WiiU "Latte" GPU Die Photo - GPU Feature Set And Power Analysis

Status
Not open for further replies.
]The humans in X look worse than some PS2 games. [/B]There's a reason why the trailers all avoid showing their faces except that brief moment in the original trailer.

650x.jpg

Well good thing the monsters look like this then
iRaLd2qyDuMKf.gif


Also how often do we even see the human characters? Even when we do see them, they look way better than what you're saying.
 
@Apophis2036, buddy, fucking sale your wii u. the machine is not for you and selling it will save you a lot of energy. why i'm saying this you ask? i think you derailed the thread very much and you are not stopping.

sorry for the jerk reaction, but...

Very nice...

No, I will continue to enjoy the console, the games are finally coming thanks all the same. You can own something while still being critical about it you know.
 
How can the Wii U GPU only be 176 GFlops when the XB360 is 240? I don't think you need to be a tech guru to know something is wrong here.

With improved efficiency that comes with the Wii U, it is possible to be more powerful than the 360 even with a lower FLOPS rating. This is why FLOPS is not everything. It's even worse when comparing them across different architectures.
 
A better Bayonetta comparision:

bayonetta-20090923081327523-3002694.jpg


VS

1370968761-bayonetta-2-1.jpg


Bayonetta 1 was bland and ugly, not to mention the washed out brownish colors. Bayo 2 has wonderful colouring. The second screenshot is of course from a huge boss fight going on in a big city, not a cut scene.

...OK, THIS shot has convinced me that Bayonetta 2 is running better textures and effects than Bayonetta 1. BTW, does anyone know what framerate X will be running at? All eShop videos are locked at 30FPS.
 
...OK, THIS shot has convinced me that Bayonetta 2 is running better textures and effects than Bayonetta 1. BTW, does anyone know what framerate X will be running at? All eShop videos are locked at 30FPS.

most likely 30 but i can see it dropping if theres like 5+ enemies on screen, xenoblade as always 30 until big battles happened
 
...OK, THIS shot has convinced me that Bayonetta 2 is running better textures and effects than Bayonetta 1. BTW, does anyone know what framerate X will be running at? All eShop videos are locked at 30FPS.

I don't think we know a lot about the more technical stuff.

As said before, the two pieces of footage we saw were only 'teasers'. A real trailer will come somewhere in the future and my guess is that they'll start giving out more information and start talking then.

As for the characters, I think Monolith will give them an upgrade these months. Most of Nintendo their games start with gameplay etc., polishing comes last. (take a look at Pikmin and W101 for example ^^

First reveal:

qbw.png


Final result one year later:

611.jpg



BTW: why are people here running circles about ps4-games. I miss the real hw-talk or analysis from Wii U footage :(
 
BTW: why are people here running circles about ps4-games. I miss the real hw-talk or analysis from Wii U footage :(
Some people are discussing Wii U's capabilities compared to current and next gen consoles, which leads to the use of some examples to support their arguments.
 
Looks like it was 216 Glfops for xenos.

http://www.neogaf.com/forum/showpost.php?p=58079132&postcount=5236

another reference to 216 glfop of x360 gpu.
http://beyond3d.com/showthread.php?t=45061 post #10

Ok, I thought I recalled Brad saying something. That beyond3d post was back from 2007, though, so I wonder why the 240 GFLOPs number still always constantly quoted.

In relation to Latte, if that info is true it would definitely make it easier for Wii U's GPU to surpassed it in actual performance due to efficiency alone, even if its has 160sp. Having said that, we are still unsure of the modifications done to its r700 base, so we are unsure on how much more powerful Latte is with the information we have now.

How many GFLOPs was PS3's GPU? I don't remember seeing a solid number for that besides 400 GFLOPs which likely includes Cell and can't be compared to any other system.
 
Oh, we are finally done comparing work in progress games that have a difference in budget possibly higher than 10x? Lets try not to post unfinished trailers and pictures from Rockstar, they often bullshot up their entire game, if there is a demo video of someone playing on a 360/ps3, we could easily discuss that, otherwises there is little point imo.

Ok, I thought I recalled Brad saying something. That beyond3d post was back from 2007, though, so I wonder why the 240 GFLOPs number still always constantly quoted.

In relation to Latte, if that info is true it would definitely make it easier for Wii U's GPU to surpassed it in actual performance due to efficiency alone, even if its has 160sp. Having said that, we are still unsure of the modifications done to its r700 base, so we are unsure on how much more powerful Latte is with the information we have now.

How many GFLOPs was PS3's GPU? I don't remember seeing a solid number for that besides 400 GFLOPs which likely includes Cell and can't be compared to any other system.

