WereKitten on 11 October 2009
| bdbdbd said: @Xoj: That's the point, Nintendo could have made a HD console and rake in the same profits they do now. Nintendo could have made a console that has multiple times the processing power of Wii, using the excact same architecture. Considering 360 has 3 Wii CPU:s clocked at 3,2GHz, one doesn't cost much. Or Wii could have that one clocked at 2,4GHz. There wasn't much financial incentives for Nintendo not make Wii in HD, so the reason was somewhere else. @Pristine: You're right. You could tell that to the devs who push the systems graphically aswell as Sony and M$ who make the standards. |
Your opinions are one thing, but you should not write about technical aspects unless you're informed about them. The bolded part is simply utter rubbish.
The Xenon CPU of the 360 is using the PowerPC ISA, because that's what IBM does. It's not 3 CPUs, its a single CPU with 3 cores, and an architecture that borrows from the development that went in other more radical departures like the Cell, rather than the G3 as in the Wii's CPU. If you know nothing about cache coeherence or hyperthreading you should really not adventure in these waters.
It's not the only reason your first paragraph is bogus, of course. "Nintendo could have made a HD console and rake in the same profits" is wild, wild speculation.
