74 replies to this topic

[BrosBeforeGardenTools]

And no one cares to speculate the power of the Wii U in terms of its blank number of times more powerful than the Wii and blank number of times less powerful than Xbox One \ PS4?

I'd love to, but doing so is always speculation.

Anyway, um... The Wii U is probably 10 times as powerful as the Wii 1, one of the biggest differences being RAM. There just wasn't enough RAM on the Wii 1. It's probably one-third as powerful as the XBox One and one-fourth as powerful as the PS4.

[GAMER1984]

I'd love to, but doing so is always speculation.

Anyway, um... The Wii U is probably 10 times as powerful as the Wii 1, one of the biggest differences being RAM. There just wasn't enough RAM on the Wii 1. It's probably one-third as powerful as the XBox One and one-fourth as powerful as the PS4.

Wii U is easily 20 times more powerful than Wii1. I would say between 3-5 times less powerful than xb1 and between 5-7 less than PS4. You can't just look at one Part and try and figure out the whole equation the numbers I'm throwing out is performance.

[3Dude]

cpu, it's what does the numbers.

An openworld where a dog revel in the beautiful sunshineing on a tree makes the ground wetter required a large amount of processing, psychics etc.
If you try to make a world more "real", you'll have to do massive amounts of calculations, which is where the cpu excels.

Thats the purpose of general purpose gpu's. They can do all that quite well even better if they have a good connection to the cpu (and being shin en uses the gpu's edram as a cpu scratchpad, the wii u's good).

Everything you mentioned can be broken up into smaller jobs and procesed in paralell on the gpu.

What cpu's are still needed for are powerful sequential single thread performance (like AI). You cant break these up into seperate jobs.

In that regaurd, wii u is set up very well.

[Nollog]

Thats the purpose of general purpose gpu's. They can do all that quite well even better if they have a good connection to the cpu (and being shin en uses the gpu's edram as a cpu scratchpad, the wii u's good).

Everything you mentioned can be broken up into smaller jobs and procesed in paralell on the gpu.

What cpu's are still needed for are powerful sequential single thread performance (like AI). You cant break these up into seperate jobs.

In that regaurd, wii u is set up very well.

Yeah you can make the world look like rainbow if you want to make it act realistic.

[Gimbal]

I'm a gamer, not a Tech Guy and to be honest, I cant tell how powerful or weak the Wii U is compared to last and next generation consoles.  People get into such technical terms that I have no idea of what they are talking about.  

 

 

They don't know what they're talking about either. I remember a while ago reading people saying stuff about it before it came out and I just thought "none of you know anything about it/ignore" Then I read stuff about it after it came out and I was like "Ah...so that's how it is? Oh no? That guy didn't know what they were talking about? Oh wait that guy actually did know and the guy who was arguing with him was the one that didn't know? Nah...I don't think anyone knows what they're talking about."

 

Now I know for sure that no one knows what they're talking about since apparently even the experts haven't figured out how powerful the Wii U is because it uses a custom super GM749D13 that isn't used in any other console or some carp.

Edited by Symbol, 19 July 2013 - 07:55 AM.

[MorbidGod]

Its not lazy, the teams that handle ports are the bottom of the barrel. They typically have the least/no experience which is why they dont actually make games, but simply port games other people make.

So not only do they not have the experience or knowledge to make use of something different than what they are used too, they have no idea what makes the engine they are porting really tick and cant dive deep into it for of screwing it up.

Take a look at the who said what. 99.99% of the time the scenario goes like this:

Wii u hard/weak: Comment made from/derived from port team that only knows how to use middleware engines and tools provided to them.

Wii u actually pretty powerful: experienced devs known to make their own engines/tools.


But it doesnt really matter any more. Screens of pikmin 3 are flooding miiverse, the cats out of the bag. Anyone with eyes is starting to notice the weak narrative about the wii u is full of crap.

Now im just waiting for big name western 3rd parties to once again, show everybody why I dont buy them on Nintendo systems. They release second rate crap for nintendo systems. And I dont buy crap.

Wait, I though Wii U was an offline device? What's this Miiverse thing?

(my real post is coming)

Is it a fact that the Wii U is more powerful than the 360 or PS3?

Quick answer: Yes, it is. For more (non technical) answer continue to read. I'm reading this entire post before commenting.

cpu, it's what does the numbers.

An openworld where a dog revel in the beautiful sunshineing on a tree makes the ground wetter required a large amount of processing, psychics etc.
If you try to make a world more "real", you'll have to do massive amounts of calculations, which is where the cpu excels.

All new consoles are GPU centric my friend. Last generation both Sony and definitely MS paid the price for a processor that was too fast. They are all taking the smart approach, which is to have a great GPU, and a more efficient CPU.

The idea is to off load stuff the CPU shouldn't be handling, and let the CPU resources be used for exactly what you said.

Okay, now for my reply.

