Wii U: Not Enough Bandwith?

omonimo said:
Starwars coming on ps3 too, so is not that impossible.
Click to expand...

UPDATE: Facebook post pulled.

We asked Lucas PR: "The official PlayStation Germany site is listing Star Wars 1313 for PS3. Is the game coming to that platform? Or is the page in error?"

They've said: "No, that was an inaccurate post. We have not confirmed any platforms yet for 1313 and do not have any announcements to make at this time."

And even if it does, it will not look anywhere close to the demo we saw which was running on tri-SLI GTX 680s.

JordanN said:
Not sure what's so funny.

Both games/demos run on engines possible on mobile phones, just saying.
Click to expand...

Obviously I meant not in any comparable capacity to what we saw in the demo.
 
Great post. It made a good case for what the situation may be and explained it well.

Some people seem worried about knowing the exact speed of the edram, but I don't think it matters much. As far as I know, memory that is on the die itself is as fast as the processor. Even the article states that though they don't know the exact performance, they know it is XXXGB/s, meaning it's in the triple digits versus 12 (DDR3) or 22 (360/PS3) GB/s. It pretty much can work as fast as the processors can use it.
 
XtremeXpider said:
Was you a Wii user?
Click to expand...

I've been a multi-console owner since the beginning, but never paid much attention to the resolution aspects of games outside having to continually listen to people(PC gamers) squabble about the 360 and PS3 not being true HD system when in reality based on what I just read is not true at all. Over the years I guess I was just inclined to give the more technically savvy people the benefit of the doubt when it came to the consoles and their lack of proper HD.

edit: granted with PC gamers having the luxury of such uber resolutions, its easy to understand their disdain towards a "true" HD resolution, but to everyone else 720p is HD.
 
delta25 said:
I've been a multi-console owner since the beginning, but never paid much attention to the resolution aspects of games outside having to continually listen to people squabble about the 360 and PS3 not being true HD system when in reality based on what I just read is not true at all. Over the years I guess I was just inclined to give the more technically savvy people the benefit of the doubt when it came to the consoles and their lack of proper HD.
Click to expand...

Well, now you know it is not true, there are more HD games than subHD ;)
 
XtremeXpider said:
What? even first Xbox have some 720p games. A few? lol...



Xbox 360 and PS3 was a greater "change" (talking about differences between last and next gen) and both showed a big jump.
Click to expand...

Don't disagree at all. There's no doubt the Wii U is not going to offer a significant technological jump like what we saw last gen.

That said, I don't believe we have seen a game from any 1st, 2nd, or 3rd party developer which has had the budget, resources, and time invested to really demonstrate the Wii U's capabilities. The Xbox 360 and PS3 however had such investments at launch.

I'll be quite interested in seeing what titles on the console look like 12 months from now. I am midly confident we haven't seen anywhere near the Wii U's capabilities yet.

omonimo said:
I don't want to destroy your hopes but there is a big chance to see more sub720p games even on the WiiU in the future... It avoid tiling in the edram & guarantee more steady fps, it's almost a key of success to optimize a lot of the bottleneck.
Click to expand...

What hopes? When did i say there would be no more sub 720p games on the Wii U?

I have no doubt that we will see a number of future titles run at sub 720p native resolution on Wii U. Especially titles that are targetting 60fps. I also wouldn't be surprised if we saw sub 720p games on the next Xbox and Playstation. Running at say 640p native, upscaled to 1080p, and spend the extra resources freed up on improved visual quality. I can see a lot of developers going down this route, especially with the Wii U.
 
The way the WiiU is set up with the slower ram and eDRAM along with DSPs sounds like a similar setup to the rumors about Durango. While the rumors about the PS4 indicate it will be setup more like a PC but with a unified fast ram setup. Should be interesting to see what they lead their development on and how ports turn out between the various platforms and differences. Hopefully it will be easier on everyone and we get more/better games.
 
Thunder Monkey said:
Nope Nintendo just upped the amount 3.2x while the large pool is about half as fast in a first look.
Click to expand...

