Support NeoGAF

[blu]

You don't need to burn the house down to build a powerful hardware for a given price. Just look at the 3DS vs Vita. Both targeted at $250 but a huge difference in power level.

What makes you think the BOMs of the 3DS and Vita are price-equal? One of them goes into a product that is said to break-even-ish at $170, the other - into a product that is said to break-even-ish at $250. Unless you believe Sony's marketing and distribution to be massively more costly than Nintendo's, that basically means those costs differences are mainly due to BOM and initial R&D investments.

 

[H_Prestige]

You don't think the Vita is hiding some of its costs in the now-completely-necessary and hilariously overpriced memory cards, do you?

They already confirmed the system itself isn't sold at a loss. The memory cards just net them some extra cash with every purchase.

What makes you think the BOMs of the 3DS and Vita are price-equal? One of them goes into a product that is said to break-even-ish at $170, the other - into a product that is said to break-even-ish at $250. Unless you believe Sony's marketing and distribution to be massively more costly than Nintendo's, that basically means those costs differences are mainly due to BOM and initial R&D investments.

That's what I'm saying, the production costs aren't the same. They both targeted $250 as a retail price, but Nintendo significantly cheapened out on the hardware relative to Sony so they could sell with greater margin.

 

[Snakeyes]

Learned from whom?
The Company that built an overtuned piece of hardware that was extremely loud and burned down very easily in its first 2 years?
Or the other company that built an even more overtuned and hard to develop piece of hardware, lost half of their market share from last gen and lots of billion dollars?

Yet these two platforms are much better at attracting the type of gamer that constantly spends. They could've gone for a happy medium but no, they just had to cheapen out again.

Chopper, are these comments based on the latest devkits?

 

[TwilightPrincess]

Also, this isn't exactly a Wii situation. With the Wii Nintendo took exactly the same tech as last gen and just added more RAM and increased the clock speeds.

The Wii U is made using "mid-gen" hardware, which is what many people were expecting from the Wii when it was first announced.

Are u building on the old rumors? Don´t think you can compare it like that, it´s a console not a pc

 

[EatChildren]

Last I heard the rumors were pointing towards an AMD HD 4770 and something between 1 and 2GBs of RAM. If that holds true, that would mean between 2~3x GPU performance and 2~4x the RAM.

Not enough to produce games which look significantly different than current gen (but that'd be the case even with double the power), but allow current-gen multiplatform to run without resorting to sub-HD resolutions, aggressive texture streaming and some games would be able to either run at 1080p or reach 60fps. As example, a Sonic Generations port would easily run at 60fps on such setup.

Even with a relatively minor GPU performance increase one should, theoretically, be able to push 'better looking' games out on the system with a well optimised engine, if just in terms of greater texture/asset variety loaded into a single scene, busier draw distances, etc. If the RAM and processing is greater, it could be made useful there.

Is that the rumours we're all going off? The AMD HD 4770?

 

[Forsaken82]

Half gen leap over what? It should be clear by now how over engineered (and I really don't mean that in a bad way) the 360 and PS3 were for when they were released. The fact that Nintendo also went against the norm in the opposite direction didn't help things.

I'm pretty content with a medium range jump over what we have now as long as 1080P/60fps is there for most games. I'll save the Samaritan level stuff for whatever PC I build next.

I would expect one or the other, but not both, at least not as the standard for the gen, even on the next MS and Sony systems. I think developers are going to continue to push the boundaries of graphics and would rather sacrifice FPS for the sake of technical prowess. I think we will get games like Halo and CoD which will run at 1080p and 60fps but don't expect frostbite 3 based games or Cryengine 4 based games running at 1080p AND 60fps. It will be one or the other. I wouldn't be surprised to see most games running 720p and 60fps (which when thinking about it, would be a decent upgrade compared to this gen. Very few games actually released at 720p AND 60fps.

CoD and Halo this gen both released at sub 720 right? Not to mention the handful of 1080p games we had barely ran at 30fps.

 

[watershed]

Jezuz guys, not that Nintendo hardware isn't gonna disappoint the hardcore, because it always will in some way, but the flood of negativity due to some second, second hand talk seems a little premature.

 

[royalan]

Jezuz guys, not that Nintendo hardware isn't gonna disappoint the hardcore, because it always will in some way, but the flood of negativity due to some second, second hand talk seems a little premature.

Well, this is a discussion thread - what else are we gonna talk about? It's not like Nintendo's gonna clear anything up.

