| Biggerboat1 said: 1) Wouldn't the likleyhood be that backwards compatibility would be no-go if they switched GPU manufacturer anyway? Are there recent examples of BC between consoles that don't share the same manufacturers of CPU/GPU? Nintendo moved from AMD to nVidia for Switch and it couldn't play (digital) Wii U games, whereas Wii U / Wii were BC with their predecessors. I realise game format also plays a role in BC, but that wouldn't stop Switch playing digital Wii U games. I also realise that if emulating, you need more headroom between consoles than Switch has over Wii U, due to going from traditional home console to hybrid... |
Gamecube/Wii was actually designed and developed by a company called ArtX which was comprised of a heap of Silicon Graphics engineers that helped designed the Nintendo 64 GPU.
ATI purchased the company just before the Gamecube dropped.
It is functionally different to the WiiU Radeon based GPU which has full backwards compatibility with the Wii.
3DS and DS also had very different graphics capability.
Conina said:
Even the UHS-I-limitation of the Steam Deck is good enough for 99.9% of the games (and much faster than the HDDs in PS4 Pro/Xbox One X). If Nintendo uses a UHS-II microSD card reader, up to 300 MB/s reading speed is possible. |
Not needed.
You just need to cache the right data on internal storage, keep the rest on MicroSD, which is more than manageable these days.
haxxiy said:
Microsoft did it with both the Xbox 360 and the Xbox One, though it took a few years in either case. Also Sony, but they would include past-generation hardware to do it. Not exactly a cheap proposition nowadays or even 15 years ago, when they stopped it. |
Keep in mind that Microsoft had the foresight of backwards compatibility, so they kept a few things from the Xbox 360 GPU such as texture format support on the Xbox One to increase emulation efficiency, otherwise those Jaguar cores would have fallen over.
--::{PC Gaming Master Race}::--
