85 replies to this topic

[Byakuya Togami]

It doesn't mean anything if they dont get 3rd party games. I'm reading more and more games that "won't be coming to the Wii U". Disappointing to say the least.

Some devs always back out. Same thing happened to the 3DS and it's doing great, and I think the library is quite alright.

Devs aren't leaving the Wii U in drones, so everything will be fine.

[Plutonas]

No!! hahaha not again... even if I search it now on google, if I am wrong or right... I am right!! if my psu is 850 watts with 90% efficiency, then it must draw 935watts from the wall to give me 850 watts! its the same principal... (the +80 i typed in the prev comment, is for safety reasons, if something bad happens with the electricity grid, to dont get explode)

so if nintendo says, that wii U takes at maximum 75 watts and lets say that is 60% efficiency... then 75+40% be able to deliver true 75watts !

Now if the guys who measured wii U watts from the wall and it needs 33watts to run mario U and the wii U psu is 60% efficiency... its more like wii U needs 19.8 watts to run Mario U!!! ... all the rest goes to waste... Thats why wii U is so cool, even if you play many hours...

Edited by Orion, 28 December 2012 - 04:50 PM.

[Alex Atkin UK]

No, all of you back to school.

1. I was EXTREMELY generous, effeciency drops like a rock at low power loads, extremely cheap mass produced psu's dont get 96% effeciency.

2. Maximum safe output >< what the system recieves.

3. Products typically weigh in using about 60% of the max output of the psu. No device has EVER used the max certified output, or even close.

4. I was already EXTREMELY generous, reel in the fantasies.

5. 1.25 Ghz is an EXTREMELY high clock speed for an architecture with a 4 stage instruction pipeline if you want to continue this clock speed nonsense FIND a 4 stage architecture clocked higher. Since its such a simple matter sutely you must be able to find lots of 2 and 3 Ghz processors with 4 stage instruction pipelines.

1. It doesn't matter if efficiency is bad in the PSU, we are talking about what happens AFTER that, which is it passes through some DC to DC circuitry in the Wii U itself which can be very efficient.

2 & 3, you could be right, you could be wrong. As this is a bespoke PSU for the Wii U, not an off the shelf unit, we cannot know if the rated output is printed on the box is actually accurate or not. It could be that the PSU is capable of outputting 10A but Nintendo chose to print the ACTUAL values rather than theoretical. We just do not know.

4. No comment.

5. Okay so lets assume the maximum clock rate IS 1.25Ghz, fair enough. However that still doesn't prove that its running at that speed on any of the current games, or that they are not being throttled back somehow by the OS.

Considering how little the TDP on the CPU is supposed to be, if it WAS being throttled in some way, it would necessarily show a huge difference in power consumption once that throttling was removed.

[3Dude]

No!! hahaha not again... even if I search it now on google, if I am wrong or right... I am right!! if my psu is 850 watts with 90% efficiency, then it must draw 935watts from the wall to give me 850 watts! its the same principal... (the +80 i typed in the prev comment, is for safety reasons, if something bad happens with the electricity grid, to dont get explode)
so if nintendo says, that wii U takes at maximum 75 watts and lets say that is 60% efficiency... then 75+40% be able to deliver true 75watts !

Not only is this nonsense, it has nothing to do with what ive said.

You do realize there is also an INPUT specification on psu's right? This whole goofy thing you are doing is completely irrelevent. Just look at the input specification to see what it draws from the wall.

Pretty sure wii u's is along the lines of 120v and 1.1 amps. Which would be 132 watts. (90% effeciency my shiny heiny) No goofy nonsense and arbitrary percentages required.

Doesnt change the fact products on average only use 60% of the psu's maximum output. The wii u is NOT the exception to the rule that uses 99% of the psu's max output.

[Plutonas]

the 60% I am typing is an example.. not true numbers!! If wii U efficiency is 90% then its 75watts + 10% be able to deliever true 75watts... so in that case, mario U needs 29.7watts to run! (10% = 3.3watts of waste) I doubt nintendo added a 90% certified psu on it... Lets be generous and say 80%



the more the efficient psu, the most the bucks you have to give for it.

Edited by Orion, 28 December 2012 - 05:02 PM.