I'm not very knowledgeable on this topic but doesn't this:

OP said:
...We also must take into account several intricate concepts of bus and direction of RAM. For starters, the 22.4GB/s bandwidth of current gen systems buses is often an aggregated rate, distributed between reads and writes with the RAM. In the case of Xbox 360, the CPU doesn’t reach this speed as its access to the RAM is bound by the FSB, the interface connecting it with the GPU where resides the memory controller. And this FSB bandwidth is 10.8GB/s for read and 10.8GB/s for write....
Click to expand...

make the half as fast part untrue? The difference seems to be that 360 RAM can read and write at the same time while the Wii U can't. It would seem that the Wii U's individual read and write speeds might actually be a little faster.

I might be totally off base here but the MCM diagram also makes it seem as if each individual RAM chip has it's own bandwidth. Wouldn't that allow for reading from one chip while writing to another? If that's the case, and 360 RAM bandwidth is actually split, wouldn't Wii U be functionally faster without even getting into supposed EDRAM magic?
 
J.W.Crazy said:
The difference seems to be that 360 RAM can read and write at the same time while the Wii U can't.
Click to expand...

When was it established that the Wii U's memory configuration was not bidirectional?

I've seen nothing of this in the tech threads. We know the bus, density, and clock speed of the RAM, but afaik we knew very little about the memory controller or the actual architecture.

Wouldn't that allow for reading from one chip while writing to another?
Click to expand...

Woudln't that be bidirectional?

You're confusing me.
 
ikioi said:
When was it established that the Wii U's memory configuration was not bidirectional?

I've seen nothing of this in the tech threads. We know the bus, density, and clock speed of the RAM, but afaik we knew very little about the memory controller or the actual architecture.
Click to expand...

I could be completely wrong about that. It's something I remember reading (maybe in one of the Wii U tech threads?) around the time the RAM info came out.

ikioi said:
Woudln't that be bidirectional?

You're confusing me.
Click to expand...

Me being wrong is the most likely possibility but I meant it would be bidirectional for the memory pool as a whole but not per chip. Again I'm not very knowledgeable about this topic I'm just trying to put together all the bits and pieces of info I've read (or at least think I have!) here on NeoGAF in some kind of way that makes sense.

At face value the numbers just don't add up. I think the best quote from the whole article is this:
Anonymous developer said:
These numbers are not the actual Wii U memory performance. I wonder if such low specs would even make a port from XBox360 possible.
Click to expand...

The fact that games like Blops II run as well as they do, which is for the most part the same as on 360, makes it seem unlikely the RAM is actually slower by 43%.
 
J.W.Crazy said:
I could be completely wrong about that. It's something I remember reading (maybe in one of the Wii U tech threads?) around the time the RAM info came out.



Me being wrong is the most likely possibility but I meant it would be bidirectional for the memory pool as a whole but not per chip. Again I'm not very knowledgeable about this topic I'm just trying to put together all the bits and pieces of info I've read (or at least think I have!) here on NeoGAF in some kind of way that makes sense.

At face value the numbers just don't add up. I think the best quote from the whole article is this:

The fact that games like Blops II run as well as they do, which is for the most part the same as on 360, makes it seem unlikely the RAM is actually slower by 43%.
Click to expand...

Blops2 often runs 20fps less than the PS3 version. The major causes are transparencies (indicating bandwidth problems) and when a lot of npcs are on screen (indicating CPU problems).
 
NBtoaster said:
Blops2 often runs 20fps less than the PS3 version. The major causes are transparencies (indicating bandwidth problems) and when a lot of npcs are on screen (indicating CPU problems).
Click to expand...

Amazing how (launch) games like ME3, Trine2 etc run better on such gimped hardware compared to the PS3. Or how Assassins Creed 3 runs every bit as smooth.
 
I DON'T WANT TO KNOW THE SPECS.

I DON'T EVEN WANT TO KNOW IF IT'LL GET NEXT-GEN DOWNPORTS.

ALL I CARE ABOUT... WILL IT RUN MONSTER HUNTER??????????

http://www.hark.com/clips/rqfkvfcwcc-are-you-happy-with-your-haircut

2376705,1ebr0NNurHg7pyGaqTGvKFi1mYu8tK50F3X2zZsiWwC5vlLma+InCuf+WGyZGONpFG54BcGDKzs2m9EcdXUIwQ==.jpg
 
NBtoaster said:
Blops2 often runs 20fps less than the PS3 version. The major causes are transparencies (indicating bandwidth problems) and when a lot of npcs are on screen (indicating CPU problems).
Click to expand...

