***k that's overly complicated.
Part 1/2
Time for a refresher:
I've been doublechecking numbers, and verifying my theories with something much more knowledgeable in computers than myself, and I think I'll get to posting what I sent you in the PMs, with more data to support it and even an irrelevant video that just so happened to get uploaded a few hours ago talking about the Xbox One and PS4's power, by 2 more people with technical prowess that just happily coincides with me getting the info ready. Be warned, you'll be here for a while (Why not listen to this while you read) So let's begin, I'll start with the contents of the PM:
http://pastebin.com/27gQNwGQ
That was a few weeks back now, and at the time was more of a theory, now it's more than that. First off, let's talk about the XBO/PS4. No doubt you've seen the mentions of Battlefield 4 on the PS4, but there's also Killer Instinct on the Xbox One, a fighting game runnng at 720p. Here's that video I mentioned, you could watch the first 10 minutes, it gets the main point across: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QdaCxtDg1qA
So if you watched all the way you'll see what was mentioned, if not I'll summarize. It quotes a KI developer talking about the game, and when asked about the resolution he says it technically runs at 720p 60FPS and anything that drops the framerate or resolution is removed or optimized. This is a launch downloadable title. Even if it was retail, w/e they are hitting walls. He goes on to mention what I've been saying for the longest, there's no progression with these systems. Bare in mind this dude is unbiased and knows his stuff. Moreso than I can say. He also mentions that it's incredibly bad that they are hitting walls before launch and the results aren't that great, and maybe the Wii U isn't that far behind as everyone expects, despite the RAM.
Now there's the CPU. So on the discussion of power someone with more technical prowess gave their thoughts:
The Wii U's CPU has a 4-stage pipeline. Running above 1 GHz with a 4-stage pipeline is very impressive. The Jaguar CPU has up to a 14-stage pipeline. These Jaguar CPUs are capable of a much higher clock rate than 1.5 GHz. Each core in the Wii U's CPU is at least twice as powerful as each Jaguar core due to being far more efficient with clock rates. The only difference here is that the PS4 and XB1 have 8 cores and not 6.
Trying to put the 4-stage to 14-stage pipeline into simple comparison. Saying the Wii U's CPU runs at 1.2GHz, it takes 3 nanoseconds for an operation to complete. Using the figure of the XB1 CPU running at 1.75GHz, it takes 8 nanoseconds for an operation to complete.The reason for more stages in a pipeline is that the next operation typically completes .87 nanoseconds later for the Wii U and .57 nanoseconds later for the XB1. The problem is that there are these conditional branch operations, all of the flow control and logic functions. If the next operation in the pipeline is not the correct operation, the next operation starts at stage 1 on the next clock cycle, leaving the next 13 hertz wasted. It doesn't sound like much, but these are among the most common statements handled in a CPU.
As far as RAM, the Jaguar cores use an x86 based instruction set. It needs 8GB of RAM because x86 is not as efficient as newer instruction sets. The engineers can't fix this because it would break backwards compatibility on PCs.
Then I presented this article I had found, talking about the PS4's 8 core processor and how it only uses 4: http://www.mcvuk.com/news/read/ps4-and-xbox-one-s-amd-jaguar-cpu-examined/0116297
Here's the response:
My opinion is that the Wii U is more efficient with its resources than the XB1 and PS4. That bandwidth the Wii U has will have smaller objects passed across it than what the XB1 will have, permitting more objects to move on the Wii U. The Wii U's CPU will have very few wasted clock cycles compared the the PS4/XB1 CPUs.
Just because the PS4/XB1 CPUs are 8 core and run 1.5~1.75 GHz does not mean that every hertz will be fully used. Even with multi-threading and multi-tasking, all 8 cores will never be used to max capabilities. That is functionally impossible. The reason for 8 cores, and the GDDR5 RAM on the PS4, is to provide enough slack to compensate for performance impacts. The GDDR5 RAM may have the capability of transferring X GB/s of data, but the real numbers the engineers want is the quantity of times per second the RAM is accessed and how large of an object can be sent in one transfer. Something extra, that 0.3 TFLOPS rating for the Wii U's GPU is likely the GPGPU's performance, not the graphics rendering performance.
