By using this site, you agree to our Privacy Policy and our Terms of Use. Close
Hynad on 17 April 2015
Edit Thread
SpokenTruth said:
Mummelmann said:
SpokenTruth said:

Ha ha ha.  Resolution isn't the same.  That still requires some processing.

More so, what of games that do display seperate video?


How much power does it take to stream a video in 480p? That's the resolution used in very early plasma sets and the Gamepad, making the whole "Ha ha ha. Resolution isn't the same" an even more insignificant anecdote as it requires very little power; the second display does not require real-time rendering, it merely mirrors effects and visuals already rendered on the main display by dedicated processing.

Besides; two screens or no is irrelevant when the discussion revolved around absolute visual quality and not visual quality compared to output tasks and number of displays (which, as mentioned above, would steal very little power at any rate).

That's still an extra 409,920 pixels to account for.  If main video is rendering at 720p, that's 921,600 pixels to start.  A streamed duplicate must still downconverted to the Gamepad's resolution.  That does take processing cycles. 

And that doesn't address the second half of my post.  What of games that do display seperate video?


What of those games? Have you ever pressed the pause button in a game? Menus are loaded at all time to be ready in case you press pause. Those games you mention have maps, menus and whatever else could be useful at the moment displayed on the Gamepad screen. That's not an intensive use of processing power by any means. xD

I'm sure if you take the time to notice how the two screens work together, for example how in some games the main screen action is basically paused while you're doing your thing on the Gamepad screen, and other similar method, your idea about the Wii U's processing power will come back down to a more reasonable level.