160 replies to this topic

[YoshiGamer9]

Think of Wonderful 101 as in Pikmin, where Pikmin would equal action heroes. 

 

 

Nahhh I still perfer my pikmin can't wait for pikmin 3!!!!

[grahamf]

Enough with the nerdfight already! The only way to know for sure is to see well built games first hand. It's fine and dandy if the PS4 has more meeps than the Wii U, but that means nothing if developers don't put all of the little meeps to work. Not saying that they won't, pretty sure they know how to care for meeps.

[BrosBeforeGardenTools]

So um..... the truth is probably in between what one side says and the other.

[TheDoritoKing]

As both are cartoony games with unique art styles, the difference will be negligible; realistic, resource-milking games would be a better indicator of power. It seems that Knack or whatever it's called is going for a Disney/Pixar look while The Wonderful 101 is aiming for something new. 

[MorbidGod]

As both are cartoony games with unique art styles, the difference will be negligible; realistic, resource-milking games would be a better indicator of power. It seems that Knack or whatever it's called is going for a Disney/Pixar look while The Wonderful 101 is aiming for something new.

Both are what I need!!!

[3Dude]

So um..... the truth is probably in between what one side says and the other.

No, its not.

Unlike certain yo yo's i DONT use internet message board posts as 'facts'.

Everything i say is backed straight from the source, with official ibm documention. That i can actually provide. Which i will, attached to this post.

750 architecture gets 2.32 dmips per mhz FACT.

ppe/xenon (xenon is 3 ppe's) gets 1879 dmips @ 3.2 GHz, do the math, thats .59 dmips per mhz FACT.

Fact vs loaded hearsay.

There is nothing in between.

Attached Files

•  PPC750GX_Eval_Kit-040904.pdf   977.73K   893 downloads
•  sg247575.pdf   11.24MB   4893 downloads

Edited by 3Dude, 27 May 2013 - 01:34 PM.

[Alex Wolfers]

Sorry if the pictures are too small but i had to reduce the size to minimize artifacts.

 

Knack vs Wonderful 101

 

Not seeing that huge of a leap. What do you guys think?

 

Also notice the last two wonderful 101 pics, the last one was from September, notice the improvements.

TBH W101 looks better. I have no clue on the specs but the Wii U appears just fine.

[TheDoritoKing]

If the Wii could play The Conduit, then I'm sure that the Wii U can pull its own weight this generation. 

[routerbad]

This video is quite interesting showing the difference between the different generations of playstation console. The racing game looks the biggest improvement on ps4. As with all games not all games push the hardware. The PS4 clearly is making a technical leap but its not the same size leap as ps2 to ps3 or ps1 to ps2 and this is to be expected as the ps4 hardware has been realistically choosen to meet a price point.

 

 

This is a great page for comparing the spec's of wii u, ps4 and xbox one. The poster keeps it upto date and seems the best reference point currently unless you want to trawl through all the neogaf postings etc.

 

http://gamrconnect.v...d.php?id=136756

 

CPU wise the xbox one and ps4 are at about 38,400 dmips for their cpu which compares to about 9,000 dmips or just under for wii u. The xenon is about 19,200 dmips and ps3 in theory is about the same as wii u for ppe but upto about 30,000 for the cell in total. Floating point performance of the xenon and cell is far in excess of the wii u cpu but the wii u gpu makes up for it. The PS4 and xbox one offload a lot of work to their gpu's same as wii u.

 

End summary is 360, PS3 and wii u are comparable in performance approximately. Xbox one is probably 3-4x as powerful as those, ps4 is about 1.5x xbox one overall.

 

 

You are still, regardless of everything that has been said, using the ridiculous notion that the Wii U CPU is a pure PPC750 core (x3, it don't need no stinkin SMP).  The numbers you ripped from GAF don't take into account the fact the the architecture is brand new and not Broadwayx3, they are still operating on that notion simply because they have no clue about it, and no one has actually run Dhrystone on the thing and talked about it.

