Lupin the Third
Member
7.9/10
Wii U Speculation Thread 2: Can't take anymore of this!!!
- Thread starter ClovingWestbrook
- Start date
- Status
7.9/10
What is this on a five point scale?
ClovingWestbrook
Banned
[Clark Gable];34503983 said:
So you're open to paying more for the next Playstation/ Xbox, why are you not open to paying more for the Wii U? Is it the controller, the Nintendo IP's that you're not too interested in? Is it that it most likely won't be as powerful as the competitors? I'm just curious.
Shin Johnpv
Member
My predictions, which are fairly similar to a lot of others, though probably cause some things we know about a bit.
- CPU: 3 core Power PC/7 based but highly customized, 3MB L2 cache, 3 - 3.5ghz
- GPU: 650 - 800 MHz, 640 - 800 SPUs, 32MB EDRAM, Honestly I can see valid arguments for it being VLIW5, VLIW4, or even GCN so I'm not going to make a call on that yet. What ever its based on is going to be highly customized.
- 1.5 GB of GDDR5, I'm not going to make a call on bus size. I'm going to continue to cross my fingers and hope that they go with 2 GB, but I'm not expecting it.
- 25/50 GB discs
- 8GB of flash memory for on console saving
- SD card support again, might even come with a 2 - 4 gig SD card
- USB 2.0, and I don't expect them to release a Nintendo branded HDD.
- No Wii chips to be found inside the system, I think backwards compatibility is going to be entirely software based.
-349.99 launch price, with some stuff like Chase Mii, etc pre-installed.
-I do think you're going to see a unified network similar to PSN/XBL. Some of that stuff is already starting to get there with the 3DS. I'm hoping for it to be name based, but I have a feeling it will still use Friend Codes.
I wonder if they're going to keep the channels thing for the OS, like the Wii. The 3DS is kind of similar to how the Channels worked, they're just not called channels.
- CPU: 3 core Power PC/7 based but highly customized, 3MB L2 cache, 3 - 3.5ghz
- GPU: 650 - 800 MHz, 640 - 800 SPUs, 32MB EDRAM, Honestly I can see valid arguments for it being VLIW5, VLIW4, or even GCN so I'm not going to make a call on that yet. What ever its based on is going to be highly customized.
- 1.5 GB of GDDR5, I'm not going to make a call on bus size. I'm going to continue to cross my fingers and hope that they go with 2 GB, but I'm not expecting it.
- 25/50 GB discs
- 8GB of flash memory for on console saving
- SD card support again, might even come with a 2 - 4 gig SD card
- USB 2.0, and I don't expect them to release a Nintendo branded HDD.
- No Wii chips to be found inside the system, I think backwards compatibility is going to be entirely software based.
-349.99 launch price, with some stuff like Chase Mii, etc pre-installed.
-I do think you're going to see a unified network similar to PSN/XBL. Some of that stuff is already starting to get there with the 3DS. I'm hoping for it to be name based, but I have a feeling it will still use Friend Codes.
I wonder if they're going to keep the channels thing for the OS, like the Wii. The 3DS is kind of similar to how the Channels worked, they're just not called channels.
Shin Johnpv
Member
The took a loss on GC right from the start. Granted it was small, but it was still there. People need to stop looking at one fucking generation for what companies will or won't do. This generation was an exception in ways for pretty much everyone. People really need to stop using this generation as a basis for what companies are going to do next gen.
*Edit*
I'm not saying 250 is a possibility, cause it's not. I'm just saying Nintendo is willing to, and has taken a lose on hardware. They just try to minimize that and not take 300+ dollar loses on systems. Which is the smart way to go about things.
ThatObviousUser
ὠαἴÏÏιÏÏÎ¿Ï Ïαá¿Ï εἶ
Would love to have it for 3DS. (Wii U would be nice also.)
Shin Johnpv
Member
All 3 consoles are going to be a lot closer in power than people think next generation. It's going to be PS2-GC-Xbox style power level differences all over again.
Ironically your example was from one generation. Not that the information is easily accessible but I'd like to know what other console Nintendo has taken a loss on from the get-go besides the GameCube.
Fighting games are garbage on portables.
TVC2 on Wii U would be awesome. And UMVC3. And SF4. And SFxT with playable Captain Falcon. I want em all.
This would be fantastic.
