Did you know that MGS3D has downscaled geometry and textures while also having lower framerates overall?Granted, MGS3D is what I would consider a shitty port.
Especially compared to what was the original deal :-S
WiiU "Latte" GPU Die Photo - GPU Feature Set And Power Analysis
- Thread starter Thraktor
- Start date
- Status
Especially compared to what was the original deal :-S
Genyo Takeda considers performance a stupid thing to focus because it'll add little to the experience, and no matter how powerful your system is, it will never be enough, anyway - but once you go that route, it also makes customers expect exponentially more every new generation. Therefore, he decided to focus on raising efficiency and reducing power consumption.
But the consumers are the same which buy Sony and Microsoft stuff.
lwilliams3
Member
I thought I saw that somewhere. Where did you get those statements from?
My impression is that while power consumption is a focus, there is also a focus on getting the most performance out of the lower-powered parts.
I dont see how its PR speak if the WiiU can handle the latest PS360 games but stay running in the 30 watt range.
It's a shame I don't share from his theory. PS4 level graphics would have been more than enough for me. Man, 1/2 PS4 would have been enough
It seems that way yes. They had to keep with their architecture and limitations that involved. It looks like they had to have a memory configuration to support that BC too. I wish they'd just simplified the whole thing.
phosphor112
Banned
It's a shame I don't share from his theory. PS4 level graphics would have been more than enough for me. Man, 1/2 PS4 would have been enough
It seems that way yes. They had to keep with their architecture and limitations that involved. It looks like they had to have a memory configuration to support that BC too. I wish they'd just simplified the whole thing.
They should have jumped ship to x86 as well, like the other two. Otherwise they'll have to stick with PPC for BC going forward.
lwilliams3
Member
That was more in the case of the Wii. I recall reading that Iwata specifically wanted to the Wii to be a specific small size, for example.
For the Wii U, you can just look at the bizarre internals of the GPU, the odd final clockspeeds, and what wsippel may have discovered with Nintendo boosting the low level registers to see that Nintendo priority of balance and performance was different than it was for the Wii.
Mihael Mello Keehl
Banned
How am i acting like gamecube was the only powerful console? Where you getting this impression from dude? Dont be making up stuff bro.There wasnt any cconsoles weaker than ps that generation so whats your pointI mean you can count the dreamcast if you want be we all know what happened there.
And thats my point bro. Gamecube did not nearly get as the third party support ps2 got. You cant ignorantly choose to ignore that fact because thats what we are talking about.
Imo it sounds like krizz knows what he talking about None of the stuff you pointed out sounds like he said WiiU is as strong PS4/720. If all you want to do is keep preaching to the choir the go ahead.
Power is still far superior. If it weren't for Microsoft, x86 would be long dead.
Schnozberry
Member
This is random, but it came up earlier in this thread. Did you ever discover the reason why a dev kit revision broke Wii U code compatibility? You had posted about it originally somewhere in the way back machine, but not much was made of it. We were wondering if it was all compiler/api related, or if there was a new hardware revision.
It's not about BC, but also being able to utilize all the experience and tools Ninty has built up over the wii/gamecube timeframe. The reason they stuck with that cpu architecture is to save money, BC was just a happy byproduct.
If Nintendo had gone for graphical power, instead of energy efficiency and not been so concerned with noise, size, or BC what more might they've been able to do in 2010-11, without incurring major loses at launch? Could they've used existing AMD tech to make a console capable of running most third party games at 1080p/30fps with 2xAA for $300 BOM?
hgarrett54
Banned
Nintendo HDS?
Nope, no idea. Probably a toolchain/ SDK thing.
Err, volts isn't power consumption, watts are. A 1200 Watt PC still has a 12 volt rail.
JordanN
Banned
Well I'm trying to tell you developers go where there's power but you keep saying "but Gamecube was more powerful but still didn't get it". So what? You need to stop pretending like the PS2 didn't make the leap first. We also have to consider powerful consoles like the 360 still missed out on some PS3 games. Yet 360 still had better third party support than Wii.
I believe PS1 and N64 were alive for some time but do you know why nobody chose to make a repeat of those consoles (including SEGA)? To not deter third parties.
If people understand the console is underpowered then why are the same people acting like this isn't affecting third party? It clearly is if the Wii is to go by.
phosphor112
Banned
Well yeah, and I think a modified (ie. fixed and improved) cell design would have been awesome for PS4, but they can't keep going against the grain. It's only worse for them in the long run. They would have had much higher performance if they went with Cell and a powerful GPU, but we all can't have nice things.
Nintendo is paying big bucks for a mediocre jump in power. It doesn't matter if they have super high performance per watt if they are paying out the ass and with no insight going forward.