 

[blu]

That's what I'm saying, the production costs aren't the same. They both targeted $250 as a retail price, but Nintendo significantly cheapened out on the hardware relative to Sony so they could sell with greater margin.

Well, as we know by now - they couldn't. So all said and done, at the end of the day it's still a $170 product vs a $250 product.

 

[Saint Gregory]

I would expect one or the other, but not both, at least not as the standard for the gen, even on the next MS and Sony systems. I think developers are going to continue to push the boundaries of graphics and would rather sacrifice FPS for the sake of technical prowess. I think we will get games like Halo and CoD which will run at 1080p and 60fps but don't expect frostbite 3 based games or Cryengine 4 based games running at 1080p AND 60fps. It will be one or the other. I wouldn't be surprised to see most games running 720p and 60fps (which when thinking about it, would be a decent upgrade compared to this gen. Very few games actually released at 720p AND 60fps.

CoD and Halo this gen both released at sub 720 right? Not to mention the handful of 1080p games we had barely ran at 30fps.

Didn't Nintendo already say that 1080p would be the target for most games on the U? They didn't say anything about framerates that I can remember but if Sony and MS can't at least deliver 1080p/60fps for their new consoles it won't only be developers who'll be pissed.

 

[DCKing]

It's doomed to Wii-level third-party support if it really is just slightly about PS3/360.

It's actually not as bad as you think. The lack of power in the Wii is a problem, but that itself not what's causing lack of third party support.

The problem with the Wii is that it uses the same tech as the GameCube. The GameCube itself was unusual even at the time of its release, because it didn't follow the same shader structure as the PC and Xbox. Even during the GameCube time some third party developers simply couldn't make sense of it and simply left shaders out. Incredibly, and despite increasingly shader heavy games, Nintendo didn't do anything about it used the exact same tech in the Wii.

Nintendo could have created a console with the same computational power as the Wii, but instead supporting technology other people were using at the time. It would have allowed the Wii to run id Tech 4 (Doom III engine), Source (HL2 engine), the CoD engine to some extent and maybe even a watered down UE3.0. Because it didn't, it meant that developers had to write entirely new technology for the Wii. That's an investment lots of them didn't want to make.

The point is, that's not going to happen with Wii U. It has tech that at least conforms to DirectX 10, and probably DirectX 11. It will be at least possible to port games, opposed to having to write entirely new games from scratch. Moreover, there is no way that Sony's and Microsoft's offerings are going to make as big a leap as they did last time (at least not when launching in 2012), so there's absolutely no way the Wii U will be in the same position.

 

[EatChildren]

Didn't Nintendo already say that 1080p would be the target for most games on the U? They didn't say anything about framerates that I can remember but if Sony and MS can't at least deliver 1080p/60fps for their new consoles it won't only be developers who'll be pissed.

Nintendo is a stickler for performance. Mario Kart Wii could have looked much, much better than it did. Same probably goes for Mario Kart 3DS. But in both instances Nintendo prioritised 60fps gameplay, and thus docked the visuals accordingly.

It wouldn't surprise me of Nintendo aimed for 1080p and/or 60fps in as many games as possible, and I expect that to come at a visual cost. Not that I care given I love high framerates, but I cant see them crippling game performance in favour of better visuals. It's just not what they do.

 

[bgassassin]

Last I heard the rumors were pointing towards an AMD HD 4770 and something between 1 and 2GBs of RAM. If that holds true, that would mean between 2~3x GPU performance and 2~4x the RAM.

Don't recall any rumors mentioning that GPU.

 

[watershed]

Well, this is a discussion thread - what else are we gonna talk about? It's not like Nintendo's gonna clear anything up.

I never said don't discuss I was talking about the negativity of the posts after the "news". Personally I don't make much of that info because the most interesting parts of the wii u to me aren't about graphics output. Also at this point I greet any info about the wii u with skepticism and curiousity instead of acceptance.

 

[snesfreak]

Jezuz guys, not that Nintendo hardware isn't gonna disappoint the hardcore, because it always will in some way, but the flood of negativity due to some second, second hand talk seems a little premature.

thisisneogafdude.gif

 

[Übermatik]

Even with a relatively minor GPU performance increase one should, theoretically, be able to push 'better looking' games out on the system with a well optimised engine, if just in terms of greater texture/asset variety loaded into a single scene, busier draw distances, etc. If the RAM and processing is greater, it could be made useful there.

Is that the rumours we're all going off? The AMD HD 4770?