Diddy Kong
Banned
Glad to see lots of people are entertaining the idea of getting it at launch 
I think it should pretty much be expected at this point (except I personally expect 720/ps4 to be the Xbox of last generation and the wiiU the ps2 sans the gigantic bottlenecks).
MikeE21286
Member
Plus the bad start 3DS had at $249.99
If the console is above $299 I would expect shitloads of software.
Right, definitely a pack-in at $349. That would be ok with me, but it will be interesting...
What are the chances we know the following at E3:
- pricing
- launch date
I would not be surprised if we know neither.
For the wii and 3ds they didn't tell us so chances are low.
When did they announce for the Wii? If I recall, the 3DS price/(and release?) was revealed on January last year.
EDIT: I wouldn't be surprised if the price is $329. Something different
If we actually get it before Fall, as we've heard in some rumors, we'll probably get it at E3.
If it launches in November, which is more likely imo, they'll announce the price/date at their October (September?) conference.
[Clark Gable]
Banned
Being burned three times in a row by Nintendo. 3DS was the final straw.
When did they announce for the Wii? If I recall, the 3DS price/(and release?) was revealed on January last year.
EDIT: I wouldn't be surprised if the price is $329. Something different
I cant tell you specifically because I don't remember. you'd have to look it up or search for it in the last wiiu thread because this topic has been brought up before.
Shin Johnpv
Member
You are correct it was an example from one generation, and I wish I could site hard evidence for other gens, though I can not. Though I would imagine they took a lose on the N64. The MIPS chips that its CPU, and co-processor were based on, were crazy expensive. Granted these were really toned down and such chips, I would think they would still be pretty expensive. I would not be surprised to hear they took a lose on each N64 sold.
*Edit*
And yeah I do think in the PS2-GC-Xbox power comparison the Wii-U is going to be the PS2. With the 720/PS4 really close like the GC and XBox.
The 64 is probably the only system that would not surprise me if they had taken a hit. Such a beast of a console held back by cartridges ={.
MikeE21286
Member
I'd be shocked if we know either honestly.
It seems as if you tell an exact date you also need to tell us a price.
With the WiiU at E3 this year being labeled as a "re-unveiling" I can only imagine they'd want to gather hype/reaction to the final system before pricing it. It only makes sense.
Maybe make a surprise showing at TGS with dates and prices?
ThatObviousUser
ὠαἴÏÏιÏÏÎ¿Ï Ïαá¿Ï εἶ
September 14th, 2006 (Japan) / September 15th, 2006 (NA)
Skiesofwonder
Walruses, camels, bears, rabbits, tigers and badgers.
[Clark Gable];34504844 said:
How exactly were you burned by the 3DS? Besides the price drop (which is a Nintendo first this early in the gen) the 3DS has had a decent-good lineup compared to most first years and 2012 looks to have a crazy amount of good first/third party support.
JoshuaJSlone
Member
Wii's problem wasn't that it was $250, it was that they explicitly edited a GameCube rather than making something more up-to-date.ClovingSteam said:
$50 more than the price the market found unreasonable for the 3DS, yes. $130 more than the price most people bought it at.ClovingSteam said:
Optical_Matrix
Banned
£249.99-329.99
I can't see it going higher or lower than that threshold.
How so?
I can't see it going higher or lower than that threshold.
[Clark Gable];34504844 said:
How so?
Wii: $249,99
This whole thing of having to make consumers feel like they got a great deal by selling
merchandise one cent or dollar under a whole number is just batshit crazy when you think about it.
Aaron Strife
Banned
Unacceptable with who?
I can't imagine anyone would be really upset at the prospect of a cheaper console.
I understand Nintendo is focusing more on the core gamer this time, but family/children is still a big part of their success. Having an affordable, powerful console on the market will help that.
Did Sony ever start making a profit on PS3s sold? Because I can't imagine they want to go down that road again. MS will always have cash to burn but I'm sure it's something they're taking into consideration as well. I'm sure that's why Nintendo wouldn't worry about a new Xbox/PS stealing their market early on. Putting out a new system 10x as powerful as the 360/PS3 (like the PS2 -> PS3 transition) would be financial suicide.
It doesn't matter if it's a Nintendo first, the epic price drop was still a burn for early adopters. Some people might have found enough value in the freebee old games games, but I'm sure plenty didn't (I'm certainly glad I waited until the price drop).
I think Sony started to profit on the PS3 the last two years, but I might be wrong. That's why Sony is hesitant about releasing a new console so soon.