I've seen the digital foundry breakdown which also shows it getting better frame rates than the PS3 at times. More importantly I've played the game on PC, 360, and Wii U. The differences between the Wii U and 360 were minimal and weren't enough to affect my enjoyment of the game.
 
The fact that a next generation system is not easily outperforming the 7 year old tech HD twins is not a good sign. Devs will probably get better at using the WiiU's strengths but once the Next Generation twins come out things could get much worse 3rd party support wise.
 
NBtoaster said:
Assassin's Creed 3 is not smooth on any console, and performance on Wii U generally lags behind. It manages better than the PS3 in Mass Effect 3, but not the 360.

Trine 2 seems to be the only game that performs better.
Click to expand...

And yet they are all launch games for WiiU and end-generation games for PS360.

Btw, DF said AC3 is on par. You were comparing to PS3 and blaiming WiiU hardware for lack of performance, not to 360. The difference between WiiU and PS3 in ME3 is rather significant, despite the so called bandwidth and CPU problems.
 
prwxv3 said:
The fact that a next generation system is not easily outperforming the 7 year old tech HD twins is not a good sign. Devs will probably get better at using the WiiU's strengths but once the Next Generation twins come out things could get much worse 3rd party support wise.
Click to expand...
Is that what people are calling PS4/720 now? What's going to happen when their successors are announced?

Will they be called Next-NEXT Generation twins? :/

Edit: Wait, you called Wii U next gen so why are there twins? I'm confused.
 
J.W.Crazy said:
I've seen the digital foundry breakdown which also shows it getting better frame rates than the PS3 at times. More importantly I've played the game on PC, 360, and Wii U. The differences between the Wii U and 360 were minimal and weren't enough to affect my enjoyment of the game.
Click to expand...

There were a couple scenes where the Wii U outperformed the PS3 version, but more where it struggled to match it.

ozfunghi said:
And yet they are all launch games for WiiU and end-generation games for PS360.

Btw, DF said AC3 is on par. You were comparing to PS3 and blaiming WiiU hardware for lack of performance, not to 360. The difference between WiiU and PS3 in ME3 is rather significant, despite the so called bandwidth and CPU problems.
Click to expand...

I mentioned PS3 because it itself is a bandwidth starved console, which the Wii U is managing to perform worse than in a few games. Comparing to 360, the results are still bad.
 
NBtoaster said:
I mentioned PS3 because it itself is a bandwidth starved console, which the Wii U is managing to perform worse than in a few games. Comparing to 360, the results are still bad.
Click to expand...

Again, launch games vs end-generation* games. I wouldn't run to conclusions just yet.

(*don't know if there is a proper term for it, but this 'll do.)
 
ozfunghi said:
Again, launch games vs end-generation* games. I wouldn't run to conclusions just yet.

(*don't know if there is a proper term for it, but this 'll do.)
Click to expand...

Most engines have very nice tools available for both the 360 and PS3. Plus, most development houses have years of development experience with the hardware, and know how to extract performance out of it. I think we'll see Wii U performance improve nicely over time as Nintendo makes better tools available for it and developers get used to programming for it. Will it rival what we see from the next Sony and MS machines? Based on the rumored specs, not a chance. But I don't think that means we won't see some awesome games available for it, and I don't think the fidelity gap will be as much of a chasm as it was with the Wii.
 
Medalion said:
Wii-U has trouble running its own OS, let alone games not designed for it originally in mind.
Click to expand...

I doubled the speed of my Wii U by using a wired network adapter and putting it in the DMZ on my router. I used wireshark and saw that the Wii U had a lot of dropped packets and was overly chatty on my network even when not doing anything actively network related. Problems disappeared after I moved it into my DMZ. Seems like it's overly sensitive to NAT for whatever reason. I probably could have continued using WiFi, but I just prefer to have things plugged in if possible.
 
JordanN said:
Is that what people are calling PS4/720 now? What's going to happen when their successors are announced?

Will they be called Next-NEXT Generation twins? :/

Edit: Wait, you called Wii U next gen so why are there twins? I'm confused.
Click to expand...

