By using this site, you agree to our Privacy Policy and our Terms of Use. Close
vivster said:

So if AMD FLOPS are comparable with Nvidia FLOPS it's still below X1. So basically what everyone was expecting.

That begs the question if 3rd parties will bother with ports now that Nintendo's console differs even more from the other two and PC. It might get some fine mobile games which should be easy to port.

Really? Like. Seriously?
AMD's flops aren't even comparable to itself.

But yes. It's still below the Xbox One.

bunchanumbers said:

I think differently. Now NX will not only have to overcome its gimmick, it will also have to overcome its own weak hardware. 3rd parties don't care about the gimmick. They want to port their games with the least amount of effort possible in order to maximize profits. This does neither.

Sadly. True.

Developers love to make one game and port it to all platforms with minimal alteration, having even weaker hardware than the Xbox One will likely compromise the amount of Multiplatforms it will be able to grab.

Support for popular engines like Unreal Engine 4 will help things a little... But only a little, the Unreal Engine isn't as popular as it was last generation, EA for instance is using Frostbite for all the games.

twintail said:
How much hardware power does ps4 and x1 have over wiiu?

Probably close to 10x overall.

There are some aspects of the PS4 that could be close to 50-100x or more the power of the Wii U.

globalisateur said:
1 - Cartridges
2 - Under powered
3 - New gimmick

This is what will prevent third party ports on NX. Cartridges is the most limiting factor IMO.

Cartridges aren't the same as they used to be. They are competitive with Optical media in terms of storage capacity and offer superior performance and durability.

Cost could still be an issue though, but with game prices as high as ever (If you account for Microtransactions/DLC/Advertising etc'), I don't think anyone really cares. :P

Zekkyou said:

Regardless of the WiiU's internal specifics (many of which we still aren't 100% certain about), the standard PS4 isn't 10+ times stronger. It doesn't even present that kind of jump over the PS3/360, and the WiiU has shown itself to be more capable than both (when its hardware is used properly, anyway).

Don't get me wrong, the WiiU is a very low-spec system, and even a system as described in the OT would fall short of the standard PS4, but the gap between the standard PS4 and WiiU is likely closer to 5 times than 10+.

The Wii U isn't necessarily more "capable" in terms of brute strength than the Playstation 3 and Xbox 360 though.
But it is smarter and more efficient overall which does allow it to pull ahead when games are made it's way.

Plus you do have diminishing returns in graphics quality every time you multiply your power.
10x more performance isn't going to give you 10x better graphics for example.

teigaga said:

I was under the impression Wii U was around 300Gflops

Flops isn't representative of a systems performance.

Positive I have driven this point home with you before?

Akeos said:

 

Wii U have 350 GFLOPS,  see a little more... 

If NX is 3 or 4 times more,  so that means it will be 1 TFLOPS to 1,4 TFLOPS...  Nearly xboxone,  but with rescent technologie (pascal) 

It could have 2 Teraflops. It might still be slower than the Xbox One.

Soundwave said:

Pretty sure the general consensus was 176 GFLOPS for Wii U, a few people were pushing the 350 GF thing but it was on some dubious reasoning. 

XBox 360 is 250, but Wii U having more modern architecture and double the RAM can explain why in practise some Wii U games look a little better than the 360's best.

Towards the Xbox 360 and Playstation 3's life-span, developers found that Ram was one of the largest limitations with those systems and looked towards technologies like streaming from Optical Disk+Mechanic disk and impostering.
So you are probably correct on that assumption.

Miyamotoo said:

If rumours is correct, NX will be great handheld console (nothing imply that will be mediocre lol) and much better and strong home console than Wii U.

I am actually hoping it is an amazing device... A Competitive Nintendo is good for everyone, regardless if you are a PC, Playstation, Xbox, Mobile Gamer.
It's what drives innovation and keeps prices low... Plus it would be nice for Microsoft and Sony to take Nintendo seriously for once.

Soundwave said:

Your phone doesn't have a better spec than a Pascal-based Nvidia Tegra. That chip would melt the inside of your phone in an hour running at full tilt. For a mobile chip it doesn't get much better than Tegra X1, especially if they are using a new Pascal version of it.

4th gen Midguard can give Tegra a good run for it's money.

But ARM's true answer to the Tegra is actually Bifrost.

But you are right. No phone has better GPU capabilities than Tegra at the moment... But they are coming and could be here before the NX arrives.

HoangNhatAnh said:

Calm down, portable with 720p screen are fine, show me a smartphone with 1080p or 4k screen that can play game at max setting with battery last for 4 hours at least

You assume that games are being rendered at 1080P, 1440P or 4k on those mobile devices, they aren't... But despite that, there are gains to having higher resolution displays.

My Galaxy Note with it's 2560x1440 screen can last 4 hours easy in most games like Hearthstone.

Metroid33slayer said:

Well pretty much every gaming site says 352, have you seen the size of its gpu. There's no way it could be less than an xb360 /ps3.

Yes it can. And it can still outperform the Xbox 360 and Playstation 3.

A large portion of the Wii U's die-space is actually caches/memory.

Qwark said:

On PC they are not, whether they are also not equal on a system with an API dedicated for gaming is debatable. AMD has gotten better performance due to firmware updates which improved card functionality on windows pc's. AMD cards also saw a bigger improvement with DX12 than Nvidia cards.

https://www.google.nl/search?q=nvidia+vs+amd+dx12&espv=2&biw=1366&bih=638&source=lnms&tbm=isch&sa=X&ved=0ahUKEwic38rzh8HPAhUGVhQKHX4yDuYQ_AUIBigB#imgrc=EfPcaIaJCU9DXM%3A

The reason why AMD and nVidia's hardware perform so differently has nothing to do with Flops at all.

AMD can pull ahead in Direct X 12 etc' thanks to Async Compute.

nVidia will pull ahead in everything else thanks to it's tiled-based approach and other architectural advantages.



--::{PC Gaming Master Race}::--