I thought that was the original speculation? More recently I've heard people draw more towards a 4850...?

 

[BurntPork]

That's what I'm saying, the production costs aren't the same. They both targeted $250 as a retail price, but Nintendo significantly cheapened out on the hardware relative to Sony so they could sell with greater margin.

So, your argument is that Nintendo's going to overprice Wii U like they did with 3DS?

 

[bgassassin]

It's actually not as bad as you think. The lack of power in the Wii is a problem, but that itself not what's causing lack of third party support.

The problem with the Wii is that it uses the same tech as the GameCube. The GameCube itself was unusual even at the time of its release, because it didn't follow the same shader structure as the PC and Xbox. Even during the GameCube time some third party developers simply couldn't make sense of it and simply left shaders out. Incredibly, and despite increasingly shader heavy games, Nintendo didn't do anything about it used the exact same tech in the Wii.

Nintendo could have created a console with the same computational power as the Wii, but instead supporting technology other people were using at the time. It would have allowed the Wii to run id Tech 4 (Doom III engine), Source (HL2 engine), the CoD engine to some extent and maybe even a watered down UE3.0. Because it didn't, it meant that developers had to write entirely new technology for the Wii. That's an investment lots of them didn't want to make.

The point is, that's not going to happen with Wii U. It has tech that at least conforms to DirectX 10, and probably DirectX 11. It will be at least possible to port games, opposed to having to write entirely new games from scratch. Moreover, there is no way that Sony's and Microsoft's offerings are going to make as big a leap as they did last time (at least not when launching in 2012), so there's absolutely no way the Wii U will be in the same position.

For future reference you don't need to make these types of responses to BP. He knows this stuff, but still overreacts.

 

[BurntPork]

I thought that was the original speculation? More recently I've heard people draw more towards a 4850...?

4850 is too power hungry at 40nm, and I doubt that it could be called "underpowered" with that. We're looking at a 4650.

 

[-Pyromaniac-]

Damn that chopper news sounds disappointing. Not the weaker part, that was inevitable, but the other stuff, or what it could imply.

 

[Saint Gregory]

Nintendo is a stickler for performance. Mario Kart Wii could have looked much, much better than it did. Same probably goes for Mario Kart 3DS. But in both instances Nintendo prioritised 60fps gameplay, and thus docked the visuals accordingly.

It wouldn't surprise me of Nintendo aimed for 1080p and/or 60fps in as many games as possible, and I expect that to come at a visual cost. Not that I care given I love high framerates, but I cant see them crippling game performance in favour of better visuals. It's just not what they do.

I sure hope so, the framerates this gen have been painful and I find myself buying more and more PC versions of games because of it. 60fps isn't necessary for every game typre but all three consoles need to establish a zero tolerance policy against sub-30fps framerates next gen.

 

[Übermatik]

4850 is too power hungry at 40nm.

Theoretically speaking, couldn't Nintendo take a custom GPU similar to the 4850 and force it to 28nm though?

 

[JosephManderley]

It's actually not as bad as you think. The lack of power in the Wii is a problem, but that itself not what's causing lack of third party support.

The problem with the Wii is that it uses the same tech as the GameCube. The GameCube itself was unusual even at the time of its release, because it didn't follow the same shader structure as the PC and Xbox. Even during the GameCube time some third party developers simply couldn't make sense of it and simply left shaders out. Incredibly, and despite increasingly shader heavy games, Nintendo didn't do anything about it used the exact same tech in the Wii.

Nintendo could have created a console with the same computational power as the Wii, but instead supporting technology other people were using at the time. It would have allowed the Wii to run id Tech 4 (Doom III engine), Source (HL2 engine), the CoD engine to some extent and maybe even a watered down UE3.0. Because it didn't, it meant that developers had to write entirely new technology for the Wii. That's an investment lots of them didn't want to make.

The point is, that's not going to happen with Wii U. It has tech that at least conforms to DirectX 10, and probably DirectX 11. It will be at least possible to port games, opposed to having to write entirely new games from scratch. Moreover, there is no way that Sony's and Microsoft's offerings are going to make as big a leap as they did last time (at least not when launching in 2012), so there's absolutely no way the Wii U will be in the same position.

This. Damn fine post!

I'm crying out for some actual news. Not rumor. Not speculation. NEWS!!!

I'd kill for a new gameplay trailer for a launch title, or a couple of new game announcements.

