314 replies to this topic

[The Lonely Koopa]

Why do we know more about the ps4 than the Wii U at this point?! By time they produce a good looking game I will have the next consoles from xbox and PS and all this spec stuff will be moot.

Nintendo is extremely secretive on everything from tech to games nowdays.

[dragomix]

And they should be! Remember SEGA and Mega Drive branding (super fast CPU) over NES, and NES was more powerful. Now what would happen if Nintendo release specs:

PS4 has gigily bigily more TFLOPS than Wii U! Xbox have x * y + super chip that can stream video, WiiUdont!

And in real performance? Wii U can do anything that PS4 and Xbox, but in 720p! That is the reality!

[namkotje]

And in real performance? Wii U can do anything that PS4 and Xbox, but in 720p! That is the reality!

I wish.

But Wii U is really underpowered compared to the PS4 (No idea about Nextbox, since it isn't announced yet). Thanks to the Neogaf tech guys, we know enough about the Wii U to understand that the Wii U isn't an high end next gen.

Edited by namkotje, 23 February 2013 - 01:59 PM.

[dragomix]

We dont know nothing yet, and i didnt say Wii U is high end next gen, but PS4 isn't also!

Anybody that dont know much about hardware should read this!

http://www.neogaf.co...ad.php?t=515265

[namkotje]

We dont know nothing yet, and i didnt say Wii U is high end next gen, but PS4 isn't also!

Next gen is just a term made for consoles. If you compare both next gen consoles, then the PS4 is a high end next gen console.

[dragomix]

But its 4-5x les powerful than SINGLE GPU PC that you can buy TODAY! PC is in this race too, most multiform titles will come to PC, and even be developed for PC first (like Watch Dogs and Star Wars 1313)!

[namkotje]

PC will always win.

[Arkhandar]

Not counting with the huge amount of fixed function logic present in the Wii U GPU, we're looking at a raw power of at least 325 GFLOPS.

The PS4 GPU has been confirmed to have a total of 1.84 TFLOPS of raw GPU power.

So, judging be the GPU alone we're looking at a relatively big difference, but it isn't by far, a "quantum leap" like Sony's advertising.

In a worst case scenario, the PS4 is 5x more powerful than the Wii U. This means that a PS4 game running in 1080p@60fps could equally run on a Wii U in 720p@30fps.

For comparison, the PS3 and Xbox360 were 20x more powerful than the original Wii, so we're definitely not looking at a last generation situation here.

Then again, none of this matters if there's no good games on either consoles. Because it all comes down to this, good games.

[3Dude]

Not counting with the huge amount of fixed function logic present in the Wii U GPU, we're looking at a raw power of at least 325 GFLOPS.
The PS4 GPU has been confirmed to have a total of 1.84 TFLOPS of raw GPU power.
So, judging be the GPU alone we're looking at a relatively big difference, but it isn't by far, a "quantum leap" like Sony's advertising.
In a worst case scenario, the PS4 is 5x more powerful than the Wii U. This means that a PS4 game running in 1080p@60fps could equally run on a Wii U in 720p@30fps.
For comparison, the PS3 and Xbox360 were 20x more powerful than the original Wii, so we're definitely not looking at a last generation situation here.
Then again, none of this matters if there's no good games on either consoles. Because it all comes down to this, good games.

I wouldnt go so far as to say fixed functions yet. It probably doesnt have any. Just custom logic.

Also, like clock speeds or 'bits', flops cant be directly compared across architectures. Some architectures may take less floating point operations to solve the same problem because they can process it differently.

And also important to consider is how close realworld performance gets to theoretical peak performance. ps360 were around 65% of their theoretical peak performance.

[NintendoReport]

I wouldnt go so far as to say fixed functions yet. It probably doesnt have any. Just custom logic.

Also, like clock speeds or 'bits', flops cant be directly compared across architectures. Some architectures may take less floating point operations to solve the same problem because they can process it differently.

And also important to consider is how close realworld performance gets to theoretical peak performance. ps360 were around 65% of their theoretical peak performance.

Nice posts. Could one say that Wii U would acheive the highest percentage peak performance this time around? I really think Nintendo has built a deceptively powerful console and as Criterion said " punches above it's weight " .

