jake_the_fake1 said:
fazz said:
jake_the_fake1 said:
fazz said:
jake_the_fake1 said:
fazz said:
Branko2166 said:
fazz said:
Eh... no, I wouldn't buy it.
Also, the hypothetical dongle would be unnecessary, seeing that Nintendo could (possibly) unlock 720p with a simple firmware upgrade. |
I was under the impression that the wii's inability to output above 480p was in part because of its connection. Meaning while it may in theory be able to render in 720p it is still unable to output it. By the way even if Nintendo managed to get the wii to output 720p how many frames per second could it run at?? |
1.- Component can carry 720p.
2.- Seeing that games with very complex graphics like Mario Galaxy run at 60fps without slowdowns, I see games with that level of graphics running at least at 30fps in 720p. |
from what i've read the electronics responsible for outputing the video signal can only output 480p max, this was the same case with the gamecube. So just because the wii can use component cables does not mean it can actually output 720p, it just means it can output 480p for a cleaner image rather than in 480i on composite cables. |
The "electronics responsible"? You mean the graphics processing unit right? In the Cube, 480p was absolute maximum because GPU could not draw frames into main memory (24MB). Also, if it ever could, it was too little and it left no room for the program itself. In the case of the Wii, the GPU can draw frames into both Memory 1 (24MB 1T) and Memory 2 (64MB GDDR3) if the framebuffer is not enough. |
nope not the GPU persay but the electronic that actually output the analogue signal out through AV cables, this component of the wii is the same as the gamecube and it max's out at only 480p which is why the wii can not output anything higher than 480p. Also, the wii GPU renders to it's 2MB dedicated frame buffer (plus 1MB texture cache), and although it can also render to it's vram it will have a a significant performance hit, which is why developers just stick to rendering to it's dedicated frame buffer see as their is no benifit doing it the other way. |
Hmmm, then you're talking about DAC? I don't remember the exacts on the Gamecube one, but the Wii one is model AVE-RVL. Being Nintendo-custom, there is no info available out there other than what we know.
The amount of eDRAM in the Wii is unknown, it could be increased considering the size of the chips on the GPU pack. Obviously this is an assumption, but there is no die shot that can prove me wrong :) |
at the moment from what is known, the wii only has 2MB frame buffer, now it stands to reason that this could be true given the fact that wii uses the same architecture as the gamecube and the gamecube only had 2MB frame buffer, as well as Nintendo not wanting to enter the HD market because HD penetration was to low. Now given what you and I said, how can you still think the wii is capable of rendering 720p? For starters their isn't enough space on the frame buffer for 720p, and even though you could render to the vram you would be hit with a significan't performance hit because rendring directly to vram isn't as efficient as rendering to the eDram, remember eDram has a much much larger bandwidth than vram. |
Read the second paragraph of my post. The Wii could have a bigger frame/texture buffer given the size of the chips and still attain perfect backwards compatibility as long as the bandwidth was still as high as it was in the Cube. And the Wii having a bigger eDRAM is extremely likely. Remember that the GPU on the Wii is quite different to the one in the Cube (different to their CPUs).
Also, the bandwidth of the Memory 2 is unknown so far. It could range from 4GB/s to 11GB/s. That's not so bad if it ever wanted to be used for any purpose.
For the records, I don't see Wii having 720p anytime soon. Only top developers like Factor 5, Valve or the same Nintendo could do it properly. I mean, EA can barely achieve 30fps on MoH:H2 with PS2 graphics.
I'll read ya later, I'll try to get Brawl :)