The Wii U isn't hard to develop for. It's different, but in all honestly, it's closer to last generation then what the others have done.

Essentially, Nintendo used the same architecture that the others used last generation, albeit more powerful and more efficient, and the others gave up making a console and made a Tablet PC (super charged with fancy ram and a more customized GPU) for your living room. Which, means, developers now can easily develop for the new generation coming this year.

What does that mean in non technical terms? Basically, while the Wii U is an easy to use Mac, the others are Windows and everyone and their grandma knows how to use a Windows PC. Is the Mac harder? No, actually, it's easier in most cases. But familiarity takes over and the others are just easier.

That doesn't make the Wii U hard to develop for. A five man crew can make their own engine for it and make games that look better then what even Nintendo had to show last year.

Now, these numbers I'm about to give you are completely made up. But it gives you an idea where the Wii U stands.

Wii U is about four to six times more powerful than the last generation. The Xbox One is about six to eight times more powerful than the last generation, and the PS4 might have a slight advantage with the ram they choose. I haven't made up my mind yet.

Again, those numbers are just to show you the Wii U is powerful enough to have next generation engines. It just won't have all that spancy mancy effects.

Edited by MorbidGod, 19 July 2013 - 09:27 AM.

[NintendoReport]

Wait, I though Wii U was an offline device? What's this Miiverse thing?

(my real post is coming)


Quick answer: Yes, it is. For more (non technical) answer continue to read. I'm reading this entire post before commenting.


All new consoles are GPU centric my friend. Last generation both Sony and definitely MS paid the price for a processor that was too fast. They are all taking the smart approach, which is to have a great GPU, and a weaker CPU.

The idea is to off load stuff the CPU shouldn't be handling, and let the CPU resources be used for exactly what you said.

Okay, now for my reply.

The Wii U isn't hard to develop for. It's different, but in all honestly, it's closer to last generation then what the others have done.

Essentially, Nintendo used the same architecture that the others used last generation, albeit more powerful and more efficient, and the others gave up making a console and made a Tablet PC (super charged with fancy ram and a more customized GPU) for your living room. Which, means, developers now can easily develop for the new generation coming this year.

What does that mean in non technical terms? Basically, while the Wii U is an easy to use Mac, the others are Windows and everyone and their grandma knows how to use a Windows PC. Is the Mac harder? No, actually, it's easier in most cases. But familiarity takes over and the others are just easier.

That doesn't make the Wii U hard to develop for. A five man crew can make their own engine for it and make games that look better then what even Nintendo had to show last year.

Now, these numbers I'm about to give you are completely made up. But it gives you an idea where the Wii U stands.

Wii U is about four to six times more powerful than the last generation. The Xbox One is about six to eight times more powerful than the last generation, and the PS4 might have a slight advantage with the ram they choose. I haven't made up my mind yet.

Again, those numbers are just to show you the Wii U is powerful enough to have next generation engines. It just won't have all that spancy mancy effects.

 

Thought I would add the "weaker" cpu may throw people off, I would propose rather to use the wording, more efficient. I agree with everything else.

[MorbidGod]

Thought I would add the "weaker" cpu may throw people off, I would propose rather to use the wording, more efficient. I agree with everything else.

True. Weaker was a poor choice of words. :'(

I'll correct it!

[RETROBLAST]

Its all very exciting to think about and ponder ... I think under the circumstances, the Wii U will do just fine next to its competitors. The key of course is games, and to me, their quality with regard gameplay, mechanics, and visual stimulation.

I am always happy with Nintendo's visuals and I am usually more impressed with visuals that are not realistic, I want video games to transport me to another word, not make me feel like I am in a real world.

I think we are starting to see a little hint of what's to come in terms of visual capabilities, I see it sprinkled throughout games but I don't see it throughout entire games.

There is a point in Mario Wii U where the camera pans over the over world past some trees on the right side of the map, and those trees, their leaves, and the subtle movement of the leaves left me breathless, they were so beautiful and visually stimulating .... To imagine an entire level in a game that matched that beauty would be something.

[Socalmuscle]

Actually, just to correct one misnomer about the Wii U CPU, its architecture is zero like what the Xbox 360 and PS3 used. 

 

It's Power Instructions, but the way the instructions are piped through is acompletely different ball game.

 

The Wii U CPU architecture is far more efficient and gets way more done in a much shorter amount of time. 

 

It's a rather huge difference. It's also a big reason why developers used to Xenon and Cell struggled to code for Wii U properly at first - especially with the need to understand how to utilize the EDRAM properly. But also due to how the CPU is routed.

 

The Wii U CPU by itself is leagues ahead of PS3s gimped cell and the Xenon CPU.

 

As in a new generation ahead.

 

No it's not 8 cores, but it thumps the Xenon and Cell from last gen.

 

Then there is the RAM setup.

 

Then there is the very very excellent GPU.

 

The Wii U is quite a bit more powerful than 360 and ps3.  But not as powerful as PS4 and X1.

