Wii U Speculation thread IV: Photoshop rumors and image memes

Status
Not open for further replies.
Father_Brain said:
It's still entirely possible that they were only allowed to announce ACIII for Wii U because it was already sorta-announced last E3.
Click to expand...

I don't know if that would be enough considering how tight everything has been. I would assume they could have easily let it remain ambiguous as to what kind of AC game Wii U would receive.

M74 said:
I'd love to have heard the call Ubisoft got after the Rayman trailer leaked. I wonder if they tightened the leash a bit after that.
Click to expand...

With Ubisoft there will probably always be holes, although I would have liked to have heard Nintendo's call as well if they made one.

Sadist said:
http://games.yahoo.com/blogs/plugge...intendo-upcoming-wii-u-console-172049063.html

Good stuff

lulz
Click to expand...

You were beaten twice. :)

Smiles and Cries said:
thread 6 just in time for Nintendo's 6th home console?
Click to expand...

At this rate yes.
 
IceDoesntHelp said:
Get what? My collection of Simpson DVD's? My collection of Kid Icarus AR Cards? My computer? My hand? My fox? What?
Click to expand...

The money. You know, the 10 grand?

Dreamwriter said:
Handhelds are different - Nintendo didn't actually say they weren't going to release specs for those, they just assumed people wouldn't be interested. The PSP didn't get its specs announced until after E3 either, except for the UMD storage space (Sony did eventually release the PSP specs though, just not until after the pre-launch E3).


For that to be possible, the system would actually have to be "three times" the performance, which for all we know may not be possible with existing technology :) And as the Wii-U is being released this year, and the competition not even announced this year, the specs will be fully known before the competitors announce their new consoles, so there's no reason not to announce the specs, unless the system truly is less powerful than current-gen consoles.
Click to expand...

Based on what we're hearing about MS's plans, 3x is actually low-balling it and assuming that Wii U is on the high-end of the expected specs.

Also, what does Nintendo gain from releasing specs? We already know it'll be weak by today's standards, so it only hurts them.
 
Dreamwriter said:
8th home console (or 12th if you count all 5 systems in the Color TV Game generation)

1977 Nintendo Color TV Game series
1980 Nintendo Computer TV Game
1983 Famicom/NES
1990 Super Famicom/SNES
1996 N64
2001 Gamecube
2006 Wii
2012 Wii U
Click to expand...

Don't worry, the closer we get to E3, the faster the threads will go.

We'll get to thread 8 for Nintendo's 8th console in no time haha.
 
Medalion said:
if the rumors to be believed about Wii-U is not even as powerful as 360/PS3
Click to expand...
There are also rumors that the Wii-U is "on par" with the 360/PS3. And rumors that it is "powerful enough to do 360/PS3 quality graphics but at 1080p/60hz". And rumors that it is "double 360/PS3" power. So which rumors are the ones that we "know" are the true ones?
 
Dreamwriter said:
There are also rumors that the Wii-U is "on par" with the 360/PS3. And rumors that it is "powerful enough to do 360/PS3 quality graphics but at 1080p/60hz". And rumors that it is "double 360/PS3" power. So which rumors are the ones that we "know" are the true ones?
Click to expand...

All of them.

I'm serious. At least all of the ones from places that aren't shady.
 
wsippel said:
Yeah, that's the $1000 question: What is Oban? I don't think it has anything to do with Sony or MS, it's probably the chip in production at fab 8 and previously at East Fishkill, and "Oban" is not only a town a Scotland, but also a Japanese coin. Maybe it's actually the Wii U CPU and SA got the details wrong. Maybe not.

And I have no idea what exactly would be required to provide clock for clock Wii compatibility. PPEs are in order, yet they are ABI compatible with the OoOE PPC970 line - iO cores can offer binary compatibility with OoO cores. Dunno.
Click to expand...