[Alex Atkin UK]

Not only is this nonsense, it has nothing to do with what ive said.

You do realize there is also an INPUT specification on psu's right? This whole goofy thing you are doing is completely irrelevent. Just look at the input specification to see what it draws from the wall.

Pretty sure wii u's is along the lines of 120v and 1.1 amps. Which would be 132 watts. (90% effeciency my shiny heiny) No goofy nonsense and arbitrary percentages required.

Doesnt change the fact products on average only use 60% of the psu's maximum output. The wii u is NOT the exception to the rule that uses 99% of the psu's max output.

You said it, on AVERAGE products only use 60% of a PSUs output. That doesn't mean there can't be exceptions.

My Wii U PSU claims 230V 0.9A, and as its in Europe it should be required to comply with the 80+ efficiency certification.

Something therefore doesn't add up. Could it be that the rated OUTPUT is actually being written more realistically?

As you point out, its an common that PSUs are 40% over-rated compared to what they can deal with on a continuous basis. However that doesn't mean the Wii U PSU also follows that logic. After all, its just a piece of text stamped on the bottom to give you a guideline.

Edited by Alex Atkin UK, 28 December 2012 - 05:05 PM.

[3Dude]

1. It doesn't matter if efficiency is bad in the PSU, we are talking about what happens AFTER that, which is it passes through some DC to DC circuitry in the Wii U itself which can be very efficient.
2 &amp; 3, you could be right, you could be wrong. As this is a bespoke PSU for the Wii U, not an off the shelf unit, we cannot know if the rated output is printed on the box is actually accurate or not. It could be that the PSU is capable of outputting 10A but Nintendo chose to print the ACTUAL values rather than theoretical. We just do not know.
4. No comment.
5. Okay so lets assume the maximum clock rate IS 1.25Ghz, fair enough. However that still doesn't prove that its running at that speed on any of the current games, or that they are not being throttled back somehow by the OS.
Considering how little the TDP on the CPU is supposed to be, if it WAS being throttled in some way, it would necessarily show a huge difference in power consumption once that throttling was removed.

Ok, you need to filter out the things imaginary me has said from the things ive actually said.

Re read my first post on this matter to see what my stance on the cpu's potential is, and more importantly, what stance isnt.

That said, even if the cpu WAS power throttled at 50% you wouldnt see more than a 4-5 watt change coming from the cpu. Its a 750.

Edited by 3Dude, 28 December 2012 - 05:05 PM.

[Alex Atkin UK]

Okay then, quoting your first post:

The psu is rated at 75 watts. Thats whats drawn from the wall, not all of that can be used, some of it is lost as thermal waste.

This is wrong, as you even pointed out later that its rated as drawing FAR more than 75W from the wall. It is however rated as 75W output, which given how much input is claimed I could definitely believe it capable of.

So we are looking at, at most, 60 watts, that goes to the wifi, both internet and gamepad, the disc drive, all the usb slots (although, it appears they are unpowered, better have a seperate power source for your hard drive, or hope a y cable is enough) flash mem, lights, ram, the audio dsp, the arm co/security processor... And the cpu and gpu.

That being said, all that does indeed appear to only take 33 watts. The most likely explanation, of course, is that the system simply isnt under load.

That doesnt mean the cpu can be clocked higher, it means it can do more instructions per cycle than its being given.

Seems pretty clear you are saying the Wii U is not being put under maximum load. If its not being put under maximum load, in GAMES, then its logical to think that in the future games can get more out of it.

I see I made a typo in my last reply though as I was saying seeing as how low the TDP on the CPU is then if it was being throttled you WOULDN'T see a huge difference with the throttling removed, which you agree on.

As for the USB ports, we can knock off 2.5W per port (which is about 3W at the mains when I tested it) as they ARE powered but they adhere strictly to the USB 2.0 spec of 500mA, which is why Nintendo do not recommend self-powered HDDs.

I'm also only seeing 33W being drawn from the wall when playing Sonic & All-Stars Racing Transformed, though while loading I saw it drop to 25W for a brief moment. Its strange, as it draws 31W just idling on Wara Wara Plaza, although I guess its rendering all those Miis and probably accessing the servers.

Edited by Alex Atkin UK, 28 December 2012 - 05:31 PM.