WiiU = Almost Current Gen
PS4/720 = Next Gen Twins
WiiV = Almost Next Gen
PS5/1080 = Ultra HD Twins
WiiZ = Almost Ultra HD
 
NBtoaster said:
Blops2 often runs 20fps less than the PS3 version. The major causes are transparencies (indicating bandwidth problems) and when a lot of npcs are on screen (indicating CPU problems).
Click to expand...

Long bow to draw identifying specific portions of the hardware as the cause for that slow down.

The game's engine, net code, rendering engine, and general coding could also cause the exact symptoms you're describing.


I'd be putting my money on this being a software issue rather then hardware. That's just my personal opinion however. I base this on the belief and understanding that Blops2 on Wii U was a quick port, done on a limited budget, with limited man power, and on limited finances. I don't believe for one second the Wii U version of the game received any where near the love the Xbox 360 and PS3's versions would have received.

Either way, what you've said is pure speculation. You may be 100% correct, or completely wrong.
 
shinobi602 said:
UPDATE: Facebook post pulled.

We asked Lucas PR: "The official PlayStation Germany site is listing Star Wars 1313 for PS3. Is the game coming to that platform? Or is the page in error?"

They've said: "No, that was an inaccurate post. We have not confirmed any platforms yet for 1313 and do not have any announcements to make at this time."

And even if it does, it will not look anywhere close to the demo we saw which was running on tri-SLI GTX 680s.



Obviously I meant not in any comparable capacity to what we saw in the demo.
Click to expand...

I am quite sure I have read an article somewhere that claims this was actually some kind of misunderstanding, and that the Star War 1313 demo runs on a single GTX 680. But can't find the link right now.
 
The chips are DDR3, a newer standard comparatively to the GDDR3 of Microsoft and Sony actual systems which have the same technological foundation as DDR2.
Click to expand...

This pisses me off more than anything: the naming convention. GDDR3 sounds cooler to DDR3 and has one additional letter, but it's apparently not? Wtf?
 
J-Rod said:
Even the article states that though they don't know the exact performance, they know it is XXXGB/s, meaning it's in the triple digits versus 12 (DDR3) or 22 (360/PS3) GB/s.
Click to expand...

I was trying to make sure I wasn't misinterpreting that statement in the original post. If its performance really is triple digits, wouldn't that more than make up for any bandwidth weaknesses?
 
prwxv3 said:
The fact that a next generation system is not easily outperforming the 7 year old tech HD twins is not a good sign. Devs will probably get better at using the WiiU's strengths but once the Next Generation twins come out things could get much worse 3rd party support wise.
Click to expand...

I don´t see how it could get any worse at this point, the WiiU is already dead third party wise and the next gen consoles aren´t even announced.
 
prwxv3 said:
The fact that a next generation system is not easily outperforming the 7 year old tech HD twins is not a good sign. Devs will probably get better at using the WiiU's strengths but once the Next Generation twins come out things could get much worse 3rd party support wise.
Click to expand...

And it didn't need to be 10x as powerful, just enough to be obviously better from the outset.
 
AOC83 said:
I don´t see how it could get any worse at this point, the WiiU is already dead third party wise and the next gen consoles aren´t even announced.
Click to expand...

The Wii U has been out exactly 2 months today and already has way better Third Party support than the Wii did at the same time in it's lifespan.

Wii's best Third Party games during launch were Super Monkey Ball, Trauma Center.....and.....COD3? Not much.
 
Everyone with a little knowing about tech knows that the Wii U has more power than PS360. Not a little more but 2-3 more, under some circstances 10x more. That could already be said knowing the known tech facts month ago.
 
We already know this. It has advantages in some areas, disadvantages in others. The fact that it runs current-gen games like Ass Creed/Batman/Fifa/Mass Effect on Par with Ps360 with only few months of porting (without much knowledge of how to push system) already tells you its powerful
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

What if the WII U was successful?
2
53
533
Alan Wake replied
Enough Geoff Keighley. Enough State of Play. Enough 25 “bass drop” trailers. This is stupid.
2 3
111
936
Zephyranthes replied
You don't hate remasters enough
Opinion Game Dev  2
94
284
Danny Dudekisser replied
30fps enough for you?
2 3 4 5 6
279
4K
Hector Hall replied
SW Outlaws Dev: Game was Designed Around SSD's, Switch 2's Storage Card Not Fast Enough, Hence It's On a "Game Key Card"
2 3
113
975
Kerotan replied
Top Bottom