If you were to create a Wii U successor, what would it be?

[Bofferbrauer]

fatslob-:O said:

Bofferbrauer said:

Even if the Wii U would fail to sell any console by then Nintendo can't simply roll out a new console just like that. Just like Jizz I'm expecting the next Nintendo Console for holiday 2017 at the earliest. And by then NVidias GTX 970 will already have become very old, nevermind the fact that that card alone is still too  expensive for a console both in price and in TDP.

Lowering the production cost for the chips is still possible because they are still being made in 45 nm. A simple Die shrink would mean more chips can hold on a wafer and thus the price per chip would be lower

Ok, the first thing is for a company to make customers and money. What good will it do for Nintendo to be held back by the likes of WII U's userbase ? What's more is that is there anything in Nintendo's future software pipeline for it to generate a reasonable amount of revenue ? Nintendo can release as many games as they want on the WII U but what's the point if they just keep performing poorly ? 

The second thing that I want to make clear is that a GTX 970 is manufactured on a 28nm process node, not on 45nm. (Of which 28nm will be the cheapest one for a long time.) Just because a GTX 970 will have aged doesn't mean that the future of microprocessors are going to get any cheaper than it is now. You tell me, what other options are there for effective cost reductions in chip manufacturing ? 

I don't think the Wii U's userbase would be holding back a new console by 2016, I just think it would just not be developed by then. In other words, you can't roll our what you don't have

About the chip, I tought you where talking about the one of the Wii U (whose chip is still produced in 45nm) when talking about lowering costs, my bad.

I do know that the GTX 970 is made in 28 nm. I am however not sure if 28nm will stay cheapest for as long as you think. First rumors about an Radeon 390 (X) being made in 20nm are starting to arrive, meaning that finally someone seems to have gotten the 20nm production under control (probably TMSC, maybe GloFo). IF thats true then 20 nm might not be that far away after all.

And there is another way to reduce costs, but that one is a bit special: bigger wafers. Fabs use 300mm today and 450mm wafers have already been developed, but not yet put into action (and will probably only come after 14/16nm and FinFETs are also implemented due to high initial investments). The cost reduction is however less pronounced than one due to a Die shrink