Yes 216 GFLOPs with efficiency around 60% (XB1 getting a 66% increase in efficiency over 360 puts it at ~99%) for Wii U this means even if it is 160 shaders (still not confirmeds but it doesn't matter since realistically Wii U isn't going to see many next gen ports anyways) with it's 10% higher clock than Xenos, gives you 176GFLOPs vs 216, the efficiency of Wii U's GPU obviously went up because vliw5 was far superior to the architecture found in Xenos, vliw5 had a ~68% efficiency on PCs with an average of 3.4 shaders being used (the architecture Xenos was based on for PC was lower than Xenos in efficiency, likely because it wasn't programmed for directly) So minimum Wii U's efficiency should be is 80% (meaning 4 out of every 5 shaders are being used) which gives you 141GFLOPs on average at minimum from Wii U, which sounds stupid small until you compare that to 360's which is 130GFLOPs.

Now before you stop reading, DX9 isn't very good for making effects happen, Wii U should always be able to produce better effects than 360's extended DX9 chipset thanks to all the extra effort Xenos has to waste approximating DX10.1/11 effects, which is why stuff like lighting, DoF and tessellation will always be more abundant on Wii U, because while Xenos might spend 20-30GFLOPs trying to render all those nice effects, Wii U will spend half or less to do the same. DX11 effects btw are mainly from a software standpoint, stuff added like Tessellation software and GPGPU software, could still be done without the software microsoft deemed necessary, and wouldn't be available to PS4 either which is why we always talk about DX11 effects being available on Wii U.

When all is said and done, Wii U's GPU is a lot better than Xenos, especially if you are using a lot of shader effects, in fact the more "next gen" you want a game to look, the faster Wii U's minimum GPU spec closes in on doubling Xenos power.

Edit: Wii U's GPU is probably closer to 90% efficiency, meaning using 4 shaders all the time and the extra larger shader at least half the time. This puts the average usable flop count to ~160 GFLOPs
 
There characters in X clearly have more geometry/texture detail and a more diverse range of animation data. The animation is also more fluid.
How can you say that when these gifs clearly show the opposite?

The X character looks like he's suffering from arthritis. There doesn't seem to be any variation in his stepping animation cycles. The same goes for all the other X gifs I've seen.
The GTA character's movements are fluid and dynamic, you can see how he slightly turns his head when passing civilians.

x_by_darkspectre99-d6hsglm.gif


gta5_2_by_darkspectre99-d6hsh7r.gif


In some aspects X looks better than GTAV but in other aspects it also looks worse. The problem in this thread is that people are so hard focused to prove one game looks superior to the other that they have become unable to view things objectively.
It reminds me of the old days of dreamcast versus playstation 2 when people were comparing Soul calibur 2 with tekken tag tournament.
 
M°°nblade;76131043 said:
How can you say that when these gifs clearly show the opposite?

The X character looks like he's suffering from arthritis. There doesn't seem to be any variation in his stepping animation cycles. The same goes for all the other X gifs I've seen.
The GTA character's movements are fluid and dynamic, you can see how he slightly turns his head when passing civilians.

x_by_darkspectre99-d6hsglm.gif


gta5_2_by_darkspectre99-d6hsh7r.gif


In some aspects X looks better than GTAV but in other aspects it also looks worse. The problem in this thread is that people are so hard focused to prove one game looks superior to the other that they have become unable to view things objectively.
It reminds me of the old days of dreamcast versus playstation 2 when people were comparing Soul calibur 2 with tekken tag tournament.

Everything better in GTAV looks to be because of budget and unimportant to hardware, extra animations shouldn't be limited by Wii U's CPUs over Xenon, extra textures (though honestly look lower res) aren't a problem for Wii U's ram, draw distance certainly isn't a problem and X's shadows look more detailed as well.

Also odd is the wind animation for the awning in GTA5's gif, the trees have no motion but the wind is obviously blowing away on GTA5's... just shows how much of it is budget and not hardware, because if it was actually something like wind physics, you'd see it in the trees and possibly people's hair and clothing, GTA5 is a pretty game because it costs $100 million to 300 million to make (I don't actually know the budget but the last half dozen rockstar games have all had budgets over 100 million) X isn't going to cost anything close to that, just comparing budgets shows why these games can't realistically be compared for hardware capabilities thanks to all the extra smoke and mirrors GTA5 puts to use. That says absolutely nothing about the stage of development these two games are at, one game comes out in a month, the other in probably 14-15 months. It's completely silly to compare them, seriously.
 