Really hard to tell. The MCM apparently costs ~$100, which isn't exactly cheap to begin with. They could have gotten an off-the-shelf part that's more powerful on paper at that price, and would have probably made things easier for early ports, but it would probably be quite a bit less efficient. CPU's never achieve 100% of their theoretical performance under real world workloads, and it's pretty much the same thing with GPUs. From what I've seen, GPUs seemingly tend to stall a lot. What's the point in having a thousand shader units when only half of them actually do something worthwhile at a time? Also, more power through more silicon or higher clocks increases TDP, which means cooling becomes more of an issue. Bigger case, stronger PSU, better cooling - all those things increase the price as well.
At the end of the day, I think they could have created a system on the same budget that would have allowed for better ports early on, but with less room for improvement over time.
Yeah funny you would think but that doesnt seem to be what happen. Tools were in a terrible shape. Not sure if that has gotten better. Need for speed devs said tools were the biggest thing they had to work around.
BC was one of the main design goals. The console was built around that...
How is power far superior? Apple move from power not to long ago to intel x86.
Understandable, but still, if I were in Nintendo's shoes and had a year headstart, I'd be more concerned with getting GTA5 than reducing system complexity and cost down the road.
Volts is potential.
You're looking for Watts which measures electrical power.
Think of it like a large boulder. Idle it has no power. But it has great mechanical potential. Now put the boulder into a raging river with high current. Now it has power.
Use wikipedia. Learn stuff if you aren't sure.
No. Intel's x86 core tech is vastly superior. Maybe if PPC had billions of R&D it may have had the potential to be better, but PPC was ditched by Apple nearly a decade ago. I wish it hadn't, seems Intel's core is the best we're going to get until graphene or something replaces silicon. Until then, things are going to be boring.
H_Prestige
Banned
Even if Power is superior to x86, it's a moot point since the PPC in the Wii U is far weaker than than the mediocre x86 CPU in the ps4.
I'm not familiar with apples/apples comparison of the PPC in Wii U and say a typical ARM processor in a flagship smartphone, but I'm betting their much closer than Intel Haswell.
lwilliams3
Member
Interesting. What changes you believe Nintendo and AMD did to the GPU to increase the efficiency of the shader units? There does seem to be bigger chunks of memory within the processor, so that is one thing.
Neither IBM nor Freescale had any chips in their portfolio that made sense for Apple. The high-end Power chips were too expensive, the low-end wasn't powerful enough, and there was pretty much nothing off-the-shelf in between. Console manufacturers sign multi-year, high-volume contracts, so IBM is willing to cook something up. Apple couldn't and wouldn't do that.
Mihael Mello Keehl
Banned
I don't know how you can say so what after you state developers go where there is power yet GameCube had power. Is that not contradicting?
I'm not pretending like the ps2 didn't make the first leap, where I say this at?
If you are really insinuating that the difference in 3rd party support for Xbox 360 and PS3 are the same as GameCube vs Xbox/PS2 I don't know what to say. That's pretty silly.
Because there was better technology available for the next consoles? Is that why no company decided to make a repeat of ps1/N64? Are you saying that holds some relevance to today? I believe Nintendo makes their consoles according to what they believe will be enough for themselves. To get the desired experiences they are willing to offer.
People are saying that 3rd party support does not only rest in power. In which is your sole reason in the argument. if that was 100% fact then can you explain 360/PS3 games in which the Wii U is not getting? That's why it's not all black and white simple thinking the way your are preaching about.
What improvements do you see them doing and wouldn't the end result be the same. Upfront more power, or take more time to get used to squeezing everything out of it but in the end have a good solid machine? If so, I'd prefer the up front power.
We'll see soon I guess. If Nintendo doesn't come out with a graphical showcase for Wii U, I won't be surprised but I'll be disappointed for sure.
JordanN
Banned
No. Factor 5 comes to mind. So does iD software. They supported consoles respectively that gave them the power to.Mihael Mello Keehl said:
The logic still applies to both. Xbox 360 was powerful but still missed PS3 games. Yet why does Xbox 360 have more third party games than Wii? Again, it's the hardware that plays a role in giving consoles support.Mihael Mello Keehl said:
Who says you have to use the better technology? Nintendo could have stuck to NES hardware if they wanted to. The technology was there.Mihael Mello Keehl said:
Edit: Nintendo can still make stuff for themselves that also appeal to third parties.Mihael Mello Keehl said:
No,no,no.Mihael Mello Keehl said:
Not once did I say it was only power. Go and find the quotes in the thread if you truly believe I did.
360/PS3 games not showing up on Wii U does not disprove what I said.
internal development =/= external development. If BC was a main design goal, then it would have been one because they believed it would increase sales; and you bet they would have pushed it as much as they did the tablet controller in the marketing. I don't think it even was mentioned or shown in any of the tv ads.
No, I still believe that Nintendo wanted to use the expertise they built up instead of shifting to a new and unfamiliar technology.
Mihael Mello Keehl
Banned
Those 2 developers don't represent the entirety of 3rd parties. It may be true but that's barely enough information to defend what you are saying. Which is 3rd parties as a whole.
