Banned for saying that a developer is lying about the Wii U can do?

I thought he was better than that.

The post he was banned for was insulting another poster.

Oh, so the uneducated comment was the dealbreaker.

Still thought he was better than that.

The first footage is coming in 2014.

http://mynintendonews.com/2013/11/24/shinen-promises-fast-racing-neo-news-coming-in-2014/

Read it again, they decided to invest in quality of life. That means no relocations, big project managements, etc. They could work on some colaborations with small companies like you were suggesting.

Gah, it's a pain that we have to wait that long, but at least now I know not to expect anything before then.

Here's the full interview:

http://www.pretendo.co/pretendo-exclusive-shinen-interview/

Key bit:

"FAST Racing Neo, our next Wii U game, shows how far we were able to go on Wii U. We hope people will like what they see.” - Manfred Linzner, Shin'en.

Tbh he had it coming for a while he had insulted various other people not just in this thread but in previous ones, if you read through his posts you can see he's someone who is hot headed. When someone doesn't agree with him he begins flaming and attempts to antagonize them and tries to even boasts about trying which probably was his undoing here, the's a way to conduct yourself when people don't agree with what you're trying to say and he has to sit down and learn that.

WTF happened to this thread? Pages and pages of tech discussion with a lot of misunderstanding as to what any of it actually means, lol.

And then insults to boot... it was entertaining at least.

Is it just me or does the Nintendo threads seem to attract these sort of people more than most?

The formula to get bandwidth is

edram bit config * gpu clock speed / (8bit*1000)

yea, i mean, come on, if xbox edram has a bandwidth of 256GB/s with the ROPS and later has to return the information that was processed in the Edram die to the GPU fraebuffer at 32GB/s, how can ports be possible on Wii U if it really just had 35GB/s for the whole edram of 32MB?

I dont even have to bother doing math to prove that is impossible

even if it had 70GB/s of bandwidth ports are still impossible since even though Wii U ROPS were able to return data to framebuffer at a speed of 2.2x faster than xbox 360 Edra+ROPS to framebuffer, that doesnt change tjhe fact that the xbox 360 ROPS can still do their job on the edram at about 3.7x times faster(256gb/s) than what the wii u ROPS would do at 70GB/s with the edram

140GB/s could work since even though the Wii U ROPS would be about 1.83x slower with the edram to accomplish their job, the WII U ROPS could still compensate that returning the job to the GPU framebuffer at about 4.4x faster than the xbox 360 ROPSwould do with the frambufferat 32GB/s

But,there are still probems for this to work out for many things

1- We are talking about 140GB/s for the whole 32MB edram on Wii U, which is clear that in ports its not being used to the full extent, you can pretty much confirm that with lazy ports like COD ghosts which despite having enough bandwidth edram badwidth for 720p, it only achieves 880x720. What does this mean?, easy, since is a lazy port from 360 to Wii U its clear that the Wii U port only uses 10megabytes of edram just like the xbox version since the source code from xbox only considers and uses 10 megabytes of edram, that would mean about only 46GB/s of edram, which fall short to xbox 360 bandwidth of 256GB/s with the ROPS and 32GB/s between ROPS+Edram to the GPU framebuffer

for lazy port as COD ghosts to even work in Wii U you would need at the very least 8192 bits configuration since that gives about 563.2GB/s for the whole edram of 32MB and would be 176GB/s for 10 megabytes of Edram, that should pretty much do for lazy ports like COD and others to work on Wii U

the 4096 bits is still a bit short for lazy port to work on Wii U since it would give about 281.6GB/s for the whole 32MB of Edram but only 88GB/s for 10MB of Edram for lazy ports from 360 to Wii U

since 360 has 256GB/s betweeen ROPS and EDRAM and 32GB/s bet5ween ROPS+edram to framebuffer, with 88GB/s between WII U ROPS and Edram and 88GB/s between edram to GPU fraebuffer is still not enough

watch
with 88GB/s between Edram and the GPU framebuffer, WII U is like 2.75x fraster in returning data from edram to framebuffer than the xbox 360 since this one only has 32GB/s between edram and GPU framebuffer, but between ROPS and Edram the 360 is 2.91x faster than Wii U rops and edram

so, i think its clear that 2.91x is more than 2.75x, and considering the fact that wii u cpu is slower and that ports waste one of its cores for sound like the 360 does instead of suing the DSP and using the extra core of Wii u for something else,orn that since the 360 port only considers 1 mega of cache and not 3 megabytes or that the main RAM doesnt pack a lot bandwidth, well, pretty much 88GB/s wouldnt be enough for WII u to work in lazy ports and the framerate would even be worse than what we have seen even if it worked

so no, pretty much is clear you need 8192 bits of edram meaning 563.2GB/s for the 32MB and would be 176GB/s for 10MB of Edram in lazy ports, that should pretty much do