 

Using these numbers is disingenuous at best, as they are ALL speculative.  Not just some of them, ALL of them.

[Zinix]

If the Wii could play The Conduit, then I'm sure that the Wii U can pull its own weight this generation. 

Then again The Conduit really wasn't anything that impressive. 

[routerbad]

3dude, you are a delusional fanboy who has no sense of reality.  The wii u's cpu architecture dates back to the last century and it was powerful then but things have moved on. The PS3 and 360 cpu's don't compare well to the wii u cpu on a mhz vs mhz basis but then both ps3 and 360 are running their cpu's at 3.2ghz not 1.25ghz and the ps3 has 2 threads and 7 support processors all running at 3.2ghz not 3 at 1.25ghz. The 360 has 6 threads at 3.2ghz in total not 3 at 1.25ghz. Clearly if the wii u cpu was at 3.2ghz then it would be a different story but its running at close to 1/3rd the speed with just 3 processes. Your view that somehow a very dated cpu x3 run at a very low speed is somehow a competitive cpu design in 2013 is totally unrealistic and only acceptable to the most demented of fanboys. 

 

The PS4 and xbox one have all the advantages of an even more modern gpu than wii u so their weak cpu performance still represents a huge increase over ps3, 360 and wii u in real terms and they are still at least 4x as powerful as wii u in integer performance and a huge massive increase in performance in other areas.

 

You need to look at what the wii u is achieving in performance. It is ridiculous to make your claims when the wii u is still getting beaten by 360 and PS3 in performance terms. There is no golden horizon to come when suddenly the wii u will outperform 360 and PS3 for all games and go on to challenge xbox one and ps4. The 360 and PS3 still have more cpu performance than wii u and where games need this the wii u will underperform. For gpu centric games the wii u will be able to make a small step ahead of ps3 and 360 but its a marginally increase. The wii u is using a 45nm process, Sony had already moved to 40nm for the rsx sometime before the wii u was released. Everything we know about the wii u including developer leaks like the metro developer stating the wii u has a 'horrible slow cpu', performance, power consumption, fabrication process, x-ray image examination supports the view that the wii u performs to current gen performance.

 

Surely you realise its utterly moronic to create a fantasy image of the wii u technically that has zero connection with the reality of how wii u games are performing. It's also pointless attacking me when the information I'm posting is widely available from a huge number of sources where as the 'wii u is actually very powerful' articles are strangely absent on the internet.

DP,

 

You are an ignoramus that would rather float BS speculation thrown out on GAF by others who have no idea how this stuff works, as fact, making it obvious that you have no idea how this stuff works.  You probably never heard of Dhrystone until you saw the GAF thread.

 

Every CPU's architecture dates back to the last century, they are all iterations of the original microchip, what's your point?  Why go strawman rather than defend your original statements for what they are, copy/pasted bullcrap from GAF that you have no clue about and isn't accurate to begin with.

 

Wii U's CPU is based on Power7, and PPC.  Its almost like IBM makes custom CPU's.  The EDRAM, the SMP architecture, the SIMD engines, the FPU, all Power7 architecture.

 

CPU's don't compare linearly based on MHz, I'd have thought anyone would have known that by now.  Shorter (much shorter) pipeline stages, faster cache (than Jaguar even), more cache (than Jaguar even), More modern instruction set (RISC).

 

No, you don't have to be a fanboy to understand that IPC>GHz.  The reason PPE was at 3.2GHz to begin with was because it had poor IPC, long pipeline stages, and in order execution.  It was making up for areas where those CPU's lacked severely.  It isn't foreign to see lower clocked CPU's that are faster and stronger than much higher clocked ones.  Improvements in process, design, instructions, and cache have allowed a high performing CPU that uses little juice, runs cool, has high IPC, all on lower clocks. 