It is possible that "Oban" is the Wii U's GPU? Fab 8 is run by a consortium including Global Foundries (AMD manufacturing partner), IBM (making the Wii U CPU) and Renesas (previously NEC, who manufactured the GC and Wii GPUs). In addition we know that the Wii U's GPU is using eDRAM, which is reported to be part of whatever's being manufactured at Fab 8. The manufacturing node and timing also fit fairly well.

If it is the Wii U's GPU, then IBM's involvement could mean that the eDRAM is actually on-die with the GPU, as opposed to being on a separate die like Xenos. That would mean a substantially lower latency and possibly a much higher bandwidth as well, in comparison to the XBox360's set-up.

As far as out-of-order/in-order are concerned, it wouldn't have any effect on binary compatibility, it would just be very difficult for Nintendo to guarantee the same performance with an in-order CPU, even if it is substantially faster than Broadway. Besides, I thought we had fairly reliable reports that it's out-of-order (even Arkam agreed on that point)?
 
Thraktor said:
It is possible that "Oban" is the Wii U's GPU? Fab 8 is run by a consortium including Global Foundries (AMD manufacturing partner), IBM (making the Wii U CPU) and Renesas (previously NEC, who manufactured the GC and Wii GPUs). In addition we know that the Wii U's GPU is using eDRAM, which is reported to be part of whatever's being manufactured at Fab 8. The manufacturing node and timing also fit fairly well.

If it is the Wii U's GPU, then IBM's involvement could mean that the eDRAM is actually on-die with the GPU, as opposed to being on a separate die like Xenos. That would mean a substantially lower latency and possibly a much higher bandwidth as well, in comparison to the XBox360's set-up.

As far as out-of-order/in-order are concerned, it wouldn't have any effect on binary compatibility, it would just be very difficult for Nintendo to guarantee the same performance with an in-order CPU, even if it is substantially faster than Broadway. Besides, I thought we had fairly reliable reports that it's out-of-order (even Arkam agreed on that point)?
Click to expand...

Interesting. It was speculated by wsippel and myself in like... thread 2 that the 32nm "Oban" could be the Wii U GPU, however how could so many people be so wrong in that case? (I know Charlie doesn't have a spotless record, obviously, but there were a lot of internet reports making the rounds that the chip was for MS. With MS fornicating AMD up and down at the moment, I have expressed doubt that Oban is for MS). Not to mention that everyone here thought that the Wii U GPU was also 45nm.

And I would've thought that OoO was a given, considering their "100% 480p BC" targets that were already mentioned last E3. However, if this chip is a newer evolution of the PPE in the PS360 ... well, the base design is in-order, obviously. I'm not sure what to think at this point.
 
Luigison said:
I also noticed that my avatar needs to be transparent around the edges. I only have MS Paint on this machine. Any one care to change it or suggest a free program I can do it in?
Click to expand...

http://www.gimp.org/downloads/

poor man's photoshop

IdeaMan said:
We just need an algorithm to search easily news/a standardized & very flashy method to present them for us to spot them in a glimpse while browsing the pages/a way to tag posts as "NEWS".
Click to expand...

Most of us do by posting: "HAS THIS BEEN POSTED YET?"... lol
 
Dreamwriter said:
Eh? Why do you highly doubt that Nintendo pays attention to what Darksiders 2 developers publically state? Or that Nintendo's PR reads major gaming sites?
Click to expand...

If they really care about it they could be stated: "Yes, the system is quite powerfull", instead they say: "We don't focus on hardware specs, we care about games".

Not saying that the system will not be powerfull, just it's not the main factor for Wii U.
 
wsippel said:
Yeah, that's the $1000 question: What is Oban? I don't think it has anything to do with Sony or MS, it's probably the chip in production at fab 8 and previously at East Fishkill, and "Oban" is not only a town a Scotland, but also a Japanese coin. Maybe it's actually the Wii U CPU and SA got the details wrong. Maybe not.

And I have no idea what exactly would be required to provide clock for clock Wii compatibility. PPEs are in order, yet they are ABI compatible with the OoOE PPC970 line - iO cores can offer binary compatibility with OoO cores. Dunno.
Click to expand...