That's cool. Is Gta V coming to Wii U?
Undoubtedly. I mean we've heard no mention of a Wii U port, Wii U has few games, Nintendo told us they were going after core gamers so it's the only conclusion we can draw. There will be a direct just before it, mark my words.
 
Undoubtedly. I mean we've heard no mention of a Wii U port, Wii U has few games, Nintendo told us they were going after core gamers so it's the only conclusion we can draw. There will be a direct just before it, mark my words.

Ok Azak you've exceeded your sarcasm quota for the year lol
 
Everything better in GTAV looks to be because of budget and unimportant to hardware, extra animations shouldn't be limited by Wii U's CPUs over Xenon, extra textures (though honestly look lower res) aren't a problem for Wii U's ram, draw distance certainly isn't a problem and X's shadows look more detailed as well.

Also odd is the wind animation for the awning in GTA5's gif, the trees have no motion but the wind is obviously blowing away on GTA5's... just shows how much of it is budget and not hardware, because if it was actually something like wind physics, you'd see it in the trees and possibly people's hair and clothing, GTA5 is a pretty game because it costs $100 million to 300 million to make (I don't actually know the budget but the last half dozen rockstar games have all had budgets over 100 million) X isn't going to cost anything close to that, just comparing budgets shows why these games can't realistically be compared for hardware capabilities thanks to all the extra smoke and mirrors GTA5 puts to use. That says absolutely nothing about the stage of development these two games are at, one game comes out in a month, the other in probably 14-15 months. It's completely silly to compare them, seriously.

I agree. The only thing GTAV and X have in common is the fact that they are 'open world'. Apart from that and the difference of budget, what the developers are trying to achieve in both games is fundamentally different. One tries to simulate an entire city with it's population and road traffic, the other one is about driving robots and killing huge monsters in the wild. This means that the available resources are being allocated to different things for an optimal gaming experience, based on their relatively different importance.
Although it may be easy (apparently not for everybody) to tell which game has a bigger draw distance, better character animation or more NPC's on screen it's impossible to see how demanding the total picture of both games is for both consoles.

And that's why multiplatform games are the only games that should be compared when you want to say something of value about the difference in hardware. Comparing multiplatform games is still not perfect, but it means you have at least some parameters that are kept under control.

ask nvidia
hehe
 
M°°nblade;76140155 said:
I agree. The only thing GTAV and X have in common is the fact that they are 'open world'. Apart from that and the difference of budget, what the developers are trying to achieve in both games is fundamentally different. One tries to simulate an entire city with it's population, the other one is about driving robots and killing huge monsters in the wild. This means that the available resources are being allocated to different things for an optimal gaming experience, based on their relatively different importance.
Although it may be easy (apparently not for everybody) to tell which game has a bigger draw distance, better character animation or more NPC's on screen it's impossible to see how demanding the total picture of both games is for both consoles.

And that's why multiplatform games are the only games that should be compared when you want to say something of value about the difference in hardware. Comparing multiplatform games is still not perfect, but it means you have at least some parameters that are constant.

Having read the last pages I wanted to post something similar. I agree with you 100%. It's just too much of an apple and oranges comparison.

edit:
Also, I don't like gifs for graphics comparisons since they are usually tiny, compressed and immensly restricted in colors per frame.
 
Hmm, I'm interested if we can find a source for that 215GFLOPS number.
The source is basic arithmetic based on the fact the scalar unit cannot do MADDs, so (4-wide * 2 + 1-wide * 1) * 48 ALUs * 500MHz = 216GFOPS. In practice this figure is highly hypothetical as well, because IIRC Xenos cannot do MADDs and scalar opps in parallel (due to how the GP registers are accessed, but that's beyond the subject of this topic).
 
So now people are comparing an early beta of X with GTAV ready for retail?
:-/

After the video for Watch Dog ps3 i can laugh for 1 year hahhahah.

People still compare PS360 with Wii U and many gaffer still not educated.

Need for speed , Injustice , Trine 2 and many games much better on Wii U.
 
After the video for Watch Dog ps3 i can laugh for 1 year hahhahah.

People still compare PS360 with Wii U and many gaffer still not educated.

Need for speed , Injustice , Trine 2 and many games much better on Wii U.

Ah man, this whole 'my Gen 8 console is more powerful than your Gen 7 console!' is equal parts sad and amusing. In 3 months, nobody will give a shit because the big boys arrive.
 
Ah man, this whole 'my Gen 8 console is more powerful than your Gen 7 console!' is equal parts sad and amusing. In 3 months, nobody will give a shit because the big boys arrive.