 

XBOX One and PS4 don't have "more modern" GPU's than Wii U.  They all share the exact shader architecture, the only difference being the number of shaders.  The big difference is that Nintendo loves to throw in custom logic.  To put it one way, 100% of the PS4 GPU can do about 4x the floating point operations as 50% of the Wii U GPU.

 

You keep saying "look at the performance we've seen" when we've seen nothing of Wii U's performance threshold.  No where near it in fact.  What we've seen are ports and a game that started development on prototype hardware.  Great, that's incredibly indicative of performance going forward. 

 

The Metro developer went back on that actually, so yeah.  All of the developers who have worked on the Wii U have openly praised its capability.  Openly.  While people with no experience on the console (or an axe to grind, EA) have tried desperately to create a narrative that it is somehow on par with seven year old hardware on a technical level when everything, ESPECIALLY the die shots, make it very clear that the architecture for both the CPU and GPU are new, and both actually raised more questions than they answered.  40nm is a pretty standard process even by today's standards.  My CPU is at 40nm and performs better than any of the more recent CPU's on the market from AMD.  AMD's dual core module design is what is killing performance in all of their chips, and Jaguar is no different.  In fact, my CPU performs better at 3.0GHz than even Piledriver does at 4.0GHz, better IPC.

 

Asserting that the DIE shots proved somehow that the hardware was "current gen" is ludicrous and another delusional disingenuous post.  X-ray cannot "show" the performance of the chip, it can show how the logic is arranged and give basic ideas, that is all.

If he thinks that  the wii u is 3-4 times as powerful as the xbox 360 and ps3 what does he think  that makes the newer consoles

 

 

bearing in mind that a late last year nvidia announced that  PC's has just passed the last gens  by 10 times(entering pcs in the relm of  emulation for those consoles). And  the ps4 and  x1 are  most argueably not in the same range as those

 

(for arguments sake,  my 2[a year before the nvidia announcemnt] year old gpu has 2.4tflops and the ps4 is said to have 1.84tflops)

 

 

 

i would also like  all of you to mind that a large  portion of the power of each device will be locked to certain features such as streamins support (which is a intensive task that cannot be left unchecked, les you expect the console preform diffrently  with it on vs off) also mind  console develops  would (or rather should) want the console to run the same at all times, allwoing the share service to be used without slowing down any game.

PS3 also had "1.8TFLOPS"

 

How quickly people forget.  I get your point, though.  None of the consoles are on par with PC's but that doesn't matter.  They are two completely separate markets that happen to get some of the same games.

 

And you are right, streaming and encoding video in the background, while also having a boatload of other services at the ready at all times takes lots of cycles to keep around, as well as RAM.  It's all rainbows and fairytales for some of the Sony drones and xbots until they see what the actual games will look like when they ship.  Wii U might be slightly underpowered, but it means less this generation than in any other generation in history, especially considering that all three consoles have the same hardware feature set.  They all support DX11.1 or equivalent, they all can support all available engines, they all have GPGPU, they all have modern CPU instruction sets.  They can do all of the same things, will it matter in the end that one of the consoles can do slightly less of something than another?  It isn't going to be like XBOX vs PS2, they had completely different feature sets.  It's going to be like a PC with a midrange GPU and CPU, vs a PC with a lightly lower end midrange GPU but a similarly capable CPU.

 

There are GPU's on the market right now that get half the FLOPs performance of my cards, yet can pull the same or better framerates in comparisons. 

[Goodtwin]

No, its not.

Unlike certain yo yo's i DONT use internet message board posts as 'facts'.

Everything i say is backed straight from the source, with official ibm documention. That i can actually provide. Which i will, attached to this post.

750 architecture gets 2.32 dmips per mhz FACT.

ppe/xenon (xenon is 3 ppe's) gets 1879 dmips @ 3.2 GHz, do the math, thats .59 dmips per mhz FACT.

Fact vs loaded hearsay.

There is nothing in between.

