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

Forums - Gaming Discussion - Wii U vs PS4 vs Xbox One FULL SPECS (January 24, 2014)

I might not get the next xbox if those current rumors hold true guess Sony will once again become my primary console.



Around the Network

Given what we know now. I think it's more likely that the Wii U's CPU is a modified Power PC 476FP. Same family as the 750. Except it's already manufactured at 45nm. It would be cheaper for Nintendo to have the 476FP modified than the other way around.

https://www-01.ibm.com/chips/techlib/techlib.nsf/products/PowerPC_476FP_Embedded_Core



Darc Requiem said:

Given what we know now. I think it's more likely that the Wii U's CPU is a modified Power PC 476FP. Same family as the 750. Except it's already manufactured at 45nm. It would be cheaper for Nintendo to have the 476FP modified than the other way around.

https://www-01.ibm.com/chips/techlib/techlib.nsf/products/PowerPC_476FP_Embedded_Core

That's the one part that was confusing me. IBM said they had no intention of going below 90nm for hthe 750 and we know WiiU is 45nm. I figured since Nintendo was paying they did it anyways. Hopefully more info will come out to clarify it further.



superchunk said:
Darc Requiem said:

Given what we know now. I think it's more likely that the Wii U's CPU is a modified Power PC 476FP. Same family as the 750. Except it's already manufactured at 45nm. It would be cheaper for Nintendo to have the 476FP modified than the other way around.

https://www-01.ibm.com/chips/techlib/techlib.nsf/products/PowerPC_476FP_Embedded_Core

That's the one part that was confusing me. IBM said they had no intention of going below 90nm for hthe 750 and we know WiiU is 45nm. I figured since Nintendo was paying they did it anyways. Hopefully more info will come out to clarify it further.

Not only that, the 750 core was never designed for a multi-CPU setup. The 476FP was however.



DieAppleDie said:
HoloDust said:


Um, that's for 550MHz - when you see someting like 480:24:8 config, it means - 480 Shaders, 24 TMUs (Texture Mapping Units), 8 ROPs (Render Output Unit). So you take the clock, divide it by 1000 (to get to giga instead of mega) and multiply with config - 24*.55GHz gives 13.2 GTexels/s; 8*.55GHz gives 4.4GPixels/s; 480*.55GHz gives 264 GOperations/s - now for the GFLOPS part - each AMD's shader can do multiply + add at the same time, which in this case gives 264*2 = 528 GFLOPS (single presicion). Notice how 360's and PS3's Shader operations per second are not related in same manner to their GFLOPS numbers - this is due to different Shaders, so math is bit different (specially for RSX inside PS3).

ok thanks for the info, now i understand it a lil bit better how it works

so its just basically the shaders that push the WiiU GPU beyond current gen consoles

Yes, that's what makes it stronger - amount and somewhat newer architecture (specially in the case of PS3, which does not have unified shaders, which means it has separate shaders for pixel and vertex operations). Above that, it seems that WiiU's GPU is DirectX 11 equivalent, so, although not very powerful per se compared to what (most likely) MSony consoles will have, it is still more easy to port to it than to PS360.

Of course, it's a real shame that CPU and memory bandwith are not spec'd higher, that would really make WiiU stand out right from the start, and be way better future proof.

EDIT: Just to clarify - this does not mean that WiiU is 2x more powerfull than PS360. If you look at raw numbers, PS3 has theoretical 400.4 GFLOPS in GPU and 179.2GFLOPS in Cell for total of 579.6 - which is more than WiiU; plus, it's pixel and shader fill rates are same as WiiUs. But this is just in theory - in practice, WiiU's GPU IS more powerfull than PS360 (just don't forget that it's shader performance is that, not necessarily overall performance). As for the whole system - it is maybe too soon to tell, but it seems that CPU will give lot of headaches to 3rd parties...



Around the Network

Well fuck you Nintendo, fuck you. It's like you WANT me to buy other consoles as well!!! You sick bastards.



I'm on Twitter @DanneSandin!

Furthermore, I think VGChartz should add a "Like"-button.

Hey chunk heard from Marcan's twitter site that the Durango will be 1.6GHz any updates on OP?
http://www.neogaf.com/forum/showthread.php?p=44951481



I wanted to point out, in case no one hasn't yet, that AMD's "Steamroller" APU wont come until 2014, that is if such APU would exist.

AMD has delayed Steamroller until 2014, with "Piledirver 2.0" set for 2013 instead.

Before the delay, AMD stated that 2013's APU's would not be Steamroller based, but something better than Piledriver. Now after the delay, hence, "Piledriver 2.0".



e=mc^2

Gaming on: PS4 Pro, Switch, SNES Mini, Wii U, PC (i5-7400, GTX 1060)

Thanks for the info gents.



Solid-Stark said:
I wanted to point out, in case no one hasn't yet, that AMD's "Steamroller" APU wont come until 2014, that is if such APU would exist.

AMD has delayed Steamroller until 2014, with "Piledirver 2.0" set for 2013 instead.

Before the delay, AMD stated that 2013's APU's would not be Steamroller based, but something better than Piledriver. Now after the delay, hence, "Piledriver 2.0".


Keep in mind several sources have said that the X720 was delayed due too poor yeilds on the chip. The question then becomes if both these things are true will MS opt to wait for Kaveri and risk letting Sony get a significant head start, or opt to use the so called "Piledriver 2.0"....



@TheVoxelman on twitter

Check out my hype threads: Cyberpunk, and The Witcher 3!