[3Dude]

Nice posts. Could one say that Wii U would acheive the highest percentage peak performance this time around? I really think Nintendo has built a deceptively powerful console and as Criterion said " punches above it's weight " .

It could, the gamecube hit within 90% of its theoretical peak (and thus likely the wii too).

but... That didnt stop ps360 from stomping wii raw powerwise.

Its just peices to consider when trying to view the whole picture.

[Arkhandar]

I wouldnt go so far as to say fixed functions yet. It probably doesnt have any. Just custom logic.

Also, like clock speeds or 'bits', flops cant be directly compared across architectures. Some architectures may take less floating point operations to solve the same problem because they can process it differently.

And also important to consider is how close realworld performance gets to theoretical peak performance. ps360 were around 65% of their theoretical peak performance.

Although the PS4 GPU is powered by GCN, they're both manufactured by AMD so there shouldn't be any big differences in the overall architecture. So that's why I made that directed comparison in terms of FLOPS.

[Socalmuscle]

it proves to be an E6760 that nobody accepts easily, they dont want to!!.. lol look at this

http://www.nintendo....ch-specs/ it says : AMD Radeon™-based High Definition GPU

and look at this.

http://en.wikipedia....i/Radeon_R700 and this http://en.wikipedia....en_(GPU_family) Both are rv700 and r800 (4xxx gpu and 5xxx gpus) They are NOT AMD branded, it is ATI branded (amd bought ATI and the AMD gpus start from 6xxx series!!) http://en.wikipedia....ds_(GPU_family)

I pointed that to gaf, because they all speak for rv7.... They trolled me in IGN forums, they dont want to listen about e6760, they want to believe that wii U does not have the dx11 hardware features!!! lol funny but true.

that alone proves that wii U is using AMD radeon based gpu (As nintendo states) technology, that means 6xxx series and up. So it may not be 320 spus, but 480 instead!

Nobody can say that wii U uses rv700 chip, because it conflicts with the branding... it should be ATI radeon rv7 instead. Its not even r800 (5xxx gpu) because it is also ATI branding.

Even if AMD bought ATI and they are one company... AMD keeps the ATI branding for 4xxx and 5xxx gpus http://www.amd.com/u...on-hd-5000.aspx

but its not accepted by the reviewers.. hmmmm

Good points.

The AMD APU is meant to be in mid range PC's, and Nintendo started with what was meant to be high end at it's time. I still expect the Wii U to be the least powerful, but close enough to handle all the same engines as the other consoles.

But the Wii U might also be the PS3 of this generation in terms of sales.

The problem with the ps3 was that it was crazy expensive. Not only to buy, but to produce. And the cell wasn't all it was touted to be. Especially since one spe had to be gimped for yield consistency.

The other problem was that it competed directly with the xbox in terms of power, but lost that war since it had an inferior gpu and ram amount. Therefore, it had no legs to stand on. Add to that it had an inferior online experience and you can see why anyone who wanted a powerful system chose xbox 360. It was cheaper, more powerful, and had better online. And if you wanted a budget system, motion controls, or Nintendo games, you bought the cheap wii.

Ps3 simply didn't have a reason to exist in that
Market. Xbox did. Wii did.

Therefore, no one needed an overpriced console when they could have a better experience elsewhere.

Now, we have an interesting situation.

Wii incomes out and has competitive hardware with ps4 and 720. It's weaker, but competitive.

Wii u has great online, unrivaled gamepad experience and low price for what you get.

Ps4 comes out and has great specs, will have a high price, but no real innovation at all. Little is known about the online other than it wastes bandwidth to remote over the Internet with vita (problem waiting to happen...).
720 has much improved connect, will rival or beat wii u in online experience, but the final hardware isn't known.

If 720 keeps the current specs, it will be the one that doesn't sell. For innovation and online, people will buy wii u, ESP since the game graphics won't look much less. For the powerhouse, they'll buy Sony. The 720 won't have reason to exist.

