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

Forums - Nintendo - Wii U's eDRAM stronger than given credit?

curl-6 on 02 March 2014
starworld said:
curl-6 said:
starworld said:

Do you have a souce?, i'm sure there were things GC were superior buts its not like a night and day diffrence, ps2 is suppose be a bandwidth monster, and has advantages in particle effects. saying a game GC would'nt run on xbox is way out there. 

beyond good and evil was lead on gamecube, and the xbox version ended up having the better framerate,  there is no evidence to back up your claim

http://www.purevideogames.net/blog/?p=479

GCN does 8 texture layers per pass, Xbox does 4.


your source is a blog, thats sounds like its written by a fanboy.

Xbox technical document, page 3: confirms 4 texture layers per pass.

http://bezadis.ics.upjs.sk/old/CryptoSymposium/files/paper2.pdf



Around the Network
Dr.Henry_Killinger on 02 March 2014
d21lewis said:
I've kinda gotten over hoping that the Wii U has some sort of hidden power but when I see things like Donkey Kong in DKC: TF and that awesome fur, I believe again. I hope somebody out there pushes the U to the limit.

Nintendo would need to use TM 10, but I don't see why Wii U couldn't learn hidden power.



In this day and age, with the Internet, ignorance is a choice! And they're still choosing Ignorance! - Dr. Filthy Frank

starworld on 02 March 2014
curl-6 said:
starworld said:
curl-6 said:
starworld said:

Do you have a souce?, i'm sure there were things GC were superior buts its not like a night and day diffrence, ps2 is suppose be a bandwidth monster, and has advantages in particle effects. saying a game GC would'nt run on xbox is way out there. 

beyond good and evil was lead on gamecube, and the xbox version ended up having the better framerate,  there is no evidence to back up your claim

http://www.purevideogames.net/blog/?p=479

GCN does 8 texture layers per pass, Xbox does 4.


your source is a blog, thats sounds like its written by a fanboy.

Xbox technical document, page 3: confirms 4 texture layers per pass.

http://bezadis.ics.upjs.sk/old/CryptoSymposium/files/paper2.pdf

i googled GCN does 8 texture layers per pass and came up with this link http://forum.beyond3d.com/showthread.php?t=7431 basically saying it some that the ps2 could but would take a small hit and no GC ever did  more 4 texures per pass, come on now unless your blind you can clearly see xbox delivered better textures.

here is a great comparison article http://segatech.com/technical/consolecompare2/



curl-6 on 02 March 2014
starworld said:
curl-6 said:

Xbox technical document, page 3: confirms 4 texture layers per pass.

http://bezadis.ics.upjs.sk/old/CryptoSymposium/files/paper2.pdf

i googled GCN does 8 texture layers per pass and came up with this link http://forum.beyond3d.com/showthread.php?t=7431 basically saying it some that the ps2 could but would take a small hit and no GC ever did  more 2 texures per pass, come on now unless your blind you can clearly see xbox delivered better textures.

here is a great comparison article http://segatech.com/technical/consolecompare2/

Blatantly false.

http://au.ign.com/articles/2001/08/29/rogue-leader-chat-transcript

LucasArts/Factor 5: We have several objects and levels in the game which uses the maximum 8 texture stages. On average we are using 5 layers of textures.

Also I don't think you understand what "multitexturing" is. It does not refer to texture resolution, it refers to combining several textures on one surface to create effects like bumpmapping. 



starworld on 02 March 2014
curl-6 said:
starworld said:
curl-6 said:

Xbox technical document, page 3: confirms 4 texture layers per pass.

http://bezadis.ics.upjs.sk/old/CryptoSymposium/files/paper2.pdf

i googled GCN does 8 texture layers per pass and came up with this link http://forum.beyond3d.com/showthread.php?t=7431 basically saying it some that the ps2 could but would take a small hit and no GC ever did  more 2 texures per pass, come on now unless your blind you can clearly see xbox delivered better textures.

here is a great comparison article http://segatech.com/technical/consolecompare2/

Blatantly false.

http://au.ign.com/articles/2001/08/29/rogue-leader-chat-transcript

LucasArts/Factor 5: We have several objects and levels in the game which uses the maximum 8 texture stages. On average we are using 5 layers of textures.

Also I don't think you understand what "multitexturing" is. It does not refer to texture resolution, it refers to combining several textures on one surface to create effects like bumpmapping. 

and you don't believe a developer would  exaggerate those numers a bit, especially factor 5.  anyway doesn't seem like a deal breaker, on average it does 5, it can do 4 on xbox and di everything else better.



Around the Network
curl-6 on 02 March 2014
starworld said:
curl-6 said:
starworld said:

i googled GCN does 8 texture layers per pass and came up with this link http://forum.beyond3d.com/showthread.php?t=7431 basically saying it some that the ps2 could but would take a small hit and no GC ever did  more 2 texures per pass, come on now unless your blind you can clearly see xbox delivered better textures.

here is a great comparison article http://segatech.com/technical/consolecompare2/

Blatantly false.

http://au.ign.com/articles/2001/08/29/rogue-leader-chat-transcript

LucasArts/Factor 5: We have several objects and levels in the game which uses the maximum 8 texture stages. On average we are using 5 layers of textures.