Oh, they will. They will. There will be tens of threads comparing different versions of each cross-gen game. It will be a fun holiday season.

The good part will be that the Wii U threads will be trolled less. Xbone vs. Ps4, fight to the death! :D
 
Ah man, this whole 'my Gen 8 console is more powerful than your Gen 7 console!' is equal parts sad and amusing. In 3 months, nobody will give a shit because the big boys arrive.

I am not graphics whore but as gamer i see games like Bayonetta 2 ,X,Mario Kart,Wonderful 101 with really nice graphics and it's enough for me.

By the way Vita stronger than 3DS 4 times i think and still the 3DS bring really great graphics and some better than Vita casual games.

MOnster Hunter 4 3DS
www.youtube.com/watch?v=TfPNzmqlfKU

Vs

Soul Sacrifice PS VITA
www.youtube.com/watch?v=k1VBXGww5UE
 
I never said it was maxed out, if it was anything other than a tiny power leap then it would be fairly easy to post some screenshots of games that show the leap though.

Who are you going to blame when Treyarch develops CoD Ghosts, the excuses of not finished tools / dev kits, and small developers doing cheap ports won't apply anymore and I bet there will still be issues with the game even when compared to the PS360 versions, why ? because the hardware isn't much more powerful than last gen.

The "cheap/rushed ports" excuse probably actually still WILL apply. Nevertheless, it all remains to be seen. We haven't seen Wii U footage of anything farther out than Splinter Cell yet.
 
The "cheap/rushed ports" excuse probably actually still WILL apply. Nevertheless, it all remains to be seen. We haven't seen Wii U footage of anything farther out than Splinter Cell yet.
Well, the "cheap/rushed port' excuse applies for every console ever released that wasn't the lead platform.
But if it's not something that can be overcome by having more powerful hardware, then the only conclusion left is that the hardware isn't really that much more powerful.

I remember the Xbox got a lot of cheap PS2 ports as well, but except MGS2 and maybe a few others, the mayority of the Xbox version were the definitive versions because it was significantly more powerful.
 
Ah man, this whole 'my Gen 8 console is more powerful than your Gen 7 console!' is equal parts sad and amusing. In 3 months, nobody will give a shit because the big boys arrive.

Thank god, let the big boys fight over this embarrassing shit. In fact we're already there. Xbone vs PS4 fights are already the absolute bottom of the human barrel, and it's only going to get worse from here on out. Digital Foundry threads will be legendary in the coming years.
 
Bokeh effect you mean. LOL heh......pokeh......
I don't think that's even Bokeh, looks like regular depth of field to me.

I do kind of wonder if the Wii U has some fixed hardware lighting effects though as I see a lot of similarity in the way some games make liberal use of advanced lighting effects, if that makes any sense.
Thank god, let the big boys fight over this embarrassing shit.
The stuff that's been going on in this thread lately is more like if someone said that your mother was fat and then you pulled out a picture demonstrating that she's actually quite slim but then they accused you of bragging about how pretty she is.

Either way it's embarrassing but there's way too many people who's only purpose for coming into the thread is to try to downplay what little strength the Wii U actually has.
 
I don't think that's even Bokeh, looks like regular depth of field to me.

I do kind of wonder if the Wii U has some fixed hardware lighting effects though as I see a lot of similarity in the way some games make liberal use of advanced lighting effects, if that makes any sense.

The stuff that's been going on in this thread lately is more like if someone said that your mother was fat and then you pulled out a picture demonstrating that she's actually quite slim but then they accused you of bragging about how pretty she is.

Either way it's embarrassing but there's way too many people who's only purpose for coming into the thread is to try to downplay what little strength the Wii U actually has.

That's why I said, thank god for the big boys monopolizing this absolutely embarrassing shit and fight it out like good big boys, with all the vitriol and hyperbole that's already in full force in other threads.

Like I said in my edit, Digital Foundry threads will be legendary these coming months and years. Not enough popcorn for the incoming carnival of stupid.
 
Thank god, let the big boys fight over this embarrassing shit. In fact we're already there. Xbone vs PS4 fights are already the absolute bottom of the human barrel, and it's only going to get worse from here on out. Digital Foundry threads will be legendary in the coming years.

I dunno man, I see more dignity in two heavyweights slugging it out than I do watching a welterweight swing punches at two 80 year old middleweights.

This is my favourite analogy of the week.
 
I dunno man, I see more dignity in two heavyweights slugging it out than I do watching a welterweight swing punches at two 80 year old middleweights.

This is my favourite analogy of the week.

Not when the two heavyweights slug it out by employing brain damaged monkeys flinging their mental excrement at each other.
 