Thraktor said:
It is possible that "Oban" is the Wii U's GPU? Fab 8 is run by a consortium including Global Foundries (AMD manufacturing partner), IBM (making the Wii U CPU) and Renesas (previously NEC, who manufactured the GC and Wii GPUs). In addition we know that the Wii U's GPU is using eDRAM, which is reported to be part of whatever's being manufactured at Fab 8. The manufacturing node and timing also fit fairly well.

If it is the Wii U's GPU, then IBM's involvement could mean that the eDRAM is actually on-die with the GPU, as opposed to being on a separate die like Xenos. That would mean a substantially lower latency and possibly a much higher bandwidth as well, in comparison to the XBox360's set-up.

As far as out-of-order/in-order are concerned, it wouldn't have any effect on binary compatibility, it would just be very difficult for Nintendo to guarantee the same performance with an in-order CPU, even if it is substantially faster than Broadway. Besides, I thought we had fairly reliable reports that it's out-of-order (even Arkam agreed on that point)?
Click to expand...


StevieP said:
Interesting. It was speculated by wsippel and myself in like... thread 2 that the 32nm "Oban" could be the Wii U GPU, however how could so many people be so wrong in that case? (I know Charlie doesn't have a spotless record, obviously, but there were a lot of internet reports making the rounds that the chip was for MS. With MS fornicating AMD up and down at the moment, I have expressed doubt that Oban is for MS). Not to mention that everyone here thought that the Wii U GPU was also 45nm.

And I would've thought that OoO was a given, considering their "100% 480p BC" targets that were already mentioned last E3. However, if this chip is a newer evolution of the PPE in the PS360 ... well, the base design is in-order, obviously. I'm not sure what to think at this point.
Click to expand...
It's not Oban. Oban would not be ready for the end of this year.
 
BurntPork said:
It's not Oban. Oban would not be ready for the end of this year.
Click to expand...
It would be, actually. It's seemingly in low volume production for about half a year by now and will enter mass production in H2. Which would fit the Wii U plan, but makes no sense for consoles not launching for another 15+ months.
 
wsippel said:
It would be, actually. It's seemingly in low volume production for about half a year by now and will enter mass production in H2. Which would fit the Wii U plan, but makes no sense for consoles not launching for another 15+ months.
Click to expand...

The thing is, there has been zero evidence so far pointing to Wii U using a Southern Islands GPU or a 32nm CPU. It just seems like wishful thinking to me.
 
StevieP said:
Interesting. It was speculated by wsippel and myself in like... thread 2 that the 32nm "Oban" could be the Wii U GPU, however how could so many people be so wrong in that case? (I know Charlie doesn't have a spotless record, obviously, but there were a lot of internet reports making the rounds that the chip was for MS. With MS fornicating AMD up and down at the moment, I have expressed doubt that Oban is for MS). Not to mention that everyone here thought that the Wii U GPU was also 45nm.

And I would've thought that OoO was a given, considering their "100% 480p BC" targets that were already mentioned last E3. However, if this chip is a newer evolution of the PPE in the PS360 ... well, the base design is in-order, obviously. I'm not sure what to think at this point.
Click to expand...

I don't see any reason for it to be a PPE derivative. For one thing it precludes OoOE, but more generally there's no reason for Nintendo to be limited to an evolution of an existing chip. They did it with the Gamecube because there was a chip that already suited their purposes, but nothing IBM currently produces fits Nintendo's needs, and with a production run of anything from 30m-100m units, a custom CPU is entirely feasible. That said I'd say the cores will most resemble very slimmed down versions of the Power7's cores, with only 2-way SMT, a reduced number of instruction units and a heavily modified VSX. The instruction pipeline itself it likely to be based off the Power7's as well, as it's the only OoO pipeline that reaches Nintendo's performance requirements.
 
wsippel said:
It would be, actually. It's seemingly in low volume production for about half a year by now and will enter mass production in H2. Which would fit the Wii U plan, but makes no sense for consoles not launching for another 15+ months.
Click to expand...