2.- shinen commented that with only 7.11MB of wii u edram can do 720p with double buffering and with 360 you need the whole 10MB of Edram for that, so that kind ofsuggests that 7MB of wii u Edram should give the same bandwidth like xbox 360 10MB of Edram, which if I consider 140GB/s for the whole 32MB, with 7.11 MB you are not gonna have the same bandidth just like 360  

watch

32MB EDRAM =  140GB/s

7.11MB Edram=  31.1GB/s

that bandwidth, besides falling short to the 32GB/s between the xbox 360 Edram+ROPS and the GPU framebuffer, it also fall short to the bandwidth between xbox 360 ROPS AND EDRAM OF 256GB/s. Even if we could say that the bandwidth between wii u edram and gpu framebuffer is as fast as the xbox 360 speed between Edram+rops with the gpu fraebuffer(32GB/s), is still 8x times slower between he WII U ROPS AND EDRAM(360 HAS 256GB/S BETWEEN THE ROPS AND EDRAM)

So no,  for achiving 720p with just 7.11MB, you need a 8192bits edram that would give 563.2GB/s for 32MB and 125.136GB/s for 7.11MB, which is about half speed between the wii u rops and edram compared to the xbox 360 rops with edram, but still 3.9x faster in returning data between edram and framebuffer for wii u against the xbox 360 speed between edram and framebuffer

i dont even have to do math with 4096bits to prove that would be impossible

The formula to get bandwidth is

edram bit config * gpu clock speed / (8bit*1000)

You can confirm the fact that XBOX 360 ROPS are in the same die as he EDRAM and thats why they have full acess to the edram bandwidth of 256GB/s

here you can confirm that

http://meseec.ce.rit.edu/551-projects/spring2012/2-4.pdf

"

XENOS SPECS

• 500 MHz parentGPUon 90 nm, 65 nm(since 2008) or 45nm(since 2010) TSMC process oftotal 232million transistors

– 48 floating‐point vector processorsforshader execution, divided in three dynamically scheduled SIMDgroups of 16 processors each.

• Unified shading architecture (each pipeline is capable ofrunning either pixel or vertex shaders)

• 10 FP ops per vector processor per cycle (5 fusedmultiply‐add)

• Maximumvertex count: 6 billion vertices persecond ((48 shader vector processors × 2 ops per cycle × 500 MHz)/ 8 vector ops per vertex)forsimple transformed and

lit polygons

• Maximumpolygon count: 500million triangles persecond

• Maximumshader operations: 96 billion shader operations persecond (3 shader pipelines × 16 processors × 4ALUs × 500 MHz)

• 240GFLOPS

• MEMEXPORT shader function

– 16 texture filtering units(TF) and 16 texture addressing units(TA)

• 16 filtered samples per clock

– Maximumtexel fillrate: 8 gigatexels persecond (16 textures × 500 MHz)

• 16 unfiltered texture samples per clock

– MaximumDot product operations: 24 billion persecond

– Supportfor a superset ofDirectX 9.0c APIDirectX Xbox 360, and Shader Model 3.0+

• 500 MHz, 10 MiB daughter embeddedDRAM (at 256GB/s)framebuffer on 90 nm, 80 nm(since 2008) or 65nm(since 2010).

– NEC designed eDRAM die includes additional logic (192 parallel pixel processors)for color, alpha compositing, Z/stencil buffering, and anti‐aliasing called

“Intelligent Memory”, giving developers 4‐sample anti‐aliasing at very little performance cost.

– 105million transistors

– 8 RenderOutput units

• Maximumpixel fillrate: 16 gigasamples persecond fillrate using 4Xmultisample anti aliasing (MSAA), or 32 gigasamples using Z‐only operation; 4 gigapixels persecond

without MSAA (8 ROPs × 500 MHz)

• MaximumZ sample rate: 8 gigasamples persecond (2 Z samples × 8 ROPs × 500 MHz), 32 gigasamples persecond using 4X anti aliasing (2 Z samples × 8 ROPs × 4X AA ×

500 MHz)

• Maximumanti‐aliasing sample rate: 16 gigasamples persecond (4AA samples × 8 ROPs × 500 MHz)

• Cooling: Both theGPUand CPUofthe console have heatsinks. The CPU's heatsink uses heatpipe technology,to conduct heatfromthe CPUto the fins

ofthe heatsink. The heatsinks are actively cooled by a pair of 60mmexhaustfans. The new XCGPUchipsetredesign isfeatured in the Xbox 360 S and

integratesthe CPU(Xenon) andGPU(Xenos)in one chip and is actively cooled by a single heatsink ratherthan two.

"

AND this article from byond3d explains this

http://www.beyond3d.com/content/articles/4/3

"

The one key area of bandwidth, that has caused a fair quantity of controversy in its inclusion of specifications, is that of bandwidth available from the ROPS to the eDRAM, which stands at 256GB/s. The eDRAM is always going to be the primary location for any of the bandwidth intensive frame buffer operations and so it is specifically designed to remove the frame buffer memory bandwidth bottleneck - additionally, Z and colour access patterns tend not to be particularly optimal for traditional DRAM controllers where they are frequent read/write penalties, so by placing all of these operations in the eDRAM daughter die, aside from the system calls, this leaves the system memory bus free for texture and vertex data fetches which are both read only and are therefore highly efficient. Of course, with 10MB of frame buffer space available this isn't sufficient to fit the entire frame buffer in with 4x FSAA enabled at High Definition resolutions and we'll cover how this is handled later in the article.

"