 

Thought the power gulf between the Ps4 and Wii U is greater than the power gulf between the GCN and PS2.

 

Even so, the actually game differences between GCN and PS2 weren't huge, though they were noticeable if you paid attention.

 

Resident Evil for example had non-dynamic lighting and some effect were missing such as water ripples, slightly less polygon count, etc. But that was a game that pushed things a bit.

 

Most multiplatform games don't push it.

 

Games like Watch Dogs, etc., so long as there is not incentive to artificially inflate performance on another platform by lessening the competitors experience slightly, should show minimal to no difference.

 

Games that are developed to take advantage of PS4 as much as possible will show some variance on Wii U (assuming the developers take the trouble to move the game onto Wii U to begin with...)

[MorbidGod]

Actually, just to correct one misnomer about the Wii U CPU, its architecture is zero like what the Xbox 360 and PS3 used.

It's Power Instructions, but the way the instructions are piped through is acompletely different ball game.

The Wii U CPU architecture is far more efficient and gets way more done in a much shorter amount of time.

It's a rather huge difference. It's also a big reason why developers used to Xenon and Cell struggled to code for Wii U properly at first - especially with the need to understand how to utilize the EDRAM properly. But also due to how the CPU is routed.

The Wii U CPU by itself is leagues ahead of PS3s gimped cell and the Xenon CPU.

As in a new generation ahead.

No it's not 8 cores, but it thumps the Xenon and Cell from last gen.

Then there is the RAM setup.

Then there is the very very excellent GPU.

The Wii U is quite a bit more powerful than 360 and ps3. But not as powerful as PS4 and X1.

Thought the power gulf between the Ps4 and Wii U is greater than the power gulf between the GCN and PS2.

Even so, the actually game differences between GCN and PS2 weren't huge, though they were noticeable if you paid attention.

Resident Evil for example had non-dynamic lighting and some effect were missing such as water ripples, slightly less polygon count, etc. But that was a game that pushed things a bit.

Most multiplatform games don't push it.

Games like Watch Dogs, etc., so long as there is not incentive to artificially inflate performance on another platform by lessening the competitors experience slightly, should show minimal to no difference.

Games that are developed to take advantage of PS4 as much as possible will show some variance on Wii U (assuming the developers take the trouble to move the game onto Wii U to begin with...)

True enough. I was talking architecture wise, but you are completely right the CPU is completely different.

[3Dude]

[Happy Monk]

Sums it up nicely.

[RETROBLAST]

I think things are really looking promising for the Wii U, that Pikmin pic looks juicy.

[cupoftea]

are devs lazy or is wiiu dificult to code

NON OF THE ABOVE

INDUSTRY HATES NINTENDO LOL BATTLEFIELD NOT COMMING BECAUSE?????!!!!!

do you really think its a hardware thing or POLATICS????

[Socalmuscle]

Nice!

Especially so since the game is primarily played from an overview perspective, ala rts.

Wow.

[NintendoReport]

 

 

great, now stop showing concept art and show a real time, in game screen.. then we can talk. 

 

being sarcastic.

[SoldMyWiiUAndLeftTheForums]

Western Devs are just a$$es, we will see the consoles true power from the Japanese first I think.

[Nollog]

All new consoles are GPU centric my friend. Last generation both Sony and definitely MS paid the price for a processor that was too fast. They are all taking the smart approach, which is to have a great GPU, and a more efficient CPU.

The idea is to off load stuff the CPU shouldn't be handling, and let the CPU resources be used for exactly what you said.

They are, but the games we saw at e3 indicates a huge amount of open world dynamic always-online environments coming to future games.
This is the way third party publishers are going to try and lead gamers this year and going forward.

That kind of world uses a large amount of physics and other calculations which are usually done on an algorithmic circuit, like inside CPU's.

I never said the new consoles are all cpu power, I mentioned the upcoming games and direction I sense the industry is trying to lead gamers in.

When I said "I'd say it's a mix, but it's not as powerful as the new girls in town." I meant to the original question, Devs are both lazy and the Wii U isn't easy to develop for.
The fact the other two consoles are going x86 confirms both. x86 is wasteful of cycles, and a terrible terrible idea for a console, unless they get rid of pretty much every wasteful instruction intel drag along from the 70's inside every chip, and at that point it'd lose it's easy lazy appeal to most lazy devs.

They're not really choosing very powerful cpu's or gpu's in my understanding, just cramming a lot of ram inside mid/low-end pc's, and closing the box with their own OS.
Certainly they choose better cpu's and gpu's than last gen and Wii U, on paper. Well, maybe not on paper, if you take their marketing BS from last gen about cell and xenon at face value.

[alan123]

both really, i don't understand why people keep comparing the WiiU (8th gen) to X360/PS3 (7th gen) & don't say "its all we have to go on" nope, there is the X1 & PS4 to go on, which is what the WiiU is supposed to be on par with & competing with.