I have also read somewhere that the original plan for MS was to launch at the end of this year, but a hardware change for the beefier has delayed that by about a year. It could be bunk, but maybe it's also possible that Oban was the "old" MS console (the one with PPE+ and Turks)?

As I said, I'm not sure what to think anymore. Charlie said that Oban was a joint chip (IBM + AMD) but that wouldn't make much sense either. The Wii U doesn't seem to be an SoC, and certainly the CPU is still at 45nm as per CU45HP being all over those documents you saw and that one LinkedIn post I stumbled upon from Infotech that may or may not be related to the Wii U.

That said, if Oban is the Wii U GPU could that mean... the base chip prior to customization was Northern Islands?

Thraktor said:
I don't see any reason for it to be a PPE derivative. For one thing it precludes OoOE, but more generally there's no reason for Nintendo to be limited to an evolution of an existing chip. They did it with the Gamecube because there was a chip that already suited their purposes, but nothing IBM currently produces fits Nintendo's needs, and with a production run of anything from 30m-100m units, a custom CPU is entirely feasible. That said I'd say the cores will most resemble very slimmed down versions of the Power7's cores, with only 2-way SMT, a reduced number of instruction units and a heavily modified VSX. The instruction pipeline itself it likely to be based off the Power7's as well, as it's the only OoO pipeline that reaches Nintendo's performance requirements.
Click to expand...

What do you make of wsippel's "target specs" for this particular CPU with a "1ghz-4ghz" operating frequency, then? I have never seen any documents indicating that anyone would want to run a server-class CPU as low as 1ghz. I have seen plenty of A2/47x's run in that range, but they don't go to 4ghz either (as he'd mentioned).
 
Dreamwriter said:
8th home console (or 12th if you count all 5 systems in the Color TV Game generation)

1977 Nintendo Color TV Game series
1980 Nintendo Computer TV Game
Click to expand...

Wasn't the latter simply an extension of the first? It was the sixth release in the Color TV game series (Othello). Nintendo's "second generation" of games was also their entry into the handheld market, with the Game & Watch series.
 
StevieP said:
I have also read somewhere that the original plan for MS was to launch at the end of this year, but a hardware change for the beefier has delayed that by about a year. It could be bunk, but maybe it's also possible that Oban was the "old" MS console (the one with PPE+ and Turks)?

As I said, I'm not sure what to think anymore. Charlie said that Oban was a joint chip (IBM + AMD) but that wouldn't make much sense either. The Wii U doesn't seem to be an SoC, and certainly the CPU is still at 45nm as per CU45HP being all over those documents you saw and that one LinkedIn post I stumbled upon from Infotech that may or may not be related to the Wii U.

That said, if Oban is the Wii U GPU could that mean... the base chip prior to customization was Northern Islands?



What do you make of wsippel's "target specs" for this particular CPU with a "1ghz-4ghz" operating frequency, then? I have never seen any documents indicating that anyone would want to run a server-class CPU as low as 1ghz. I have seen plenty of A2/47x's run in that range, but they don't go to 4ghz either (as he'd mentioned).
Click to expand...

That would make sense when you consider what Alberto said.
 
TunaLover said:
If they really care about it they could be stated: "Yes, the system is quite powerfull", instead they say: "We don't focus on hardware specs, we care about games".

Not saying that the system will not be powerfull, just it's not the main factor for Wii U.
Click to expand...
Now that I think about it, there's quite a contrast in how they talked about the Nintendo Juicy™ last year and this year. Remember Reggie bragging about how this system would be for families with high disposable income? And how they were targeting core gamers with the system?

Perhaps I'm reading a bit too much into the silence (Nayru knows people do it all the time), but the braggart Nintendo of last year seems so far-separated from the mute Nintendo of this year..
 
