curl-6 said:
bonzobanana said:
curl-6 said:
bonzobanana said:
With any discussion about the latte fabrication you have to bear in mind the huge amount of stuff included in the latte, not only is a huge part the edram but there is also the arm cpu, audio dsp, 1MB wii u texture memory, 2MB wiii frame buffer, wii gpu, sections designed for high speed compression of the wii u gpu frame buffer and downscaled to fit in the wii gpu frame buffer. There is a huge amount of additional stuff.
The 176 gflops figure is completely realistic, not only does it fit in with the power consumption figures but it fits in with how the wii u is actually performing. Let's not forget the generational difference between 360/PS3 gpu's and the later radeon's is quite significant in performance.
If the latte really is 352 gflops and the architecture is much improved plus you have 32MB of high speed edram then what the hell is going wrong that the wii u that it is struggling to outperform 360/PS3 graphically? The figure of 176 gflops makes total sense, it simply works with all the information we have. If the latte really is 352 gflops then something has gone horribly wrong in the design of the wii u that is creating major issues. I don't believe this. I believe Nintendo have a designed a console at the absolute minimum price to merely match current gen performance overall. However as a wii u owner I'm more than happy to be proved wrong but the evidence surely dictates that of the possible range of gflops performance 176-352 gflops where once we were clinging on to believing it was 352 gflops infact the lower figure is much more realistic.
I guess an alternative view is that CPU is so weak that the compute functionality of the radeon gpu is being utilised for practically every game and compromising graphic output. I don't believe this myself. I also don't believe the wii u console is hard to develop for, I believe the complete opposite is true and I don't believe all developers are being lazy on wii u either.
Ultimately I believe the wii u is a low performance console designed to a specification for good quality cartoon graphics for Nintendo games and a huge profit for Nintendo and its shareholders (if it sold well). A continuation of their 'withered technology' philosophy that was so successful for gameboy, wii etc.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gunpei_Yokoi
|
Current PS3/360 games are built on 8 years of optimization for their specific hardware. Wii U hasn't even been out for a year yet, no console is maxed out that fast. You need exclusives designed around a console's specific hardware to really show off what it can do, and no Wii U exclusive so far has aimed for high end graphics, they all adopt simpler styles that preclude technological boundary-pushing.
The Wii U has yet to have its Uncharted 2, its Gears of War, its Mario Galaxy, that one game that really puts its chipset through its paces and shatters its established graphical standards.
|
We don't know how mature the development software is but the wii u is not a complicated design. It's using a well known and well documented radeon gpu (which one we aren't sure of) and I don't think there are any surprises when it comes to the 32 bit CPU which dates back to 1997. The wii u is not a ps3 or even a xbox 360 its a much simpler design. When the ps3 and 360 came out they were cutting edge hardware and new to market that is not the case with wii u. Also just about the most impressive gamecube/wii title is Rogue Squadron despite being a launch title. Also Halo represents a very level of optimisation on the original xbox. The wii u is not cutting edge its a combination of well documented and mature components clearly this will have an effect on what level of optimisation it achieves. Did the wii make great strides over the gamecube in optimisation beyond the extra 64MB memory and 50% overclock plus dvd storage capacity. I certainly don't think so.
The gamecube itself hit the ground running with great performance unlike the ps2 because it was a much better design to develop for as is the wii u.
|
We don't know for a fact that Wii U GPU is well documented; Nintendo traditionally uses customized parts, the same is likely true here.
Also, it is very different from PS3/360, which all current multiplats are designed around. Forcing a game designed for one architecture onto another never gets the best results.
Wii was familiar hardware yet it did not show it's full power at launch. Its most technically advanced games came in its 3rd, 4th, and 5th years.
Rogue Squadron 2 was a freak occurance, and was in fact surpassed technically by its sequel two years later.
Halo 1 was nowhere near the most advanced Xbox game, it pales in comparison to its sequel, and to games like Conker Live and Reloaded, which came much later in the system's lifespan.
|