[GAMER1984]

You seem to be thinking that the PSU is 75W INPUT, however that is not the case. The Wii U PSU is rated as 15V 75W OUTPUT, so the conversion loss after that point could be very low. as why choose 15V unless it converts efficiently to the internal voltages of the Wii U. After all, Nintendo made a big deal about just how efficient the Wii U is, so I wouldn't expect there to be huge losses in the console itself.
What is even more curious though is that the AC rating on the UK Wii U PSU is around 207W which seems way too high for a 15V 75W PSU.
I wonder if its labelled incorrectly as looking on Google I see universal PSUs rated as 100-240V 1.5A which makes more sense, drawing around 90W at the mains at 100V.
Back to CPU speed though, nobody seems to have considered exactly WHERE the hackers got the numbers from? Does he know for sure those are the highest clock rate, the clock rate at a specific point in the OS, a specific game, etc? There is nothing to suggest the Wii U cannot alter its clock rate according to what software you are a running, so the fact a hacker managed to read the clock speed during an unknown event, still tells us nothing about the maximum clock rate the hardware is designed for.
Bottom line though, as you point out, the Wii U clearly is not being used efficiently at this point. If its only using around 1/3 of its maximum wattage, it doesn't matter if its due to underclocking or just due to inefficient programming. Either way it implies the console is capable of much more than we have seen so far. The question is if that disused power is from the CPU, GPU, or a little of both.

I've questioned him many times and all I've gotten is he is God don't question him. If he say thats the speed than thats what it is. im like back your work up if you are that good tell us how, what you were doing to get this reading. Me personally the judgement is still out.

Edited by GAMER1984, 28 December 2012 - 08:02 PM.

[3Dude]

I've questioned him many times and all I've gotten is he is God don't question him. If he say thats the speed than thats what it is. im like back your work up if you are that good tell us how, what you were doing to get this reading. Me personally the judgement is still out.

Holy crap you are pissing me off so much.
Team Twizeers does not, has not for years, and will not divulge source code (especially since you wouldnt be able to make heads or tails of it, seriously, what the hell would you do with any of this information) because its irritaring when Nintendo has an express ticket to undo all the work and lock us out at square one, because the in has been outed all over the internet.

Its been this way for years, get the hell over it, or educate yourself so you can find your own answers, but do NOT make baseless accusations at someone elses competence to fellate your fanboy fantasy.

And YES alex, I said the cpu, or rather the whole system core doesnt appear to be under heavy load. That was the whole point of the post, since you seemed to be engaging an imaginary post where i said the opposite.

HOWEVER.

The wii u will not be the only device in the world that runs at 90% of the psu's maximum output. This is getting stupid now. It is NOT going to 'more than double its power consumption'.

60% of 75 watts is 45 watts.

OH MY GOD ITS ALMOST LIKE THATS THE EXACT SAME NUMBER GIVEN BY IWATA IN HIS IWATA ASKS.

Im done being generous.

Edited by 3Dude, 29 December 2012 - 08:16 AM.

[GAMER1984]

Yeah judgement is still out on the CPU... We have to wait and see when all the details come out.

NOTHING about this console has made since from a tech standpoint. What I mean is the back and forth one week its a powerhouse the next week it is no better than ps360. I've never seen so much indecisiveness over a console before in my life. I think its a case of old devkits vs newer devkits. I don't believe we have the true specs of the Wii U final devkit yet. It might be a while until we truly understand what the Wii U can do and at this point I'm not going to take ONE person word for it... Without any logical proof.

Edited by GAMER1984, 29 December 2012 - 08:46 AM.

[3Dude]

Yeah judgement is still out on the CPU... We have to wait and see when all the details come out.

NOTHING about this console has made since from a tech standpoint. What I mean is the back and forth one week its a powerhouse the next week it is no better than ps360. I've never seen so much indecisiveness over a console before in my life. I think its a case of old devkits vs newer devkits. I don't believe we have the true specs of the Wii U final devkit yet. It might be a while until we truly understand what the Wii U can do and at this point I'm not going to take ONE person word for it... Without any logical proof.

Its a case of different people making up different things. It was never going to be a powerhouse and it was never horribly weak (depending on your definition of powerhouse and weak, if you think 2-3x last gen is powerhouse, then powerhouse away, its the fricken juggernaut).