BurntPork said:
The thing is, there has been zero evidence so far pointing to Wii U using a Southern Islands GPU or a 32nm CPU. It just seems like wishful thinking to me.
Click to expand...
And I don't think it does. But I don't think Oban is what SemiAccurate claimed in the first place. Because the chip they talked about probably doesn't exist.
 
are we at the cycle of the thread where we once again play what is inside the WiiU?

I thought we were getting closer to nailing it down now it seems like more guesswork
 
HylianTom said:
Now that I think about it, there's quite a contrast in how they talked about the Nintendo Juicy™ last year and this year. Remember Reggie bragging about how this system would be for families with high disposable income? And how they were targeting core gamers with the system?

Perhaps I'm reading a bit too much into the silence (Nayru knows people do it all the time), but the braggart Nintendo of last year seems so far-separated from the mute Nintendo of this year..
Click to expand...

They were screwed really bad with all the leaks that forced them to do a rushed and completely unnecessary presentation at last year E3 leaving them completely vulnerable to Microsoft moneyhat/we-don't-mind-throwing-billions-down-the-drain machine and Sony copy-pasting machine so now they're probably playing confussion and even missinformation. At this point, I would even think that the "less powerful than PS3/360" came from them in an attempt of misleading the competition. They must be royally pissed at Ubisoft seeing how like 90% of the leaks for their hardware come from that house of incompetents.
 
wsippel said:
And I don't think it does. But I don't think Oban is what SemiAccurate claimed in the first place. Because the chip they talked about probably doesn't exist.
Click to expand...

I don't think Charlie was the only one talking about Oban, though (unless everyone else on the internet sourced SA's site when talking about it). And there is definitely SOMETHING being produced at Fab 8 at 32nm, because I think IBM or someone else put out some kind press release (at work so I don't exactly have the luxury to dig it up).

Smiles and Cries said:
are we at the cycle of the thread where we once again play what is inside the WiiU?

I thought we were getting closer to nailing it down now it seems like more guesswork
Click to expand...

Hey, isn't it far more entertaining to speculate about the Wii U in the Wii U speculation thread?
it's better than the endless cycle of crappy replacement names and pessimism over NDAs lol
 
HylianTom said:
Now that I think about it, there's quite a contrast in how they talked about the Nintendo Juicy™ last year and this year. Remember Reggie bragging about how this system would be for families with high disposable income? And how they were targeting core gamers with the system?

Perhaps I'm reading a bit too much into the silence (Nayru knows people do it all the time), but the braggart Nintendo of last year seems so far-separated from the mute Nintendo of this year..
Click to expand...

They haven't said anything this year really. Suspecting that the specs were cut based on that statement is a bit of a jump.
 
Just saw this over at IGN.

Nintendo has confirmed to IGN that it plans to support both third and first party content for its new digital initiative. Late last week the publisher revealed that, starting this August with New Super Mario Bros. 2, all self-published games will be available on launch day in digital and packaged forms. This plan applies to both the 3DS and Wii U.

"We are currently preparing a program for third parties but have nothing specific to announce at this time," a Nintendo representative told IGN, when asked about the company's plans to include other publishers. There's currently no word on prospective partners, nor a timetable for their possible involvement.
Click to expand...

http://wii.ign.com/articles/122/1224063p1.html
 
StevieP said:
As I said, I'm not sure what to think anymore. Charlie said that Oban was a joint chip (IBM + AMD) but that wouldn't make much sense either. The Wii U doesn't seem to be an SoC, and certainly the CPU is still at 45nm as per CU45HP being all over those documents you saw and that one LinkedIn post I stumbled upon from Infotech that may or may not be related to the Wii U.
Click to expand...

I'm probably misremembering, but a mixed-signal SoC could allow for different fabs in one SoC (e.g. 45nm CPU/32nm GPU). Saw this awhile back and my memory likes to play tricks on me so I can't confirm that as true at the moment.
 
DrWong said:
Actually, I know the guys who created this Oban. Maybe I can ask them to leak some stuff. They're French, so...
Click to expand...

