By using this site, you agree to our Privacy Policy and our Terms of Use. Close

Forums - Gaming Discussion - Supposedly, Final WiiU Specs from VGLeaks

MosDef fake since IBM already confirmed it is using a Power7 cpu. Wii U was also suppose to have at least 1.5 GB of RAM as well. After all the false "official" leaks of the 3DS (64MB vs real 128 MB, 133MHz GPU vs 268 MHz GPU, etc) I will wait for an official press release or a reputable teardown.



Around the Network
HapySqurriel said:

It seems to me that talking about how great the performance from memory is could come from stripping out half of the cores but leaving their memory controllers in place and having the chip run in TuroboCore mode. A 3/4 core chip with 6/8 memory controllers to be used by 12/16 threads would be relatively impressive, affordable and low energy consumption processor; and its memory bandwidth would be substantially better than either the XBox 360 or PS3's CPUs.

There is no way there ae 6/8 memory controllers (and threads have nothing to do with them). Typically memory controllers are 64 bit and there is no way WiiU has such a wide bus (makes mainboard way too expensive). Given the reported power brick of the WiiU says 75W on it, these "final specs" seem to agree with that.



curl-6 said:
superchunk said:
curl-6 said:
superchunk said:
So, I read the GAF thread for this and I have to say this though. IF this turns out to be true (we'll only know after it launches and someone tears it down), I will be buying a 2nd console in 2014 when I see defect rate (or lack there of) for neXtBox/PS4. Because there is no way the console defined in the OP will be able to play all 3rd party games at that point.

I'll also realize NO ONE LEARNED A DAMN THING from this last generation. Also, if true.... it better be fucking priced at $250 or less for the a base version. At least in two days we'll know how good or bad the full OS/Online system is as well as pricing.

Surely there's 0% chance it's true; they're putting Mass Effect 3 and Assassin's  Creed 3 on it, those couldn't run on 3 Broadways.

Why not? 3 Broadways with increased clock speed and cache are easily comparable with a X360 CPU, if not a little better.

I was under the impression that Broadway was further behind the 360 CPU than that. My mistake, I guess. (Out of curiosity, about how big is the gap? Would 5 or 6 un-enhanced Broadways rival the 360 CPU?)

But if this was true, it would mean that, power aside, the fundamental design of the Wii U CPU (or each core, at least) would be unchanged since the Gamecube CPU was built in 1999.


Nah, it's way behind. Broadway doesn't support the same instructions, its architeture is way less refined, it lacks logical cores, the extra vector units etc.

The Broadway is some 32 times slower than the Xenos on raw number crunching. Three Broadway cores would need to be clocked at something like 12 GHz to be comparable to the Xenos.

Just so you can compare the Broadway architecture was introduced (in an even less refined way, but still) in 1997 while the Xenos comes from the same Cell architecture IBM released in 2006, nine years later, an eternity as far as computer hardware is concerned so far. 



 

 

 

 

 

drkohler said:
HapySqurriel said:

It seems to me that talking about how great the performance from memory is could come from stripping out half of the cores but leaving their memory controllers in place and having the chip run in TuroboCore mode. A 3/4 core chip with 6/8 memory controllers to be used by 12/16 threads would be relatively impressive, affordable and low energy consumption processor; and its memory bandwidth would be substantially better than either the XBox 360 or PS3's CPUs.

There is no way there ae 6/8 memory controllers (and threads have nothing to do with them). Typically memory controllers are 64 bit and there is no way WiiU has such a wide bus (makes mainboard way too expensive). Given the reported power brick of the WiiU says 75W on it, these "final specs" seem to agree with that.


You don't seem to understand the Power 7 processor do you ...

Each core supports 4 threads and in a typical Power 7 processor each core has 1 memory controller, and the processor comes with 4, 6 or 8 cores. In the 8 core model you can disable 4 of the cores and the other 4 cores will use their memory controllers, resulting in having 4 cores each having 2 memory controllers while running 4 threads. Hypothetically speaking you could permanently "disable" 4 cores from this processor and constantly run in TurboCore mode.

The power 7 is a (relatively) low power processor especially the 4 core model running at 3GHz. Being that the Wii U has already been confirmed to be using the Power 7 it is likely that they're using something similar to the 4 core model running at 3GHz.



Turbocore doesn't really exist, because CPUs go to the lowest clock they possible can to conserve power anyway. There's no point in having 4 extra cores and disabling them either.

They'll clock whatever cores are on the chip as high as they can at while not exceeding the design limits for power and heat and then as low as they can when the workload is off. Ignore turbo modes.



Around the Network

This specs, don't mean much to me, I will just wait till Nintendo confirm info



Xbox One, PS4 and Switch (+ Many Retro Consoles)

'When the people are being beaten with a stick, they are not much happier if it is called the people's stick'- Mikhail Bakunin

Prediction: Switch will sell better than Wii U Lifetime Sales by Jan 1st 2018

Is it just me or does the RAM amounts not make any sense whatsoever...i dont trust this



It should also be noted that IBM stated several years ago that it was doing not doing any die-size reductions on the PowerPC 7xx series of CPUs (Broadway/Gekko) below 90nm ...



Soleron said:
Turbocore doesn't really exist, because CPUs go to the lowest clock they possible can to conserve power anyway. There's no point in having 4 extra cores and disabling them either.

They'll clock whatever cores are on the chip as high as they can at while not exceeding the design limits for power and heat and then as low as they can when the workload is off. Ignore turbo modes.


I'm suggesting that they "permanently disable" (read: remove ) the additional 4 cores.

Essentially producing a CPU with 2 memory controllers per core



HappySqurriel said:
Soleron said:
Turbocore doesn't really exist, because CPUs go to the lowest clock they possible can to conserve power anyway. There's no point in having 4 extra cores and disabling them either.

They'll clock whatever cores are on the chip as high as they can at while not exceeding the design limits for power and heat and then as low as they can when the workload is off. Ignore turbo modes.


I'm suggesting that they "permanently disable" (read: remove ) the additional 4 cores.

Essentially producing a CPU with 2 memory controllers per core

It's too much die to waste for such a small performance benefit. If they had to they'd do a custom chip without the disabled cores.