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

Forums - Nintendo Discussion - Wii U 'Has A Horrible, Slow CPU' Says Metro Last Light Dev

Again. What does this console does right?



Proud to be the first cool Nintendo fan ever

Number ONE Zelda fan in the Universe

DKCTF didn't move consoles

Prediction: No Zelda HD for Wii U, quietly moved to the succesor

Predictions for Nintendo NX and Mobile


Around the Network

Wii U(nderpowered) confirmed?

Not groundbreaking news at all for me.



Cobretti2 said:
runqvist said:

It is just your intepretation that they were talking just about clock speeds and even if they were, it is just a powerpc cpu. Just like the one in 360, with slight modifications and slower clock speeds,

That other part of your post is just bullshit. Care to tell me which athlon 64 is "much faster" than any i7? No, wait. Tell me one that is even faster at all.

The reason I say it is clock speed because the tekken devs said the cpu was slower tha 360/PS3 and siad you cnanot do a striaght port as those consoles relied on the high speed CPUs to compensate for the video card. He also did say they found other ways that are nto avialable on 360/PS3 to d achieve the same end result.

As for your other question.

My Athlon64 was 3.2GHz

when I7 first launched they were as low as 2.67GHz.

Yet which CPU is better? the i7 BLOWS it out of the water.

With WiiU we also knwo the CPU is customised, what does that exactly mean? who knows. Looking at the raw speed it is obvious that it is slower, no one is deniing that. But if the Tekken guys could do things differently by utilising the strengths of WiiU, I don't see why other developers cannot either.

The Wii U CPU die size is IIRC ~33mm^2 It has more in common with that Athlon 64 than it does with that Core i7. You can look at the CPU physically and tell that it is slow simply because it is very small. The PS3 Cell on the same process is 115mm^2 so effectively it is over 3 times the size on the same process. In the end they'll need to rely on GPGPU to make up the difference in compute performance and you have your standard pros/cons on that approach.



Tease.

I'm now pretty sure that the refrain of Nintendo haters next gen will be "PS360 could've run this." Whether it's about Nintendo first-party software or downscaled multiplats, we'll be hearing a lot of that.

We didn't hear a whole lot of "GameCube/PS2/XBox could've run this" this gen about Wii because it was usually obvious.



That's not seems good.

First the slow RAM... now slow CPU.

Wii U needs a miracle from GPU and eDRAM to became a REAL NEW-GEN.



Around the Network
ps3-sales! said:


I've seen the reviews of Darksiders, Arkham City, Devil May Cry, ect.

1.They are ps360 ports to the WiiU - fact
2.They are getting worse scores than the originals - fact
3.They don't cater to the core audience that don't
want to be forced to use the gamepad - fact

What were you saying?

Good job tracking down those elusive DMC reviews from, what, 2008? There was no DMC release this year for any console, including Wii U. Already making me distrust your post, since this means all of your "facts" are at least 1/3 false.

Your first point is pretty much completely irrelevent. It relies on the negative connotations of the word 'port' to spin the fact that Wii U is finally getting multiplat third party support into a criticism.

Your second port is somewhat true if you go by Metacritic, I suppose. Some sites like IGN are giving them the same scores as the other versions, so while not really an improvement, they may be equals.

Your final point is ridiculous. Darksiders doesn't force you to use the gamepad -- it can be played with the Pro Controller. This reinforces my doubt that you actually did read the reviews you mentioned. Assassin's Creed, Call of Duty, Mass Effect, and Ninja Gaiden can also be played with the Pro Controller. I'm pretty sure the sports games can, too. It seems most games do NOT "force" you to use the gamepad.



Well, until Nintendo proves otherwise with one of their first party offerings, it seems as though they've gimped their hardware in favor of saving a few bucks yet again.

I'll reserve judgment until I see what Retro for example has to offer on the system, but things aren't looking very good for the Wii U long term right now, what with the shaky launch and 3rd parties jumping ship already.



On 2/24/13, MB1025 said:
You know I was always wondering why no one ever used the dollar sign for $ony, but then I realized they have no money so it would be pointless.

I haven't seen ANY major third parties jumping ship at all. Something is very off about this remark.



Mr Khan said:

So we have this dev who is barely able to develop on PS3, working for a failing publisher, trying to scapegoat a new console to take light off their incompetence.

Next!

 

Dude, you would not have played this even if it was on the Wii U. It has a big following amongst survival horror and fans of unique shooters and the original is a unique classic. They are a small developer so I do not see why this snubs the Wii U. It is going to be a great sleeper hit for the systems the company has the resources to develop it for. I am so excited.



ethomaz said:
That's not seems good.

First the slow RAM... now slow CPU.

Wii U needs a miracle from GPU and eDRAM to became a REAL NEW-GEN.

About that, any news about the rest of the components? I been checking SuperChunks's thread but no new information have been reported.



Nintendo and PC gamer