By all means! lol

How accurate is fudzilla in their rumour mill? Note that they claim a different source (i.e. they don't source SemiAccurate)
http://www.fudzilla.com/processors/item/25619-oban-initial-product-run-is-real

fudzilla said:
It seems now that recent speculation that the new main System on a Chip (SoC) for the Next Xbox (or Xbox 720, if you like) began production is apparently accurate; the SoC did indeed start production in late December of 2011. Sources tell us that the code name for the chip is Oban, and it is being produced by both IBM and Global Foundries for Microsoft.

If speculation is correct, which our sources believe it is, the power behind the next Xbox will be a PowerPC CPU that is married to an ATI Southern Islands GPU, or modified 7000 series. Continued rumors of an x86 compatible CPU seem to be bunk, just based on where the chip is being fab’d.

This first run of these 32nm Oban chips will be destined for developer consoles, so any hope for a holiday console release in 2012 seems unrealistic, according to our sources, but an announcement perhaps before the end of the year might be possible.
Click to expand...
 
StevieP said:
I have also read somewhere that the original plan for MS was to launch at the end of this year, but a hardware change for the beefier has delayed that by about a year. It could be bunk, but maybe it's also possible that Oban was the "old" MS console (the one with PPE+ and Turks)?

As I said, I'm not sure what to think anymore. Charlie said that Oban was a joint chip (IBM + AMD) but that wouldn't make much sense either. The Wii U doesn't seem to be an SoC, and certainly the CPU is still at 45nm as per CU45HP being all over those documents you saw and that one LinkedIn post I stumbled upon from Infotech that may or may not be related to the Wii U.

That said, if Oban is the Wii U GPU could that mean... the base chip prior to customization was Northern Islands?
Click to expand...

Well, it's possible that the "IBM + AMD" was misinterpreted, and doesn't actually refer to a SoC, but rather a joint AMD/IBM chip design, which could well mean an AMD GPU with IBM eDRAM on board.

As far as MS is concerned, I don't see why they'd want to be out so early with a successor, given the increasing profitability of the XBox360, and especially the release of Kinect. Then again, it's possible that they expected much weaker numbers by this stage, which have caused them to change their plans.

StevieP said:
What do you make of wsippel's "target specs" for this particular CPU with a "1ghz-4ghz" operating frequency, then? I have never seen any documents indicating that anyone would want to run a server-class CPU as low as 1ghz. I have seen plenty of A2/47x's run in that range, but they don't go to 4ghz either (as he'd mentioned).
Click to expand...

I wouldn't pay much attention to the lower end of the range, I'm sure you could downclock a Power7 to 100MHz if you really wanted to. The upper bound of 4GHz makes sense, though. Nintendo would be looking for a final clock speed somewhere in the 3-4GHz range, so it makes sense to design a chip for anywhere up to 4GHz, and then nail down the final clock speed once you're doing final thermal management with production hardware. I still wouldn't expect anything above 3.5GHz on the final chip, though.

Edit: The SemiAccurate report I've been basing this on is actually this one, which doesn't mention Oban, so disregard my references to Oban and replace with "whatever's being produced at Fab 8".

Edit 2: And here's Global Foundries PR confirmation that 32nm manufacturing involving IBM's eDRAM got under way at Fab 8, for anyone who's interested. No mention of AMD, but that doesn't necessarily mean anything.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Similar threads

Rumor: GTA IV and Max Payne 3 Remasters Likely in Development
2 3 4
185
1K
awwr999999 replied
Dragon Age Veilguard - Memes Thread
2 3 4 5
216
24K
Robb replied
  • Locked
[Speculation] PlayStation Console, Games Price increase could be revealed on May 15th
Rumor  2
78
928
dorkimoe replied
'Pills' Found at Miami Music Week Fuel GTA VI Speculation of Release Date
Rumor 
9
799
willothedog replied
[Speculation] GTA VI could be delayed again
2 3
148
1K
Kerotan replied
Top Bottom