PS3 is FINALLY profitable, and releasing a new console might hurt them even more financially.
Wii won this gen? Gen is over? I think Wii bowing out earlier means it won a big portion only.
If the trend continues, then we could probably expect a similar scenario for the Wii U.
However, it is likely that they will just drop every bomb all at once at E3 to truly get a head start (if Aug/Sep launch).
So we will find out when the launch is during E3 regardless if they announce it or not.
Dreamwriter
Member
The 3DS actually had plenty of bundled software. Really, the price was not really the reason the system flopped. Notice that even when Nintendo dropped the price, sales didn't immediately take off - that didn't happen until Nintendo released Mario 3D and Mario Kart. Had the system launched with first-party killer-apps, I think $250 would have been a fine starting price, with a $30 to $50 pricedrop right before the Vita release.
ClovingWestbrook
Banned
And if they bring a console onto the market that is $250, it wouldn't be that much better than what is currently available which would be suicide when in a few years the Wii U wouldn't be able to handle the types of games released and built for the next Xbox/Playstation. If people don't want to pay $300+ , they don't have too. They can wait for it to drop in price. Nintendo wants the third party support, they want to make sure the system is relevant more than just a few years in terms of software being sold. The only way to accomplish this is to make sure its competitive with their competitors so they are able to receive the big third party quality titles they lacked this generation.
Dreamwriter
Member
The one thing that we know for sure about the CPU (other than it being an IBM multicore Power architecture chip) is that it uses eDRAM as part of the cache. Looking at the Power7, which is the chip IBM designed their eDRAM cache for, there's 32MB of eDRAM L3 cache shared amongst all 8 cores, each of which has lower-latency access to a 4MB section of it. There's then a 256kB L2 SRAM cache for each core as well. The reason they include the L2 SRAM cache is that the latency on that SRAM is 8 clock cycles, whereas the minimum latency on the eDRAM is 25 clock cycles (which would be reduced a bit if it were used as L2, but would still be much too high).
eDRAM is cheap and dense, but it's not going to be able to achieve the latency required for use as an L2 cache, so the L2 caches are going to be SRAM. Therefore, there is going to be some eDRAM L3 cache.
I don't know where the mentions of 3MB of L2 cache come from, but it strikes me as excessive if there's also L3 cache on there, and a bit on the low side if you're talking about L2+L3. Asymmetrical L2 cache is possible, perhaps along the lines of 256kB/128kB/128kB. The L3 cache, assuming it's shared, could be asymmetrical in a topological sense, in that if, for example, there's 8MB of L3 cache, the main core has low-latency access to 4MB of it, and each of the other cores 2MB.
I would also imagine that the 32MB eDRAM rumour would be referring to the GPU's framebuffer. There's no way a console CPU would need that much L3 cache.
On the matter of recent changes to the hardware, I very much doubt CPU cache is one of them. If there is a shared L3 cache (and I see no reason for it not to be shared), then the chip is physically designed around it to make sure each core has low-latency access. By increasing the cache you basically have to start from scratch to accommodate the larger physical area it would take up. Clock speeds may change, but I don't see anything happening to the cache.
MikeE21286
Member
I agree on most of your premise honestly.
It was a combined price + software affect I think we can agree on.
I'm not sure of the sales now, but I don't think they're setting the world on fire (although in Japan it's doing better than over here IIRC). I think they're just at reasonably good levels.
IMO if the system was still at $249.99 even with the software now and in the pipeline for 2012, it would be selling poorly.
I agree. It would also be very un-wise to have a 3DS-like price drop, because consoles are different. Everyone would criticize it and deem it a failure.
ShineALight
Member
At under $400, I'm helpless against the promise of HD Nintendo games. Especially when Pikmin 3 is a likely launch title and Retro's next game won't be far off.
bgassassin
Member
And a texture buffer of 4KB. >_<
Wii sold way more than 360/PS3 and Nintendo made the most profit out of their own console.
I also don't get what you mean by "bowing out earlier". Are you referring to the fact Wii U is coming out before the 720/PS4? If so... that's kind of silly. The Wii has lasted a normal console lifetime cycle (if not longer). I think it's natural that we'd see a new system 5/6 years after their last console release.
Obviously their sales will skyrocket once the WiiU is released.
