"Wii U hardware is on par with current gen consoles"

[Pemalite]

zero129 said:

thismeintiel said:

zero129 said:

thismeintiel said:
If this turns out to be true, it wouldn't surprise me in the least. I know some Nintendo fans are hoping this will blow the PS3 out of the water (3x or 4x more powerful), but I don't see it happening. Not unless Nintendo does want that hefty price tag. It'll probably be more like 1.5x more powerful when all things are considered and the graphics will be have better shadowing and anti-aliasing, while having the texture quality and poly count of PS3's better looking games.

This would actually make more sense if Nintendo wants to keep the price tag ~$299. Though, I don't think it's going to help them with 3rd party support when most developers leave for the much more powerful PS4/NeXbox, which will probably be releasing 1 year from the Wii U's launch.

I don't know how you come to that conclusion. The PS3 is 6 years old, the is sub €100 GFX cards out now that blows the PS3 out of the water, same for the CPU. The is no reason to believe the WiiU won't be atleast 3-4 times more powerfull then the PS3, but i know "Some Sony Fans" would like to think other wise....

I probably should have been more specific.  I meant 1.5x in real world execution, not numbers on paper.  Nothing Nintendo has said or shown has given me the impression they aiming to, or will succeed, in making the Wii U push out graphics that are 3x or 4x better than the PS3's.  Like I said, texture quality and poly count will probably remain similar to the better looking PS3 games, while it will have greatly improved shadowing and anti-aliasing.  If the Zelda tech demo is anything to go on, this seems to be the case.

Maybe i should of been more specific too. As i also meant 3-4 times more powerfull in real world terms, Not on some paper. Nintendo has never hyped their systems power. Maybe Nintendo should of used CGI for their tech demos like sony have done in the past??. That Zelda demo was made very fast, and was un-optimised, and it still looked better then any PS3 game imo. And like i said the is GFX cards out their now that cost's €100 or less that blow the PS3 away, in real terms, not on some paper like you would like to believe. So nintendo would get them even cheaper in bulk, plus add in the 1.5GB ram with a nice processer, it wouldn't cost nintendo any more $250 to build a console that is 3-4 more times powerfull then the PS3. As you're forgeting the PS3 is now 6 years old, everything has moved on alot since then...

Even on paper today's graphics cards wipe the floor the the PS3 and XBox's Graphics chip.

For the sake of it... I'll omit the memory bandwidth numbers because in a console they can pair it up with whatever expensive yet stupidly fast memory they want anyway.

PS3:
24 Pixel Shaders, 8 Vertex Shaders, 24 Texture mapping units, 8 Render output pipelines, 550mhz core clock.

Xbox 360: 48 Unified shaders. (Both Pixel and Vertex use the same pipelines.), 16 Texture mapping units, 8 Render output pipelines, 500mhz core clock.

$100 PC graphics card (Radeon 6750):
720 Stream processors. (VLIW5, comparitively would be 144 SP's.), 36 Texture mapping units, 16 rops, 700mhz core clock.

If you go with the Wii U's rumoured 46xx class graphics chip:
320 Stream processors, (64 SP's.), 32 Texture mapping units, 8 Render output Pipelines, Core clock of 500mhz - 1ghz.

VLIW5 architectures that the WiiU uses is generally rather efficient and allows for more throughput per shader cluster than what the PS3 and Xbox is capable of, so even if it *did* have the same amount of shaders it would be far more efficient at pixel and vertex shading with the additional benefit of being able to do geometry shading amongst other things.
Graphics architectures like Fermi and Southern Islands is more geared towards compute, VLIW4 and to a lesser extent VLIW5 is incredibly efficient at graphics  tasks.

If the Wii U is going to be "minimum" in next gen consoles, that should mean some pretty impressive graphics.