamecube easily surpassed the PS2, and was not that far behind the beasty Xbox. The Gamecube's efficient and friendly architecture allowed developers to make games on it that far suprassed what raw numbers suggested it could do.
As for the Xbox 360 and PS3, Microsoft and Sony both quote their GPUs as exceeding the 200 gigaflop mark. That number however is based on synthetic and best case benchmarks, not real world performance. While i don't know for sure, i doubt very much any Xbox 360 or PS3 game comes anywhere close to consuming 200 gigaflops of power. Also Microsoft state the Xbox 360 is capable of 200 million polygons a second, someone please tell me how many Xbox 360 games exceed 40 million polygons yet alone 100 million.
Even if the Wii U's GPU is at the low end of the measuring stick at 400 gigaflops, i am confident real world performance will put it more then 2x ahead of the Xbox 360/PS3.
Trevelyan9999
Banned
This exactly. The Gamecube comparisons are the point I've been trying to make to people who are only focused on raw numbers. Console development is a totally different beast than PC, as soon as people understand that or wrap their heads around it the better.
Fourth Storm
Member
I don't believe any reliable sources are still holding to 600 gflops. Even bgassassin, before he left, seemed to be open to the possibility that the info on the early dev kits he recieved way back, was either inaccurate or out of date. Things happen and I will hold no hard feelings when we find out that it's nowhere in that ballpark. That, btw, is what reliable sources both here and on beyond3d are now saying.
I was in the 640 spu camp myself up until we saw the chip. I figured they would go with 32nm based on IBM's eDRAM being manufactured on that process and my belief that the 32 MB eDRAM would be right on the die. Well, I got one thing right at least. Never thought Nintendo would use two different types of eDRAM in Wii U and I never thought Renesas would be the manufacturer.
Now, I am facing the reality that Wii U will be to this current gen what the Wii was to the PS2 era. Probably 320 SPUs but maybe 400. There simply isn't room for any more at 40nm (hopefully my reasoning for that process is clear but if not I will expand on it again later).
As for clocks, my hypothesis is that they are using the same clock sync ratios as Gamecube and Wii. They synced the 3DS clocks as well, so it's still a practice of theirs. Basically, the system RAM would be 2x the gpu clock and the cpu would be 3x the gpu clock. The fastest DDR3 is 1066 Mhz, so that's an upper limit. Also, per Matt, the GPU clocks slightly under 600 Mhz. My best guesstimate now is a 532 Mhz GPU, 1064 Mhz DDR3 on a 128 bit bus, and a 1.59 Ghz CPU (which also matches a claim on Beyond3D a while back).
I am still very much looking forward to what Nintendo's artists achieve with this setup. The flexibility of the 32 MB MEM1 is especially promising. More shaders would be nice, but Nintendo has made their choice and it's time to come to terms with it.
Apophis2036
Banned
At the end of the day even if it's closer to 400 GFLOPs than 600, they created Mario Galaxy 1 & 2, Metroid Prime 3, Zelda Skyward Sword, Smash Bros Brawl and Mario Kart Wii on a 12 GFLOP GPU, now imagine what they will create with a GPU 33 times as powerful, 10 times more Ram and a faster clocked Tri core version of the Wii CPU !.
KojiKnight
Member
I still agree with everything you say here, and why hard numbers only tell a part of the story... I don't think we'll see the CPU quite as low as he predicts though, even modern cell phones have higher clocked processors with more cores(yes yes, ARM doesn't directly compare to Power but still
)... It'll almost certainly be pushing 2ghz+Trevelyan9999
Banned
The IBM press release makes a lot more sense now when looking at the CPU power:
"The all-new, Power-based microprocessor will pack some of IBM's most advanced technology into an energy-saving silicon package that will power Nintendo's brand new entertainment experience for consumers worldwide. IBM's unique embedded DRAM, for example, is capable of feeding the multi-core processor large chunks of data to make for a smooth entertainment experience.
Built on the open, scalable Power Architecture base, IBM custom processors exploit the performance and power advantages of proven silicon-on-insulator (SOI) technology. The inherent advantages of the technology make it a superior choice for performance-driven applications that demand exceptional, power-efficient processing capability – from entertainment consoles to supercomputers."
http://www-03.ibm.com/press/us/en/pressrelease/34683.wss
In my opinion, the Wii U is going to be a beast when developing ground-up software for it. We simply can't compare the CPU to something more traditional since it has been custom built for exactly what will make the console perform well but power efficient. Out of Order Execution combined with the strong GPGPU capability will give us some amazing looking games. Raw numbers will never do this console justice........
<3 Gamecube
Smurfman256
Member
I still agree with everything you say here, and why hard numbers only tell a part of the story... I don't think we'll see the CPU quite as low as he predicts though, even modern cell phones have higher clocked processors with more cores(yes yes, ARM doesn't directly compare to Power but still
I'm predicting 2.2-2.4GHz.
Zoramon089
Banned
Yeah, except dev kits don't get weaker as it gets closer to launch...unless you have proof of him saying otherwise, I'm pretty sure bgassassin never implied it was much lower than 600 like you are
Fourth Storm
Member
Agreed. And there are still many unknowns with regards to GPU customizations. That they are calling it a GPGPU seems to indicate a register increase in the shader cores, but Matt's info on that only really served to befuddle unfortunately. But yeah, even with modest specs, we have much to look forward to. And if they really are getting games like Assassin's Creed 3 to run on a tricore Broadway, all I have to say is that's damn impressive (and that goes to both Ubi and Espresso).
CaptNfantasy
Banned
Ive never really been a big fan of opinions. They seem really rigged, and when you try to call out the rigging, people play the "sacred opinion" card and treat you like Hitler for trying to steal their magical soul and take away their golden unique snowflake consciousness.
My opinion on Wii U is, there will be games, some good, some bad, we will play them, there will be surprises, there will be disappointments, and there will be enjoyment to be had of several varieties. I feel this is a good opinion to have, be it sacred or not.
Fourth Storm
Member
Read the beyond3d thread. He said he's not adamant anymore when it comes to power claims and he'd be fine with a weaker machine. But I would not presume to speak for him anymore. The only thing I will say is that it appears the dev kit info he got was from a very early rendition which was still using off the shelf parts. It's possible that system contained some extra raw power in order to simulate the effects of Nintendo's modifications. Or it could have just been bad info. That's life when you rely on leaks...
I doubt the CPU will be clocked above 2GHz. Nintendo do love to use multiplier based clock rates as evident by the Gamecube, Wii, and 3DS.
Either way i'm still confident the Wii U is capable of delivering a visual experience that clearly surpasses that of the Xbox 360 and PS3. It features modern GPU architecture, a significant amount of edram, and more then double the available system memory of the HD twins. Those improvements alone should provide a significant boost, and thats not factoring in other improvements thanks to the DSP, IO controller, and other efficiency gains.
Either way i'm still confident the Wii U is capable of delivering a visual experience that clearly surpasses that of the Xbox 360 and PS3. It features modern GPU architecture, a significant amount of edram, and more then double the available system memory of the HD twins. Those improvements alone should provide a significant boost, and thats not factoring in other improvements thanks to the DSP, IO controller, and other efficiency gains.