 

It didnt get a lot of attention over at Gaf, but someone there was able to run some benchmarks coparing the PPC750CL to the Bobcat cpu.  The PPC was quite a bit more efficient than the Bobcat in IPC, to the number of about 30% better.  So even if the Wii U cpu was simply upgraded Broadway cores with better cache, they would absolutely blow the PS3 and 360 CPU's out of the water, and should beat the PS4 and Xone on a core to core basis. 

 

Its the GPU and ram where the PS4 and to a lesser extent the Xone will really outshine the Wii U.  Both of those consoles will handle 1080p far better than Wii U, and will be able to accomodate more effects all at once.  Just because the Wii U has a similar feature set tot he PS4 and Xone doesnt mean they are eual, there are DX11 $40 GPU cards that will straight up choke on a high end 360 game, just because something is DX11 capable doesnt tell you anything about performance.  Thank goodness E3 is just around the corner, its about time people learn what the Wii U can really do, the current general consensus is that its only on par with the current gen consoles.  Come on Retro, its time to show off the hardware. 

[routerbad]

It didnt get a lot of attention over at Gaf, but someone there was able to run some benchmarks coparing the PPC750CL to the Bobcat cpu.  The PPC was quite a bit more efficient than the Bobcat in IPC, to the number of about 30% better.  So even if the Wii U cpu was simply upgraded Broadway cores with better cache, they would absolutely blow the PS3 and 360 CPU's out of the water, and should beat the PS4 and Xone on a core to core basis. 

 

Its the GPU and ram where the PS4 and to a lesser extent the Xone will really outshine the Wii U.  Both of those consoles will handle 1080p far better than Wii U, and will be able to accomodate more effects all at once.  Just because the Wii U has a similar feature set tot he PS4 and Xone doesnt mean they are eual, there are DX11 $40 GPU cards that will straight up choke on a high end 360 game, just because something is DX11 capable doesnt tell you anything about performance.  Thank goodness E3 is just around the corner, its about time people learn what the Wii U can really do, the current general consensus is that its only on par with the current gen consoles.  Come on Retro, its time to show off the hardware. 

Apt, but we know that Espresso cannot be simply an optimized PPC750cl, which was one of the lowest end models of that chip created.  The cache alone points to it being at least based on Power7, the addition of SMP, and the fact that it was able to handle CPU SIMD heavy games on only two cores points to a stronger SIMD engine and FPU than PPC750 ever had in any iteration.

 

I agree that the GPU and RAM do surpass Wii U, but not to the point that they can do an incredible amount more work.  If you take two cards that have different architectures and power figures but the same features, at around the same price point, they'll do pretty much the same amount of work.  Nintendo obviously put a lot of R&D work behind the GPU, but not just in unified shader application, they like to do things their way, and going full on with programmable shaders is something they weren't prepared to do yet.  Either way, we'll see how the RAM and GPU in the PS4 gives it a little boost, but it won't be big, and most won't notice the difference without being told.  It isn't anywhere near even PS2 to Gamecube difference, it will be a subtle difference, and will be shown with fewer loads, it will still be able to handle 1080p without any issues once developers hit their stride and start using that 32MB of EDRAM effectively.  How long that will take is anyone's guess.

 

Seeing as NERD is looking into GPGPU cloud computing, Nintendo may find a way to extend the capabilities of the system, though I have my doubts as to how effective that will be.

 

Rumors right now are also pointing to a brand new IP from Retro, or Startropics, though I tend to side with 3Dude.  When you look at the portfolios of the people they are hiring, it has to be fantasy based.

[Keviin]

What is a TFLOP? Hearing it a lot here.

[MorbidGod]

What is a TFLOP? Hearing it a lot here.

http://m.wisegeek.co...-is-a-tflop.htm

There ya go.

