By using this site, you agree to our Privacy Policy and our Terms of Use. Close
Mr Puggsly said:
Play4Fun said:

Wow. If you get so pissed when people argue with you then maybe you shouldn't be on a forum? Hhhmm?

Twist your  words. Lol. I said exactly why the bar can be raised much higher than the PS360 despite the size of the box butof course you hate people arguing against your points.

I'm not wasting anymore time with you. Good day, sir.

Your explanation was bad examples.

Any what's my point? The size of the Wii U may pose some limitations in regards to delivering cutting edge technology. That's simply a fact.

Gaming laptops and all in one PCs with gaming GPUs demonstrate current game level graphical processing tech can be easily engineered to fit into small form factor packages.

Will anyone be engineering a tablet sized device with a GTX 580? Of course not. Nor a GTX 570, GTX 560, etc. which require more power to operate and generate more heat, requiring significant active cooling solutions. But none of those GPUs can be currently produced for less than $100 (nowhere near this price point, regardless of production scale) either making the whole "cutting edge" factor moot. 

Mobile GPU chipsets on the other hand can be cooled by miniature fans that fit into a sub 1" chassis. Mobile GPU chipsets that easily provide more graphical processing power than the RSX or R500 based Xenos GPU.

Regardless, cutting edge technology is not the issue for the Wii U. Cost will be, as is always the case with Nintendo, which is why the rumored R700 based GPU seems all the more plausible. HD4850 level of graphical processing power, at least 50-100% more than the RSX or R500 (extreme low ball estimate), in a GPU than can be produced for maybe $50, probably less. 

Unlike gaming PC rigs, GPUs in consoles do not constitute 1/3rd up to 1/2 (in extreme multi card builds) of the hardware costs. Keep in mind that at its most expensive, the RSX had an iSuppli estimate of about $85 for a $599 retail console.