This was the beginning. The biggest question is x86 vs PowerPC. He gave me some insight on that:
x86
The x86 instruction code was designed back in the 1970s when RAM was very limited, 1024 to like 4086 bytes of RAM. It used variable length instruction code to be space efficient in RAM. This was fine when the CPU was 8 bit. Going into 16 bit and 32 bit, the RAM size moved up to 65,536 bytes and then 2 million bytes. Further, the first chip did not have expansion libraries, but only restricted to a library of 127 functions on the CPU, because one bit in the first byte on x86 (the operation to perform) was 0 if in the primary 127 functions or 1 if it wasn't. When the 286 came out, extended functions required a second byte to fetch for operation code.
Intel never intended for x86 to live past the 1990s. They developed the Itanium instruction code to replace it. When I get to megahertz myth, I will explain that. x86 was designed for small systems, which today are appliances. It was efficient in early models, but not these advanced systems of today.
PowerPC
IBM developed POWERPC in the 1990s, 2 decades after x86. Systems have evolved, and this newer architecture takes advantage of it. The reason why I put POWERPC in caps here is because it really is an acronym. To be short, POWERPC is RISC design, Reduced Instruction Set Computer, built for performance.
For POWERPC, instruction code is fixed width, 32bit for most POWERPC CPUs, like the Wii U. This takes less clock cycles to fetch instructions. It requires less memory usage. Overall, requires less power for the CPU and cooler temperatures. This gives room for higher clock speeds and allowing multiple instruction operations per clock cycle.
Another part with POWERPC CPUs, many are not backwards compatible because IBM's engineers may adjust the instruction library to be more efficient to process in the CPU.
Overall, POWERPC is more powerful than x86 with current systems by a long shot by not requiring as much resources per instruction to perform operations.
So I presented him with my theory from the PM, and well:
Developers, like managers, can exaggerate. They do so to justify a budget and the need of so many employees. Using multiple speed RAM is a matter of resource allocation, which is not that hard to handle.
The Wii U follows the design of the Gamecube. It is not as hard to develop as said.
x86 is very inefficient today. It was efficient back when it was made for cheap 4-bit and 8-bit systems.
The Wii U uses less RAM and loses less cycles than the XB1 and PS4. Smaller is better, as clock rate is govern by speed of light.
The overclocking statement is a misunderstanding. If the Wii U CPU is able to reach higher clock rates, it is really underclocked, not overclocked. The CPU may have power states that reduce the clock rate and shut down extra units when not needed. The guy who said the clock rate is 1.2 GHz may not have pushed the system to go to full power or did not know the instruction to force full power state. He was probing around, not working with a manual.
All of this supports my admittedly originally half baked theory, well not anymore. Of course my word isn't everything, just watch that video I linked, the caps are being hit on the PS4/XBO. Bayonetta, the first obviously graphically intenstive game coming out of Nintendo is going to be at 1080p 60FPS. There's no dicking around on that one. It's not a racer or a fighter or with simple textures/models. It's a full blown game with great performance at year 2, with the consoles shipping at their max potential what excuse is there for Killer Instinct? For Knack at 720p, and Killzone at 30FPS with dips, Ryse looking like a buggy mess with dips as well. AC4 at 30FPS aiming for 1080p. At stated before, graphics don't matter too much, neither does power in general, but let's put that aside since you are all so insistent. What does this show? This is year 2, hell I wouldn't even say that since the devs had pushbacks due to understaffing, even then what's Mario Kart, at just over a year with 1080p 60FPS with 2 player Split screen ready at e3, and with them aiming for 4 player splitscreen 60FPS native 1080p. Battlefield struggling to do 720p and with unsatisfactory visuals. What say you of this?