[Alex Wolfers]

3dude, you are a delusional fanboy who has no sense of reality.  The wii u's cpu architecture dates back to the last century and it was powerful then but things have moved on. The PS3 and 360 cpu's don't compare well to the wii u cpu on a mhz vs mhz basis but then both ps3 and 360 are running their cpu's at 3.2ghz not 1.25ghz and the ps3 has 2 threads and 7 support processors all running at 3.2ghz not 3 at 1.25ghz. The 360 has 6 threads at 3.2ghz in total not 3 at 1.25ghz. Clearly if the wii u cpu was at 3.2ghz then it would be a different story but its running at close to 1/3rd the speed with just 3 processes. Your view that somehow a very dated cpu x3 run at a very low speed is somehow a competitive cpu design in 2013 is totally unrealistic and only acceptable to the most demented of fanboys. 

 

The PS4 and xbox one have all the advantages of an even more modern gpu than wii u so their weak cpu performance still represents a huge increase over ps3, 360 and wii u in real terms and they are still at least 4x as powerful as wii u in integer performance and a huge massive increase in performance in other areas.

 

You need to look at what the wii u is achieving in performance. It is ridiculous to make your claims when the wii u is still getting beaten by 360 and PS3 in performance terms. There is no golden horizon to come when suddenly the wii u will outperform 360 and PS3 for all games and go on to challenge xbox one and ps4. The 360 and PS3 still have more cpu performance than wii u and where games need this the wii u will underperform. For gpu centric games the wii u will be able to make a small step ahead of ps3 and 360 but its a marginally increase. The wii u is using a 45nm process, Sony had already moved to 40nm for the rsx sometime before the wii u was released. Everything we know about the wii u including developer leaks like the metro developer stating the wii u has a 'horrible slow cpu', performance, power consumption, fabrication process, x-ray image examination supports the view that the wii u performs to current gen performance.

 

Surely you realise its utterly moronic to create a fantasy image of the wii u technically that has zero connection with the reality of how wii u games are performing. It's also pointless attacking me when the information I'm posting is widely available from a huge number of sources where as the 'wii u is actually very powerful' articles are strangely absent on the internet.

You are being full of it. 3DUDE doesn't lie about his specs. He is perhaps the smartest member here when it comes to hardware. If anyone is being fanboyistic it's you.

Edited by Rose Red, 29 May 2013 - 02:10 PM.

[routerbad]

What is a TFLOP? Hearing it a lot here.

Tera- Floating Point Operations

[Wile E Coyote]

No the Wii U is not underpowered, but Nintendo alone can't prove it isn't,even if the graphics of Retro's new game blows minds, people will still say the Wii U is weak simply because the game was produced by a first party Nintendo developer, Nintendo needs a really good looking third party game to break the perception that the Wii U is underpowered

[routerbad]

No the Wii U is not underpowered, but Nintendo alone can't prove it isn't,even if the graphics of Retro's new game blows minds, people will still say the Wii U is weak simply because the game was produced by a first party Nintendo developer, Nintendo needs a really good looking third party game to break the perception that the Wii U is underpowered

It already has that, in Need For Speed.  People will never be satisfied because all they have is their confirmation bias and they aren't going to let it go no matter how good a game looks or who makes it.  Similarly, many of those people who are Sonic fans were super hyped when Sonic was rumored for Xbox One, but now Sonic is irrelevant and overdone because it is Nintendo exclusive.  People will find any way they can to believe stupidity so long as it confirms what they thought all along with some of this stuff.  "Obscure, incorrect information stating that the Wii U CPU has fewer DMIPS than PS3?  I'll take it!"

[Rockodoodle]

I think there is some truth to this- games will start running more smoothly as developers become more familiar with the system.  Nintendoland is really smooth and crisp.  Madden '13 is a little choppy at times.  If they were going to make a madden '14, I'd imagine it would be smoother.

 

 

No the Wii U is not underpowered, but Nintendo alone can't prove it isn't,even if the graphics of Retro's new game blows minds, people will still say the Wii U is weak simply because the game was produced by a first party Nintendo developer, Nintendo needs a really good looking third party game to break the perception that the Wii U is underpowered