Also I don't think you understand what "multitexturing" is. It does not refer to texture resolution, it refers to combining several textures on one surface to create effects like bumpmapping. 

and you don't believe a developer would  exaggerate those numers a bit, especially factor 5.  anyway doesn't seem like a deal breaker, on average it does 5, it can do 4 on xbox and di everything else better.

They're a proven dev and their numbers make sense given the hardware's support for 8 layers, so I trust them. Lies tend to be less specific.

Rogue 2 and 3 in their current form would have to have texture layers cut down to work on Xbox.

In other words, like I've been saying since the beginning; Xbox is more powerful overall, but the GC still did some things better.



Kane1389 on 02 March 2014
sc94597 said:
Kane1389 said:
sc94597 said:
Kane1389 said:


Nice job comparing a 2008 game with 2014 game.

Both games were/will be released at comparable periods in their lifecycle. Two years after the release of the console. If the logic that I've seen in other threads in regards to the PS4 and XBOne holds, that they are not optimized enough to show vast improvements over the latest games of last generation, then the same should hold for the Wii U vs. last generation, which means that we should compare games that were released after similar periods of time in their life cycles. If you are to argue that there is software technique advancement, we can always remember that Nintendo games are made with their own proprietary engines and Nintendo didn't develop games with such graphical feats back then. The comparison is not only valid but optimal. 

Except that those games in Xbone/Ps4 threads are cross gen titles, never designed to take full advantage of next gen power. X is not a cross gen game. 

 

And WiiU as a supposed 8th gen system should have had better looking games than anything on the ps3 right at launch just like ps360 and their successors had.

 

And lets not pretend WKC was The best looking ps3 game in 2008. I dont see any 2014 wii u game looking better than MGS4, although Watch Dogs might prove me wrong

http://gamrconnect.vgchartz.com/thread.php?id=179145&page=1#42

^ That thread isn't about cross-gen titles. 

Also the comparison makes sense because they're both open-world games with similar art styles. 


I have no idea why you brought that thread up,am I supposed to agree with OP?

And if you wanna compare graphics, you use the best looking games. MGS4 was best looking on PS3 in 2008, X is on WiiU in 2014.



MegaDrive08 on 02 March 2014

Nano Assault Neo looks as good as anything out there, Shin'en Used 8k textures for Nano Assault Neo and are doing the same with Fast Racing Neo because they have taken there time to use the WiiU capabilities, it's a myth that the Wii U can't produce amazing looking games.



 

sc94597 on 02 March 2014
Kane1389 said:
sc94597 said:
Kane1389 said:
sc94597 said:
Kane1389 said:


Nice job comparing a 2008 game with 2014 game.

Both games were/will be released at comparable periods in their lifecycle. Two years after the release of the console. If the logic that I've seen in other threads in regards to the PS4 and XBOne holds, that they are not optimized enough to show vast improvements over the latest games of last generation, then the same should hold for the Wii U vs. last generation, which means that we should compare games that were released after similar periods of time in their life cycles. If you are to argue that there is software technique advancement, we can always remember that Nintendo games are made with their own proprietary engines and Nintendo didn't develop games with such graphical feats back then. The comparison is not only valid but optimal. 

Except that those games in Xbone/Ps4 threads are cross gen titles, never designed to take full advantage of next gen power. X is not a cross gen game. 

 

And WiiU as a supposed 8th gen system should have had better looking games than anything on the ps3 right at launch just like ps360 and their successors had.

 

And lets not pretend WKC was The best looking ps3 game in 2008. I dont see any 2014 wii u game looking better than MGS4, although Watch Dogs might prove me wrong

http://gamrconnect.vgchartz.com/thread.php?id=179145&page=1#42

^ That thread isn't about cross-gen titles. 

Also the comparison makes sense because they're both open-world games with similar art styles. 


I have no idea why you brought that thread up,am I supposed to agree with OP?

And if you wanna compare graphics, you use the best looking games. MGS4 was best looking on PS3 in 2008, X is on WiiU in 2014.

The replies in that thread stated that the reason why the OP doesn't see a large difference between the previous generation and this generation (in regards to exclusives) is because the new consoles have not been optimized for yet. The OP should compare early releases of the 7th generation with early releases of the 8th generation, and the same logic holds with the Wii U vs. last generation consoles, does it not? Metal Gear Solid IV was not an open world game. X will be an open world game. That is where the comparison fails. 



freedquaker on 02 March 2014

I have replied this earlier multiple times scientifically but nobody seems to have noticed it LOL.

In short, "GPU wise", PS4 is about 6 times as fast as WiiU, and around 10x as fast as a PS3. So yes, technically, WiiU is much better than both PS3 and X360 in GPU terms, but nowhere near, forget PS4, not even XB1. For comparison, please read the thread below!

WiiU vs PS4 GPU power, architectural differences and efficiency


http://gamrconnect.vgchartz.com/thread.php?id=173912&page=1



Playstation 5 vs XBox Series Market Share Estimates

Regional Analysis  (only MS and Sony Consoles)
Europe     => XB1 : 23-24 % vs PS4 : 76-77%
N. America => XB1 :  49-52% vs PS4 : 48-51%
Global     => XB1 :  32-34% vs PS4 : 66-68%

Sales Estimations for 8th Generation Consoles

Next Gen Consoles Impressions and Estimates