Smiles and Cries
Member
$349 is a good price if the Wii U is at least 3x the power of a PS3
anything less is THIS gen not NEXT and Nintendo should not even bother
so it better be at $349 and worth it for the hardware
P.S. Hey Nintendo if you even think of putting a Mii feature in my Pikmin 3 I will boycott U for the next 10 years
anything less is THIS gen not NEXT and Nintendo should not even bother
so it better be at $349 and worth it for the hardware
P.S. Hey Nintendo if you even think of putting a Mii feature in my Pikmin 3 I will boycott U for the next 10 years
Well, the eDRAM will be providing all the bandwidth they really need for the framebuffer and for other things if they so choose (who knows how complex they'll make it in terms of functionality).
For the sake of comparing to 360, 96-bit GDDR5 is (theoretically) equivalent to 192-bit GDDR3 with respect to data transfer per clock. IIRC, GDDR5 starts out at 900MHz (rated operation), so it already has a 28.6% clock advantage over the 360 setup. Even if they matched the clocks with the 700MHz GDDR3, brain's prediction still puts the bandwidth to main memory as being 50% greater than 360 (32.8GB/s vs 22.1). The main reason for going with a smaller bus is that it more easily facilitates a future die reduction.
One would require 6x2Gbit chips for 1.5GB total and for GDDR5, you can have either 32-bit or 16-bit I/O per chip. So that's either a 192-bit or 96-bit bus.
As soon as you get to higher GDDR5 clock speeds, you'll need to increase the complexity of the I/O on the GPU itself so that it can support such high signal rates (it's no simple matter).
---------------------
Alternatively, there's DDR3, which should be relatively dirt cheap due to greater manufacturing supply. 2Gbit or 4Gbit DDR3 are certainly much more common and have been around a lot longer than GDDR5's more recent introduction of 2Gbit; keep in mind that with 4Gbit DDR3 they can also cut down on the number of chips and thus motherboard complexity.
96-bit DDR3-2133 is just a bit more bandwidth than the 360 config.
------------------
32MB of eDRAM is still a fair amount as long as you don't expect to use MSAA for the framebuffer. And if the configuration is flexible enough, you might do direct reading of the framebuffer in that local space to cut down on having to shift things to main memory, and perhaps use the eDRAM for texture ops... ultimately cutting down on main memory bandwidth contention. So... it really depends on the rest of the tech what makes a decent amount of sense here. Having a huge amount of bandwidth to main memory may not be as critical as you might think.
More is always better, but then you might wonder where exactly Nintendo is positioning this piece of hardware, that despite having much newer process technology and architecture available, must still fit within a chassis that is half the size of a 360 slim - it doesn't leave a lot of space for huge heatsinks and fans nor high end power circuits/capacitors etc. It's not like the 360S is a cool-running gadget with 90W power consumption at load (not to be confused with TDP).
I would like to throw my Miis for Bulborbs to eat! I wonder what the animation would be like.P.S. Hey Nintendo if you even think of putting a Mii feature in my Pikmin 3 I will boycott U for the next 10 years
Well, to slightly change the subject then...
Until recently, a lot of us have been speculating that many devs weren't announcing Wii U support for known titles in development because Nintendo has been forcing them to keep their traps shut in preparation for a big E3 blowout.
But then Project C.A.R.S. happened.
With very little drama or fanfare associated, they just announced a Wii U version of a pretty major title (for them), even going as far as slapping a Wii U logo on their press images (something many other 3rd parties who previously pledged support to the Wii U have yet to do).
Obviously, they're not bound by the iron-clad NDA we previously believed existed. So what do you guys think this means for Wii U 3rd party support? Does it mean anything at all?
bgassassin
Member
The 3MB of L2 cache and 32MB of eDRAM are not rumors. Those come directly from Nintendo target specs and I've confirmed that from multiple spots. Same with the cache being split asymmetrically.
Honestly I would say not to rely that much on how POWER7 looks since its a server chip. Yes it uses eDRAM for L3 cache, but going in more depth of what I said before the PowerPC A2 also uses the same eDRAM for L2 cache. Apparently the idea was to increase the memory on the chip over latency. The idea of L3 cache shouldn't even be thought about for the console as that would just make the die bigger. From what I understand the 32MB is considered as "MEM1". Essentially similar to Wii's 24MB of 1T-SRAM.
Also I don't see how the 3MB of L2 sounds excessive considering Xenon had 1MB and Cell had 2.5MB (if I remember correctly).
LOL. If I had made the thread I was going to name it "Wii U Speculation Thread of: Speculating the same things over and over till E3".
- Status