| TheLastStarFighter said: It's at least double and probably closer to 4X the power of PS360. 4X the RAM makes more things possible. The graphics card is far better. People have made comments about the CPU, but it's not all that important for games. The GPGPU means that smart programers will dump most work on to the GPU, and the close connectivity of the two chips makes this easy and efficient. The end impact on visuals won't be hugely noticible in comparisson to the best current-gen games, but the Wii U will run new engines, which is all that's important. It will be interesting to see the next Mario Galaxy title next year. I think that will be our first glimpse of what Wii U can truly do. |
Back up your statments please.
a VGChartz member here "Soleron" has already debunked basically all of your post but I'll give my own take on your post and the power of the graphics card inparticular.
1. GPGPU been around for about 4 years on PC GPUs, not used at all except for Physics.
2. CPU is important when it's that low.
3. Tasks can't just be emptied onto the GPGPU, coding for GPGPU is extremely difficult and although it opens to the door to new things, given that nothing new has come from the PC GPGPU area, you can be sure nothing will come here.
4. Where do you get 4X the power of the Xbox 360/PS3, did you just roll a dice?
5. The Wii has 1.5GB RAM, of which half a GB is reserved for the OS. So it has 1GB, which is double what the Xbox 360 and PS3 has. This doesn't open up the door to anything from a graphical perspective but does open the door to increasing the gap between loading times and allowing larger game worlds. There will be no noticeable benefit in performance as in frame rate or resolution or texture detail because of this.
6. The graphics card isn't far better it's maybe 20% better being generous to the Wii-U. It's based on a 2 generation old card released 3 years ago and at the time it was only a mid-range card and cost less than £75 at the time. It's power is not up to much at all. The Xbox 360 and PS3 were based on top end cards that cost about £350 at the time hadn't even been released for the PC in the case of the Xbox 360.
The Xbox 360 had a souped up version of a Radeon X1800 in it with unified shaders, although it was far superior to an X1800 - which hadn't even been released at time of the Xbox 360s debut. The PS3 had an equivalent of an nVidia 7800GT in it.
It's common knowledge the Radeon 5670 is about 5-10% slower than a 9800GT which is a rebadge of an 8800GT.
The Radeon X1800 is a superior card to a 7800GT by a fair bit due to much improved shaders. So basically at the end of the day the Wii-U's graphics card is 5%-10% less powerful than a top end graphics card 1 generation ahead of an Xbox 360. Considering the Wii-U has been released about 7 years after the debut of the Xbox 360 and new graphics card generations happen basically once every year.
We have tech in the Wii-U that is about as powerful as a top end PC was 6 years ago in terms of graphics and about 20% better overall than the Xbox 360 graphics card but a CPU that is at least 40%-45% slower, even taking into account that it can do more per clock but the Wii-U also has 512MB extra RAM at it's disposal.
Considering how slow the CPU is, I can't see it being that useful because loading more into RAM will mean that the game is more complex computationally and the CPU is weak. It might make coding games easier for developers but I can't see it making a difference to actual output.
There's no way you will be seeing DirectX 11 type effects on it because the GPU is too slow, even if it technically supports them.
