System Faults Didn't Stop THQ From Bringing Metro: Last Light To Wii U

[Lafiel]

miz1q2w3e said:

Lafiel said:

miz1q2w3e said:

zarx said:

actually most people would be right in that case http://www.anandtech.com/bench/Product/47?vs=677&i=505.506

I don't have to tell you why that's wrong, but ok.

what kind of relevance have CPU only benchmarks for a game system? gaming performance probably is more important, no? (not to mention, that the i7 in the bench is 2.66GHz, so it's a lot faster than the 1.5GHz i7 Nem originally proclaimed to be faster than a 3GHz i3)

I just wanted to counter his post/ spreading of misinformation. Anyone with knowledge should know that clock frequency is not the only measure of a CPU's performance.

Yes, the lately often quoted architecture does play the biggest role in CPU performance, yet Nem's example was flawed from the beginning as i3 and i7 are _same gen tech_. The i7 has better per clock performance mainly due to larger caches and so on, but the underlying architecture is largely the same.

I expect the WiiU's main chip to have a better per clock performance than the Xenos for example, but I don't know how much that can be if it operates with less transistors as some reports point to. (same process -> same transistor size -> but smaller die size = lower transistor count?) Normally CPU performance does scale pretty linear with transistor count, but a considerably better (or better suited for it's functions) architecture can upset that aswell.