The Wii had 3rd parties. Maybe not on the scale of qualified games the 360 was receiving but it still had 3rd parties. And yes it was due to power. Im not fighting the fact of which games come to Nintendo consoles because of the lack of power but simply debating that power is not the sole reason in the case of Wii U.
If Nintendo cared so much about 3rd party support with N64/Gamecube they would of chose a media format that was not so strict against piracy and used something developers preferred.
You said something about Nintendo alienating 3rd parties with different formats which is true. But you never include this along with your argument. For instance just now you talk about how "Nintendo could of stuck with NES hardware" Is that not to demonstrate how power and technology plays a role here?
360/PS3 games not showing up on Wii U does not disprove what you said? Can you explain please?
JordanN
Banned
For my point, 2 developers is more than enough.
For developers working on PS2, they could still support Gamecube or Xbox because the power is equal or better to what they're working with. For them to not support it is where other factors come to play.
This was never my argument.Mihael Mello Keehl said:
My argument still wasn't power is the sole reason. It was a counter to the belief power had nothing to do with third parties.Mihael Mello Keehl said:
Developers can still port PS3/360 games to Wii U without there being a hardware obstacle. This wasn't true for the Wii.Mihael Mello Keehl said:
Internal Development to way behind on the wiiu. Not sure what point you are making.
Just looking at how the system is deisgn its very clear BC was one of the main design goals. To say otherwise is just silly....
The reason why they dont market playing wii games on the wiiu is most likely they are trying to show wiiu is a "new" console. Since so many people think its just an add on controller.
http://www.nintendolife.com/news/2013/05/nintendo_sends_direct_wii_u_marketing_message_to_wii_owners
phosphor112
Banned
If developer outlook is as grim as it looks, does it even matter at that point? And as you said.. 100 bucks for that MCM is just nuts...
hgarrett54
Banned
How much do you think the MCM for the PS4 will cost?
Mihael Mello Keehl
Banned
For you point that third parties go where there is power it is more than enough? I guess but we are talking about third parties as a whole not just factor 5 and Id.
If it was never your argument then I don't understand the point of ever saying Nintendo could have made another NES or something. You use that argument every time in multiple threads.
As of third party games currently released and cross-gen, power has nothing to do with third parties, since Wii U is stronger than 360/PS3. If one goes by that its entirely reasonable.
They can port the games without hardware obstacles (as you say), but they aren't. I'm not even sure what is your point anymore. Is it that power has 'something' to do with missing third party support? Yet Wii U is still missing out on games that could be ported without hardware constraints.
I'm not sure about the price, but it's a SoC not a MCM.
phosphor112
Banned
It's an APU (SoC) not an MCM. Also, I have no idea.
Estimate the size of the chip and divide by wafer size. Only thing missing is yields, should be pretty good for sony since it pretty much a known design.
Now for the motherboard would be a lot tougher to figure out.
I would be surprise if it cost sony more than $50 per SOC to make. Since it size should be under 300mm2. They made have to pay amd a couple dollar per chip also.
JordanN
Banned
Developers migrated from previously weaker hardware like the PS1 or N64 to the PS2.
It's a counter to people saying hardware has no effect on third parties.Mihael Mello Keehl said:
Just because power becomes the dominant example, doesn't mean it's the only rationale.
Wii U needed to be on par or better than PS3/360 to be considered receiving those games.Mihael Mello Keehl said:
Wii received next to none of them because of the prevailing underpowered hardware.
Developers go where there is power. There are other issues that could get in the way which I have explained (i.e alienating cartridges) but power is still apart of the equation.Mihael Mello Keehl said:
Jordann, Jesus give it a rest. Power is NOT the primary reason for the lack of support. It's not even in the top 5. There are plenty of examples, even in this thread, as to why that's not the case but there is honestly no need to repeat them because you've already read them 500 times and refuse to acknowledge them.
JordanN
Banned
So the Xbox 360 having more third party support than Wii was just a fluke right?
For the situations being described in this thread, it's primary.
Looking at JordanN's tag, I'm not entirely sure why anyone is bothering to respond. In any case the idea of power being the deciding factor in what medium gets what games is fucking ludicrous. PC gaming would be larger than any of the consoles combined if that were the case.
Mihael Mello Keehl
Banned
Ahhh it makes sense. I just want to be clear, because most of the time you address someone it's only about power, which isn't fair to only include that.
I can't really argue with the rest of that though as you seem to be agreeing its not just power in one way or another. So like that its cool. And we're done having our way in this thread lol.
Edit: Im sorry, you guys just leave him alone. He has his reasons wether they are related to today or not. Regardless it's what he believes so let it be. He is a cool guy. And the tag, well maybe he was drunk.
the Wii to date has actually gotten more third-party support, just not the kind of titles that you're interested in
It sure as hell wasn't power.
JordanN
Banned
The Wii's hardware definitely did prevent it from getting certain games. This is fact.
You're right. Don't really count shovelware.
Edit: This is no longer about Wii U so I'm going to stop here.
- Status