But... Ms has the benefit of seeing songs unveiling. And the resources to bump up their specs. And they will. Therefore. The one and only thing Sony has to offer-power-will not be a selling point anymore. So they will have to rely on games. One prob. Their first party isn't good, third party will be the same or better on 720 and they can't compete with Nintendo ip or gears, halo, etc. of course, that's IF ms bumps their specs. Can't see them not doing that.

If that happens, However, I can see this gen playing out similar to last.
Wii u sells a ton. 720 sells a ton. And ps4 doesn't have a reason to exist.

[tboss]

ps3 almost caught upnto xbox. over stuff like free online and having all the same multy plats. both ended up equal. but that ps3 didnt mean much in the beginning except high price tricked dume people into the mkre power belief.


expect 720 to lose ground this gen.

as for wiiu gpu, hope each part asigned jobs go well should be close to ps4 quality but lack freedom to use how u please.

[3Dude]

Although the PS4 GPU is powered by GCN, they're both manufactured by AMD so there shouldn't be any big differences in the overall architecture. So that's why I made that directed comparison in terms of FLOPS.

The difference in architecture is MASSIVE. AMD has never released anything like this. Whatever this started as, its completely u recognizable now. Its that custom.

I have a thread with a high resolution image of the gpu die, you can see for yourself.

... Er, wait, thats this thread.

Edited by 3Dude, 24 February 2013 - 08:04 PM.

[dragomix]

One Neo gaf member found this:

 

Ah, I found an interesting photo. Its not a die shot but I'm sure it can be of some use.

Quote:

Fab process: 40 nm
Core Speed: 550 Mhz
Processing power (single precision): 352 GigaFLOPS
Polygon throughput: 550M polygons/sec 
Unified Shader: 320(64x5) 
Memory bandwidth: DDR3: 24.5 – 28.8 GB/s (isn't the Wii U's RAM clocked at exactly half that? That would make it 28.8 with both used simultaneously. Just a thought)
Texture Mapping Units: 16 
Render Output Units: 8 
32 Z/Stencil ROP Units
8 Color ROP Units
ATI Eyefinity multi-display technology - Three independent display controllers
Maximum board power: 39 Watts

I also recall people suggesting it could be an e6760 base a while back. Its also 40 nm. What is the likelihood of that I wonder.

Also, maybe that thing the Toki Tori devs found that saved them 100 MB of memory was HDR texture compression.

Can someone tell me what "Order-independent transparency" means for a game?

 

If it had 64 shaders per SIMD core, than Wii U wold have 8*64=512 shaders.

 

In gflops it would be 563gflops. I think that this is the strongest candidate for Wii U GPU. I will research more to find more info if I could.

[DéliopT]

I understand nothing of CPU and GPU talk, so, what would that mean for Wii U? Better than expectations?

[tboss]

im still leaning on modified E6760. mostly because it fits what we saw from wiiU so far and its what AMD (i know we cant trust the people who make the chip to not know what they make), said it is. 

 

teh HD5550 is also more likly than the R700 we keep hearing about. 

 

personly id expect the E6760(570 gf if i remember right) + upgardes bring it to effectivly 650ish gigflops, comming with 90-95%(expect ruffly 75-70% form 720 and PS4), should put it around 600.

[3Dude]

One Neo gaf member found this:
 

 
If it had 64 shaders per SIMD core, than Wii U wold have 8*64=512 shaders.
 
In gflops it would be 563gflops. I think that this is the strongest candidate for Wii U GPU. I will research more to find more info if I could.

In that diagram, the l2 is shown being off the gpu die. On the wii u gpu, its right on the die along with the l1.

[dragomix]

In that diagram, the l2 is shown being off the gpu die. On the wii u gpu, its right on the die along with the l1.

I didnt say that Wii U GPU is THIS GPU, i think it uses same SIMD engines as HD5550 or to be precise Redwood SIMD cores.

 

Redwood is used in last gen AMD APU-s, on FM1 socket. 

 

Here is the die shot of Llano APU:

 

http://images.anandt...raightBlack.jpg

 

SIMD cores are very similar. I dont know on which architecture is e6760 based on. If it is Redwood, then we found which SIMD cores Wii U uses. 

Edited by dragomix, 12 March 2013 - 01:19 AM.