By using this site, you agree to our Privacy Policy and our Terms of Use. Close
Captain_Tom on 21 June 2013
Edit Thread
HoloDust said:
Michael-5 said:

Anyway, PS3 was a bad console? How?

As for that original comparision, I've been told that I underballed the WiiU. Again, I can't used GFLOPs for a fair comparision, but WiiU has between 350-500GFLOPS, so it's anything from 2-3x as powerful as the PS3, but a 5th to a 3rd as weak as the PS4. WiiU is still closer to PS3/360 then PS4/One, but the gap between graphics is smaller then it was for Wii-PS360.

@bold Too expensive and too over-engineered for its own good - it cost them a LOT of money, and a LOT of PS2 user base due to price.

As for WiiU - its GPU is VLIW5 architecture, very similar to 360 (most likely even with the same number of TMUs and ROPs, though I think TMU number is 32 vs 16 in 360), and if it has 320 shaders (which is most likely), than it might be some 70-80% faster than PS360 - if not, and it's 160 shader part (which I doubt), it might be some 20-30% faster.

Contrary to what some people here living in Phantasy Kindom believe, you can't cram some mysterious super-tech on 40nm fab into such a small chip with pretty low TDP and expect it to have some incredible performance. So, unfortunately, (unfortunately cause few years ago I was really hoping for 4850-4870 level performance from WiiU), PS4's GPU  is more in the area of 7-8x of WiiU's...and please don't make same mistake as before and compare their FLOPS numbers, they are completely useless ;) 

If you're really interested, search for 4650/5550 GDDR3 benchmarks and compare them to 7850/7870 to get the picture what I'm talking about.


Not to mention it doesn't matter how strong the GPU is since the system only has 1GB of ram and no standard storage to install textures on.  Essentially it is already bottlenecked by these two things to the point that it will be impossible to surpass the current visuals in any meaningful way...