spemanig said:
| amak11 said:
Usually not, A lot of companies use engines that are very diverse and have support for both consoles. let say you build a game in Unity. It has both Wii U and PS4 support, It's just a matter of optimization from there
MS and Sony are using them because it's easy for developers to make games for, not for efficency. Efficency in technology is just a faster way to do things. powerPC will always have the advantage over x86 in this category. It's the difference of sending 3 large men carrying a ton of barrels each (x86) and a ton of men carrying a single barrel each (ARM/PowerPC). Both groups will finish their task, but the people carrying single barrels will be done first. The RAM you put in to it is the steroids.
X86 just don't fit in to Nintendo's philosophy. Hell the Wii U uses less power than the Wii. There is always more to consider than raw unadulterated power. Look at Sony last gen. The cell had huge potential, and it wasn't used by anyone except internal devs.
|
That's what I mean though. I get that PowerPC is more efficient, but what does that matter if no one but Nintendo uses it? If it's easier to develop for, wouldn't it be better for Nintendo to use x86? And what are the advantaged of ARM over both? Why would Nintendo use that instead of Power PC next gen, and would the be able to maintain BC with ARM or would they be starting from scratch like with the PS4 and XBO? Would they have to emulate the Wii U like they do with the Wii, or would it be as simple as plugging in one hardrive into the new system and running it from the new consoles OS natively?
|
That's really not true anymore. Far more research has been done into X86 compared to PowerPC. Intel has chips that have TDP as low 2.5W and are being increasingly used in tablets. Even AMD who don't have the advantage of the die shrink that Intel do have APUs (so that's including the GPU) that are equal to or lower than the TDP of the WiiU with approx. the same performance, as well as their own tablet equivalents.