I dunno man, I see more dignity in two heavyweights slugging it out than I do watching a welterweight swing punches at two 80 year old middleweights.

This is my favourite analogy of the week.
Sorry but my fat mom analogy is at least a generation ahead of yours.

I'm actually working on a gif comparison to prove it right now.
 
I dunno man, I see more dignity in two heavyweights slugging it out than I do watching a welterweight swing punches at two 80 year old middleweights.

This is my favourite analogy of the week.

Except it's not two heavyweights slugging it out. It's fanboys of said heavyweights flinging schoolyard insults at eachother. Sounds pretty dignified to me?
 
You are mostly looking at pre-baked lighting in those shots.
Yeah, from the demo I didn't get the impression that any of the environmental lighting was dynamic. It's still very pretty though (aside from the jaggies) and there's nice dynamic effects coming off all the projectiles and such. Definitely an impressive game engine when you consider how much crazy stuff is happening all at once.
Can you include the one above? It's a real contender.
I'm trying but I can only find PC footage of that one.
 
Oh, we are finally done comparing work in progress games that have a difference in budget possibly higher than 10x? Lets try not to post unfinished trailers and pictures from Rockstar, they often bullshot up their entire game, if there is a demo video of someone playing on a 360/ps3, we could easily discuss that, otherwises there is little point imo.



Yes 216 GFLOPs with efficiency around 60% (XB1 getting a 66% increase in efficiency over 360 puts it at ~99%) for Wii U this means even if it is 160 shaders (still not confirmeds but it doesn't matter since realistically Wii U isn't going to see many next gen ports anyways) with it's 10% higher clock than Xenos, gives you 176GFLOPs vs 216, the efficiency of Wii U's GPU obviously went up because vliw5 was far superior to the architecture found in Xenos, vliw5 had a ~68% efficiency on PCs with an average of 3.4 shaders being used (the architecture Xenos was based on for PC was lower than Xenos in efficiency, likely because it wasn't programmed for directly) So minimum Wii U's efficiency should be is 80% (meaning 4 out of every 5 shaders are being used) which gives you 141GFLOPs on average at minimum from Wii U, which sounds stupid small until you compare that to 360's which is 130GFLOPs.

Now before you stop reading, DX9 isn't very good for making effects happen, Wii U should always be able to produce better effects than 360's extended DX9 chipset thanks to all the extra effort Xenos has to waste approximating DX10.1/11 effects, which is why stuff like lighting, DoF and tessellation will alwa ys be more abundant on Wii U, because while Xenos might spend 20-30GFLOPs trying to render all those nice effects, Wii U will spend half or less to do the same. DX11 effects btw are mainly from a software standpoint, stuff added like Tessellation software and GPGPU software, could still be done without the software microsoft deemed necessary, and wouldn't be available to PS4 either which is why we always talk about DX11 effects being available on Wii U.

When all is said and done, Wii U's GPU is a lot better than Xenos, especially if you are using a lot of shader effects, in fact the more "next gen" you want a game to look, the faster Wii U's minimum GPU spec closes in on doubling Xenos power.

Edit: Wii U's GPU is probably closer to 90% efficiency, meaning using 4 shaders all the time and the extra larger shader at least half the time. This puts the average usable flop count to ~160 GFLOPs
I agree with you and Stevie that budget and priorites have to be considered with comparing titles like that. Not to mention that the X has another year of development to go through.

As for the DX9/DX10.1 statements, it has to be taking to consideration that 360's GPU was a prototype for the upcoming GPU features in that time. In addition to it having unified shaders, it also supported some features that were not supported in DX9. They were later included in DX10, so it was not a complete generation ahead of Xenos.

On the flipside, it has been heavily implied that Latte has some features/customizations beyond DX10.1. This may have to do with Wii U's GX2 being more related to OpenGL to DX. Besides possibly tessellation, we don't know what these extra features are.

The source is basic arithmetic based on the fact the scalar unit cannot do MADDs, so (4-wide * 2 + 1-wide * 1) * 48 ALUs * 500MHz = 216GFOPS. In practice this figure is highly hypothetical as well, because IIRC Xenos cannot do MADDs and scalar opps in parallel (due to how the GP registers are accessed, but that's beyond the subject of this topic).
Thanks Blu. How would this compare to Latte's VLIW4/5/? base?

Well, this thread has turned into a joke.
There are still some on-topic conversations buried here.

104.jpg


33.jpg


I think Pokeh & Lighting in this game impossible with DX 10.1.
Hmm. How do we know that?
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top Bottom