 

[Log4Girlz]

I'm really disgusted by the rumblings about the system's power. I thought Nintendo would have learned.

This. Especially since the Wii was such an embarrassing failure. They will never learn it seems.

 

[Übermatik]

This. Especially since the Wii was such an embarrassing failure. They will never learn it seems.

How on earth was it a failure? Nintendo is a business, they made a fucking ton. Their approach and focus will always be on delivering gaming experiences to the widest market possible, and just because they lost out on one particular demographic/segment last-gen, it certainly didn't slow them down.

 

[blu]

Damn that chopper news sounds disappointing. Not the weaker part, that was inevitable, but the other stuff, or what it could imply.

The other stuff implies that some publishers/developers can't be arsed. Expect plenty of verbatim ps360 ports and similar ps720 downports. Business as usual.

 

[BurntPork]

Theoretically speaking, couldn't Nintendo take a custom GPU similar to the 4850 and force it to 28nm though?

Maybe, but if the case and cooling haven't improved, it would need an underclock.

 

[Sadist]

How on earth was it a failure? Nintendo is a business, they made a fucking ton. Their approach and focus will always be on delivering gaming experiences to the widest market possible, and just because they lost out on one particular demographic/segment last-gen, it certainly didn't slow them down.

Psssst

I think it's sarcasm

 

[Log4Girlz]

How on earth was it a failure? Nintendo is a business, they made a fucking ton. Their approach and focus will always be on delivering gaming experiences to the widest market possible, and just because they lost out on one particular demographic/segment last-gen, it certainly didn't slow them down.

Embarrassing failure.

 

[Übermatik]

Maybe, but if the case and cooling haven't improved, it would need an underclock.

I'ms ure they've tweaked it enough to be able to pull it off, even with a little underclocking like you say. It seems like the route they will take. Fairly powerful GPU, underclocked for performance and efficiency/energy aspects.

Psssst

I think it's sarcasm

What is sarcasm?

 

[Saint Gregory]

This. Especially since the Wii was such an embarrassing failure. They will never learn it seems.

I see what you did here but in a way it was a failure. All three console developers made massive mistakes this gen that cost them but Nintendo's were the easiest to avoid. They chose to thumb their noses at the industry when they made the Wii as underpowered as it is. It was a total take-their-ball-and-go-home response to the failure of the Gamecube and they knew what it would mean for them long term with 3rd parties.

Now they have to try to undo that damage with both gamers and 3rd parties alike. If the Wii was the unmitigated success that it looks like on paper then Nintendo wouldn't be in the position that they are now with one dead system and another that can't launch soon enough.

 

[BurntPork]

I'm talking about a heavy underclock. RV700 is such an old, inefficient architecture that Nintendo should be ashamed for choosing it.

And this is a moot point, since there's no chance of Nintendo going 28nm.

 

[guek]

Half gen leap over what? It should be clear by now how over engineered (and I really don't mean that in a bad way) the 360 and PS3 were for when they were released. The fact that Nintendo also went against the norm in the opposite direction didn't help things.

I'm pretty content with a medium range jump over what we have now as long as 1080P/60fps is there for most games. I'll save the Samaritan level stuff for whatever PC I build next.

This is pretty much what I was thinking. I asked whether chopper's source was comparing the wii u to the current gen or with what devs are expecting next gen, and if the latter, whether or not his source had any insight into what MS and Sony are planning.

It's all relative. If it's a modest jump over the current gen, I'll be satisfied, even if a lot of devs might not be. At the same time, I think it's very true that how devs react to the Wii U's hardware will depend greatly on what the competition is going to bring out against it.

Psssst

I think it's sarcasm

I don't think so. I'm pretty sure log is the drive by troll who pretends like he's not talking out of his ass and acts like he's "in the know" about how much nintendo's a joke.

 

[Sadist]

Oh

Well then carry on

 

[DCKing]

Theoretically speaking, couldn't Nintendo take a custom GPU similar to the 4850 and force it to 28nm though?

Why would they, though? If they're going for 28nm anyway there's no need to customize a 4850 design. They can just use the new more powerful and more efficient Lombok chips from AMD?

Truth is, the Wii U GPU will not be directly based on the R7xx series. There's no way. Maybe the early devkits have a 4850, but that's it.

 

[Azure J]

What in the world is happening in here now. :/

Did we happen upon real news regarding the system's specs? Why am I seeing 4650s being tossed around all of a sudden?

My mind is full of fuck.