It has weak simd (which 360/ps3 cant function without) because it was designed to execute instructions in their entirety within a single clock cycle instead of breaking them into parallel tasks through many clock cycles.

This gives it very strong general purpose, but it has nothing to specialize in simd or flops. it doesnt have seven spu's, like the ps3, or a dedicated floating point unit like the 360.

Because its designed to finish whole instructions in a single task single cycle, instead of splitting them up into multiple simutaneously running sub tasks heavily dependent on clock speed for performance (and enabling said clock speed, youll notice the more instruction stage pipelinesthe higher the clock speed.... But theres a pitfall.... in the form of hundreds of cycles wasted as penalties whenever something goes wrong) The cpu is (and in fact must be, as it has a blazingly short 4 stage instruction pipeline) clocked much slower.

This means it runs simd code much much much slower than xbox or ps3, in fact, SO much slower since simd performance is directly proportional to clock speed.

The solution is to NOT use simd.... Which is something completely foreign after 10 years of ps360. Which is the problem with ports from ps360, which is the ONLY place anyone has ever voiced complaints.

[xile6]

To many postes to read.

But they can unclock the cpu then release an update to max it out.
I had a htc g2. it was the same way. Used a 1ghz chip clock down to 800mhz. And update opened it up tho.

Also like a few others said in this thread. It could just be the max that the system will pull.
You knew netter safe then sorry.
So you make yout power plig able to handle 75 while the system fully streeed may only pull 50.

[3Dude]

To many postes to read.
But they can unclock the cpu then release an update to max it out.
I had a htc g2. it was the same way. Used a 1ghz chip clock down to 800mhz. And update opened it up tho.
Also like a few others said in this thread. It could just be the max that the system will pull.
You knew netter safe then sorry.
So you make yout power plig able to handle 75 while the system fully streeed may only pull 50.

No, they cant simply 'unlock the clock'.

The architecture has a 4 stage instruction pipeline. Try finding a 4 stage architecture clocked higher than wii u.

You cant. You cant clock such a short instruction pipeline up to 2 GHz or higher unless you shrink the process size. If you want a 2GHz or higher 750, youll need it on a 22 or 18 nm process.

Edited by 3Dude, 30 December 2012 - 07:49 AM.

[xile6]

No, they cant simply 'unlock the clock'.
The architecture has a 4 stage instruction pipeline. Try finding a 4 stage architecture clocked higher than wii u.
You cant. You cant clock such a short instruction pipeline up to 2 GHz or higher unless you shrink the process size. If you want a 2GHz or higher 750, youll need it on a 22 or 18 nm process.

Say again?
If the chip is a 2ghz , underclock to 1.5ghz. Then they can send and update to run it at full.
Thats what i was saying. My laptop does this to save battery.

[The Lonely Koopa]

Say again?
If the chip is a 2ghz , underclock to 1.5ghz. Then they can send and update to run it at full.
Thats what i was saying. My laptop does this to save battery.

What I believe 3dude is trying to say is the cpu due to the type they used is already as high as it can be clocked and its impossible to clock it any higher than it already is.

Edited by The Lonely Koopa, 30 December 2012 - 10:04 AM.

[xile6]

What I believe 3dude is trying to say is the cpu due to the type they used is already as high as it can be clocked and its impossible to clock it any higher than it already is.

yes i wasnt talking about over clocking it.
I was talking about it being underclock as of now. And later on they run it at full.

[3Dude]

yes i wasnt talking about over clocking it.
I was talking about it being underclock as of now. And later on they run it at full.

Its not underclocked there has never been a 750 family clocked as high as the wii u cpu, and there has never been a 4 stage pipeline clocked at 2Ghz.

If there was there would be no such thing as icore and wed still have power macs.

[Plutonas]

I know what he means... There is 1 topic but I cant remember the link... That says, wii U cpu tech, can increase its clocks if the game demands it, up to 1.6... more like the amd ones, that at idle they work at 1.+ ghz and when they run games they jump up to 3-4ghz... something like that.

[Nollog]

Its not underclocked there has never been a 750 family clocked as high as the wii u cpu, and there has never been a 4 stage pipeline clocked at 2Ghz.

Yet.*