| Kami said: Ok I didn't say anything about you're other strenghts. So where does it say the PS4 is clocked at 1.6 GHZ, Where does it say the PS4 has 8 ACE units or any of that other stuff? If the people got the PS4 specs rights they proabably got the Wii U specs right. The Wii U is just as simply configured at the PS4 and Xbox One. It's not like they are looking at CBU like the PS3 had. |
What about you? Can you look at a picture of the Wii U's motherboard or GPU and derive conclusions? If so, go!
Weren't we talking about floating point performance? How do you know all of their PS4 specs which weren't given by Sony are correct? It's easy to get specification right if you are given them in the first place. There isn't a device on the motherboard that tells us the theoretical performance of the Wii U. People have to figure that out. It is entirely different from counting certain features by looking at the physical component on the board. There are assumptions involved, and calculations to be made.
Here is the analysis that ended with 178-350 gflops by the way. Notice how they mention that the GPU isn't just a r700.
http://www.neogaf.com/forum/showthread.php?t=511628
"The die is exactly 11.88 x 12.33mm (146.48mm²). Chipworks believe that it's "fabricated in a 40 nm advanced CMOS process at TSMC". It carries Renesas die markings, but no AMD die markings (although there is an AMD marking on the MCM heat-spreader). This is unexpected, as it was widely reported that the GPU was originally based on AMD's R700 line, and Nintendo publicly referred to it as a Radeon-based GPU. As the die appears to be very highly customised (it looks very different to other R700-based GPUs), the markings (or lack thereof) may indicate that the customisations were not done by AMD, but rather by Nintendo and Renesas."
"It it worth noting at this stage that a large portion of the GPU logic is still unexplained."