 

[Log4Girlz]

This is pretty much what I was thinking. I asked whether chopper's source was comparing the wii u to the current gen or with what devs are expecting next gen, and if the latter, whether or not his source had any insight into what MS and Sony are planning.

It's all relative. If it's a modest jump over the current gen, I'll be satisfied, even if a lot of devs might not be. At the same time, I think it's very true that how devs react to the Wii U's hardware will depend greatly on what the competition is going to bring out against it.



I don't think so. I'm pretty sure log is the drive by troll who pretends like he's not talking out of his ass and acts like he's "in the know" about how much nintendo's a joke.

Sigh. Read the comment I originally quoted, it was a ridiculous comment, so I agreed to it to emphasize just how ludicrous it was. Not a troll effort. I'm trying to be ironic, and my room is brimming with spoons.

 

[Saint Gregory]

This is pretty much what I was thinking. I asked whether chopper's source was comparing the wii u to the current gen or with what devs are expecting next gen, and if the latter, whether or not his source had any insight into what MS and Sony are planning.

It's all relative. If it's a modest jump over the current gen, I'll be satisfied, even if a lot of devs might not be. At the same time, I think it's very true that how devs react to the Wii U's hardware will depend greatly on what the competition is going to bring out against it.

I would never use developers desires as a baseline for console specs. If they had their way all three console makers would be bankrupt.

 

[bgassassin]

What in the world is happening in here now. :/

Did we happen upon real news regarding the system's specs? Why am I seeing 4650s being tossed around all of a sudden?

My mind is full of fuck.

Nah. Reaffirmation of what most expect. Some view it negatively and some don't.

<---- *Doesn't view it in a negative manner*

 

[LeleSocho]

Why would they, though? If they're going for 28nm anyway there's no need to customize a 4850 design. They can just use the new more powerful and more efficient Lombok chips from AMD?

to pay less for the chip design?

 

[Log4Girlz]

I would never use developers desires as a baseline for console specs. If they had their way all three console makers would be bankrupt.

Microsoft would be able to shoulder the cost

 

[guek]

Sigh. Read the comment I originally quoted, it was a ridiculous comment, so I agreed to it to emphasize just how ludicrous it was. Not a troll effort. I'm trying to be ironic, and my room is brimming with spoons.

Dude, you come in here like once a week or so and make some bullshit dumbass negative comment and then run away.

At least I think it's you...

edit: wait....no...I think i'm thinking of luckyman. WHOOPS. Yeah sorry.

 

[BurntPork]

Why would they, though? If they're going for 28nm anyway there's no need to customize a 4850 design. They can just use the new more powerful and more efficient Lombok chips from AMD?

Truth is, the Wii U GPU will not be directly based on the R7xx series. There's no way. Maybe the early devkits have a 4850, but that's it.

The early dev kits had an RV730. Digital Foundry's analysis proved that.

They're probably using 40nm, so best case is Southern Islands. However, Souther Islands isn't really more efficient than Evergreen, so Nintendo will go for the cheaper choice. Look at B3D's analysis, since it's probably spot-on.

 

[bgassassin]

The early dev kits had an RV730. Digital Foundry's analysis proved that.

They're probably using 40nm, so best case is Southern Islands. However, Souther Islands isn't really more efficient than Evergreen, so Nintendo will go for the cheaper choice.

Now you've gone full circle back to what got you banned.

 

[freddy]

Dude, you come in here like once a week or so and make some bullshit dumbass negative comment and then run away.

At least I think it's you...

That's Drinky. Oh wait, it's 2011 now. Carry on.

 

[bgassassin]

Dude, you come in here like once a week or so and make some bullshit dumbass negative comment and then run away.

At least I think it's you...

You sure you aren't think about Lucky Charms?

 

[BurntPork]

Now you've gone full circle back to what got you banned.

I don't give a shit right now. Besides, it was 720p and barely 30FPS. Unless you think these guys, who are experts, got it wrong that is...

 

[guek]

You sure you aren't think about Lucky Charms?

uh, yeah, my bad.

 

[bgassassin]

I don't give a shit right now.

You should. Anyway they made that breakdown before it was known the dev kits were underclocked.

 

[guek]

The early dev kits had an RV730. Digital Foundry's analysis proved that.

They're probably using 40nm, so best case is Southern Islands. However, Souther Islands isn't really more efficient than Evergreen, so Nintendo will go for the cheaper choice. Look at B3D's analysis, since it's probably spot-on.

wait, what?? how did they "prove" it had a rv730?