ethomaz said:
Teriol said:
did you know than an OOE cpu can gain a 60% performance vs an IOE cpu? (like the cpu's on ps360 that cpu's are IOE), did you know that the gpgpu can work better for somethings that always developers take to the cpu? and that is why i think you dont understand everything yet.
|
No because in this two points your are wrong.
1. The CPU is slow... even if you gain 60% with OOE the CPU is still slow... and you forget a point games don't use OOE... it's more for OS use.
2. There are a lot of articles about GPGPU and GPGPU just do paralel things better... even the Folding@Home needs the CPU to do somethings because the GPGPU can't do everything or most things the GPGPU is slower than CPU... even the Physics is GPGPU is not better than in CPU... anyway if you don't have a strong CPU to help the GPGPU (because GPGPU can't to everything) then everything is thrown out.
And now my point of view...
Games will not use GPGPU in Wii U... sorry but even way stronger GPU have problems to handle graphics and GPGPU at the same time... so because that the better options is have a GPU for graphcis and another GPU for GPGPU (nVIDIA and AMD do that)... the Wii GPU is not TOP level like GTX 680.
All that talk about GPGPU is an attempt to hide the obvious.
The only thing that can really help the Wii U is the eDRAM but it's unknown yet.
|
OK, let me enlighten you on a few things:
1.) How a CPU is used is based on the devs, we are not working with a standard PC library here, it is most likely than not slower in overall performance vs the Xenon and the Cell, but you do bring up an interesting topic in stating that it's mostly for OS, and OS is going to be the defining factor in next gen consoles, the current 360 GUI and the XMB just won't do for the 8th gen(of course, also limited by RAM, which Wii U certainly doesn't lack for what it needs to do), having an OOE CPU means that it can handle that situation better without having a huge die behind it. It's smart design over raw power, kinda like the GPU situation in the 360 vs PS3, where the Xenos is clearly superior to the RSX in features, but not RAW power.
2.) You are completely mad to think that a CPU can do physics better than a modern GPU, not to mention that they don't need to load the entire physics system to the GPU, they only need to offload what they would need to, the fun thing about consoles is that you can not thinking about a wide range of hardwares like a PC, you can concentrate on that one piece of technology, so it doesn't need to have GTX680 power to produce cool stuff.
All the talk about GPGPU is most people don't understand how things work, and thinks that all the physics work would be done on the GPU via an API like how Nvidia does it with PhysX, but we are not dealing with a PC, so it's completely moot.
We know nothing about the eDRAM, so people hoping that to be the Wii U's savior are also weird, that's also moot.
Finally, we really know nothing about the efficiency of the console, knowing Nintendo, prolly not a lot of bottlenecks. They have never designed things based on how to build a muscle car, which are fun cars, but also the most inefficient pieces of toys on Earth.