By using this site, you agree to our Privacy Policy and our Terms of Use. Close
dahuman on 30 January 2013
Edit Thread
ethomaz said:

Aielyn said:

I'm sorry, but at this point, I won't accept what you're saying until you provide sources backing up your claims. And from what I can find, the argument of "the GPU alone is 104 mm^2" comes from the assumption that it's based on Redwood, not vice versa.

Also, your numbers don't match up. You claim that the eDRAM must use at least 55 mm^2... but that leaves just 101 mm^2, less than the 104 mm^2 that you claimed the Wii U GPU must be using.

Meanwhile, there's the AMD Radeon HD 7670M, which has a die size of 104 mm^2, a 40 nm process, a clock speed of 600 MHz (Redwood has a clockspeed of 775 MHz), and pushes 576 GFLOPS - at 550 MHz, that's 528 GFLOPS, which again contradicts your claim, which was that there is no AMD tech that can put over 520 GFLOPS in 104 mm^2 running at 550 MHz. And at 600 MHz, it uses only 25 W, if I'm reading this correctly, which means that it'll use maybe 20-22 W at 550 MHz... which is right around where it should be, if I understand correctly - my understanding is that the system uses 40 W when active.

And if it's based on the 7690M XT, then it should work out even lower in power usage, since it still has 25 W with a higher clock speed (and therefore should have an even lower power usage when underclocked). Or perhaps it's based on the 7590M, which performs pretty much in line with the 7670, except only requiring 18 W.

Meanwhile, the only reference I could see to the association of 32 MB of eDRAM to 55 mm^2 goes back to 2004/2005, except one instance on Beyond3D, where one guy speculated that, since IBM get 61.4 mm^2 at their 45nm process for 32 MB of eDRAM, then at 40nm, it should be about 55 mm^2. The problem is, this guy sucks at mathematics and scaling. 61.4*40/45 = 54.5, which is likely where he got 55 from. But area works with the square of the scale, so it's actually 61.4*40^2/45^2 = 48.5.

Again the AMD Radeon HD 7670M have a die size of 118mm^2... the 104mm^2 of you article is wrong.

GPU-Z: http://www.techpowerup.com/gpuz/3eyre/

Anyway for me 400 or 500 GFLOPS is the same for next-gen... really weak... the Wii U GPU is unbelievable weak for the next-gen... I don't need to prove anything because even the biggest Nintendo fans knows that... and that is way off topic to try correct your wrong numbers.

The size of the eDRAM is the best scenario too... 32MB eDRAM can be bigger than 55mm^2.


you guys understand that no matter what the Wii U's GPU is based on, it's still a customized chip so it wouldn't follow the general rule of a PC part right? Beyond3d is also not the mother load of all accurate information, a lot of those people are pretty dumb, just because they might be in the business, it doesn't mean they are the best, I'd know since I've been a member there since the begining. :P not to mention Wii U is pretty much 1/4th to 1/3rd the power of the Orbis as we have all been speculating anyways if the specs are true, which is really not that powerful if you look at how powerful PCs are these days, it is pretty much on the mark, we should all be happy that it's not the Wii situation again and that if Nintendo can make a game that's better than Galaxy 2, then it's good news for all gamers, and Sony will continue to make good exclusives as well from their 1st party. We need to accept the fact that no 8th gen consoles will wow people as much as the 7th gen jump did being only roughly 6x-8x more powerful.