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

Forums - Nintendo - REAL official specs are here. Lets dissect !GPGPU! !2GB RAM!

errorpwns on 14 September 2012
crissindahouse said:
errorpwns said:
 

I can get a 1tb drive for 70 dollars. A 320gb new xbox drive is around 60 dollars.  How is that not insanely overpriced?  I paid 50 for my 750GB desktop drive a year ago and 50 for my 500gb 2 years ago.  So you're saying I should have to pay the same price for half th espace?  Also the 250gb in the Wii-U would have to be nand due to the way the console was designed.  There is no place for a physical drive.  That's why.

i said now two times that it still costs more as a normal hdd but is way cheaper as you said first. what's the problem to understand there? i did never say that it isn't maybe still overpriced.

and yes, it wouldn't fit in a wii u, if it would be like i want the whole console would look different then which i obviously would accept then...

so, i would like to have a wii u with hdd even if the console would look different then. it was just about what would be perfect for me, not what other people want or if this would be worse for 95% of people so no, i don't say you should pay the same for half the space, no clue why you think i talk about you or others. i would prefer a console with hdd so i wouldn't have to hide one anywhere even if it would cost me more then because it would look better to me. i also pay more for a clock if i like the look more even if the time isn't more accurate and it is only a design aspect to pay more.

on average i buy maybe 50 new games per console + all the other stuff in the lifespan of the console. 50€ more or less aren't really what i care about.

The problem is your terrible sentence structure.  I can barely understand what you're trying to convey half the time to be honest. 



Around the Network
crissindahouse on 14 September 2012
errorpwns said:
crissindahouse said:
errorpwns said:
 

I can get a 1tb drive for 70 dollars. A 320gb new xbox drive is around 60 dollars.  How is that not insanely overpriced?  I paid 50 for my 750GB desktop drive a year ago and 50 for my 500gb 2 years ago.  So you're saying I should have to pay the same price for half th espace?  Also the 250gb in the Wii-U would have to be nand due to the way the console was designed.  There is no place for a physical drive.  That's why.

i said now two times that it still costs more as a normal hdd but is way cheaper as you said first. what's the problem to understand there? i did never say that it isn't maybe still overpriced.

and yes, it wouldn't fit in a wii u, if it would be like i want the whole console would look different then which i obviously would accept then...

so, i would like to have a wii u with hdd even if the console would look different then. it was just about what would be perfect for me, not what other people want or if this would be worse for 95% of people so no, i don't say you should pay the same for half the space, no clue why you think i talk about you or others. i would prefer a console with hdd so i wouldn't have to hide one anywhere even if it would cost me more then because it would look better to me. i also pay more for a clock if i like the look more even if the time isn't more accurate and it is only a design aspect to pay more.

on average i buy maybe 50 new games per console + all the other stuff in the lifespan of the console. 50€ more or less aren't really what i care about.

The problem is your terrible sentence structure.  I can barely understand what you're trying to convey half the time to be honest. 

sry next time i will grow up in usa or uk for you to do it better^^



errorpwns on 14 September 2012
crissindahouse said:
errorpwns said:
crissindahouse said:
errorpwns said:
 

I can get a 1tb drive for 70 dollars. A 320gb new xbox drive is around 60 dollars.  How is that not insanely overpriced?  I paid 50 for my 750GB desktop drive a year ago and 50 for my 500gb 2 years ago.  So you're saying I should have to pay the same price for half th espace?  Also the 250gb in the Wii-U would have to be nand due to the way the console was designed.  There is no place for a physical drive.  That's why.

i said now two times that it still costs more as a normal hdd but is way cheaper as you said first. what's the problem to understand there? i did never say that it isn't maybe still overpriced.

and yes, it wouldn't fit in a wii u, if it would be like i want the whole console would look different then which i obviously would accept then...

so, i would like to have a wii u with hdd even if the console would look different then. it was just about what would be perfect for me, not what other people want or if this would be worse for 95% of people so no, i don't say you should pay the same for half the space, no clue why you think i talk about you or others. i would prefer a console with hdd so i wouldn't have to hide one anywhere even if it would cost me more then because it would look better to me. i also pay more for a clock if i like the look more even if the time isn't more accurate and it is only a design aspect to pay more.

on average i buy maybe 50 new games per console + all the other stuff in the lifespan of the console. 50€ more or less aren't really what i care about.

The problem is your terrible sentence structure.  I can barely understand what you're trying to convey half the time to be honest. 

sry next time i will grow up in usa or uk for you to do it better^^


Sorry I wasn't trying to offend you or anything.  I understand not everyone speaks perfect English.  I don't always have correct grammar either.  I was just having a little bit of trouble understanding your whole argument is all.  You were getting all rude over it.  I understand it's cheaper than what I originally said, and I agreed with it.  



lilbroex on 14 September 2012

.



zarx on 15 September 2012
errorpwns said:
zarx said:
disolitude said:

For sure if we count VRAM as well. Hell I've seen benches of games that go over 2 GB of VRAM alone. Metro 2033 maxed on 3 screens is doing 2.5 GB of VRAM. 

But GPU RAM aside,  I doubt games will ever use more than 4 GB of system RAM. Hell even 2 GB seems like a strech for next gen. 

Well for consoles we are talking combined and as far as memory addressing goes in applications it's all takes up address space. In a 32Bit game if it chewed through 2GB of VRAM then it would technically only be able to address 2GB of system RAM, hence why most games today (which are mostly 32Bit) won't go past ~3GB of RAM usage.

Yeah, but there is a big difference between 32 bit and 64 bit games performance. If this benchmark is any indication http://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/ram-memory-upgrade,2778-8.html  Look at HL2 32bit vs 64bit.


there will be a huge difference once games are actually designed to take advantage of 64Bit systems. Also that benchmark isn't compairing HL2 32Bit and HL2 64Bit, it's compairing the 64BIt version with 4GB of RAM and more.



@TheVoxelman on twitter

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

Around the Network
errorpwns on 15 September 2012
zarx said:
errorpwns said:
zarx said:
disolitude said:

For sure if we count VRAM as well. Hell I've seen benches of games that go over 2 GB of VRAM alone. Metro 2033 maxed on 3 screens is doing 2.5 GB of VRAM. 

But GPU RAM aside,  I doubt games will ever use more than 4 GB of system RAM. Hell even 2 GB seems like a strech for next gen. 

Well for consoles we are talking combined and as far as memory addressing goes in applications it's all takes up address space. In a 32Bit game if it chewed through 2GB of VRAM then it would technically only be able to address 2GB of system RAM, hence why most games today (which are mostly 32Bit) won't go past ~3GB of RAM usage.

Yeah, but there is a big difference between 32 bit and 64 bit games performance. If this benchmark is any indication http://www.tomshardware.com/reviews/ram-memory-upgrade,2778-8.html  Look at HL2 32bit vs 64bit.


there will be a huge difference once games are actually designed to take advantage of 64Bit systems. Also that benchmark isn't compairing HL2 32Bit and HL2 64Bit, it's compairing the 64BIt version with 4GB of RAM and more.

Well I worded that wrong, but regardless you can see that the other 32 bit games still get 30 less FPS than the 64 bit HL2 which utilizes more memory.  And 30 FPS is a lot.  That was just to show what impact memory can have if you have a game that can handle 64 bit.