Wii= Gamecube 1.5 says N'Gai Croal

[Phalanx]

Entroper said:

KruzeS said:

Snesboy said:

I believe Nintendo was the most modest and down-to-earth with their statement of 2-3 times more powerful than GameCube though.

And it can be with those clock speeds (which are written on the chips by the way), if for instance, there were twice as many graphic pipelines on the Wii. Now, the article says there aren't, that there's 16 in both the GC and Wii, but that I find much harder to believe given die sizes and stuff. The clock speed is actually the most believable thing so far, since it's written on the damn chips.

Confusing pipelines and TEV stages again. We went over this in a thread two weeks ago. You're right, though, that the Hollywood's die size suggests that they've doubled the number of pipelines. It would be from 4 pipelines in the Gamecube to 8 pipelines in the Wii.

 

What makes me really question this article is this quote: "By taking these measurements and the process node (which was the only piece of information released by Nintendo) into account, we quickly realized that Broadway and Hollywood were not significant departures from their GameCube equivalents; the sizes were simply too close." I don't know how you could come to that kind of conclusion based on the die sizes and process shrinks between the Flipper and Hollywood. I'd really like to see some explanation there when multiple other sources are quoting 2-3x the number of transistors in Hollywood.

Yeah, I thought that part of the article was pretty retarded too (no offence to any retarded articles that may be reading this post).  If the only difference between Flipper and Hollywood was the transistor size, then Hollywood should be significantly smaller than Flipper, not the other way around.  This article is full of fail.