Here's my theory, one that will never be confirmed of course because this information will never be public but regardless. My thoughts are that Sony and MS saw Nintendo put their system on the market, and they got flustered and rushed to designing a new system. 2011 was right when they started profiting on the PS3/360 with no signs of sales faltering, had it gone their way they would have kept it up for another 3-5 years. It didn't go their way, and 3 months after that inspiring speech of continuing to make the impossible possible, they did, by revealing the Wii U and throwing their competition a curveball out of nowhere. Sure Cerny said they've been planning it since 08 but I don't buy that and there's a difference between the conceptual stage and actually starting R&D, something tells me that bit began for both MS and Sony in 2011. They rushed to not let themselves get beaten to the market badly and both designed something easy for them, a laptop/budget pc with their firmware and sent it through testing. These consoles are clearly rushed, as has been the software. Looking at their displays this year objectively. These surprise announcements 6 months before release, last second hardware changes (not policies), nothing ready for e3. News of Xbox One cases MELTING! and them having to underclock the CPU and that's why they've been slowly increasing it bit by bit.
These aren't consoles, they are laptops chopped in half and put in custom boxes. They push and push to make things seem better for them than they really are, and again Sony is offering false promises. Does nobody remember PS3 launch or the PS2 with Toy Story Graphics? Deep Down has since been confirmed to have been a CG render, despite them saying on stage it was running in real time on the PS4, when they didn't even have devkits ready until Gamescom! As well as everything at e3 running on PCs with higher graphical fidelity than the systems themselves. They are throwing a whole bunch of CG at us and hoping we don't notice again when the console comes out. It'll bite them in the ass though. Early adopters will be fooled, but that's only 2 million or so users.
These systems are static, but Wii U is growing, day by day, week by week, month by month, year by year. Sure, 2013 they'll have the upper hand, but what about next year? Wii U will intensify while the others stay in the same spot. Maybe they'll take holiday 2014 graphics as well, but after that? No I think that's when it's going to be an issue for them. By holiday 2014 it'll be clear to the general public the Wii U is taking the lead through performance in games, but in 2015 it will be known to everyone which system is on top. The Wii U is the only true console in the 8th gen, but not only that it is the perfect console by design. It follows the greatness of the Wii, and expands on that with the ultimate peripheral, the U pad. Build for the so called "hardcore" gamer. Rather, the core gamer. Sure you can say other systems can do it, but technically an SNES controller can do anything current systems can do, just use the bumpers to cycle between what the buttons can do. It just wouldn't be very efficient. That's what the Wii U is all about, from the software, to the hardware, and most importantly the peripheral, the U pad. Dual screens were the same thing, why do I need them? Well after you use them on a DS it becomes clear, it makes games a lot better to have that dual screen. Even if it's a simple thing like a mini map in Kart. No, not all games require it, a Platformer won't make much use of it, but now with the gamepad you aren't being held back, so you can still do anything other controllers can do and then some. Sure, Wonderful 101 could be done on a standard controller, but as reviews have stated, the stick isn't as good as using the gamepad. That style of game wouldn't have been made for regular controllers because they don't offer the complete functionality of the pad. Mario games won't need the gamepad but Zelda games gain a lot out of it. As does Pikmin and so will Metroid.
The Gamepad makes the system what it is, and without it, it'd just be another HD box to join the fray. With it, you can play games like never before. That's what will lead it to victory, it truly is Unique, while PS4/XBO are more of the same, without reason to buy it. Their online isn't any better, that's a misconception. It's simply a matter of features, the XBO won't offer anything that the 360 doesn't, it's the same Xbox LIVE, same with PSN, the only difference is an OS improvement. You can't say the Wii U is lacking online because it doesn't have some of the social features, which is something we know Nintendo is fixing and the unified account system for the Wii U and 3DS will likely drop before the WWHD bundle or in early October, the second update. The Wii U has just as capable online infastructure, thanks to the help of EA, which goes against the naysay from a certain completely irrelevant company, in which Nintendo had EA help them with the online infrastucture.
This system is not only plenty powerful for the average consumer (about 99% of us), it's much more efficient than the PS4 and Xbox One and it will blow them away, not for the superior power, but for the unique exclusive gameplay experiences while still offering what you already love.
Essay Pro