So you're not going to adress anything I said?

I was sticking to yearly comparisons of the games, but you started complaining about genres

it actually matters if wiiu has 1terabyte of bandwidth with edram, even if its a low power system having like 400 to 550 gigaflops which fall way back from the 1,2 or 1.8 gigaflops of the xbne and ps4, still you ca use that tremendous bandwidth for tesselation, therefore graphics fidelity would increase a lot

here
http://developer.amd.com/wordpress/media/2012/10/WileyAuthoringforTessellation.pdf

"
The first and most obvious benefit of real-time tessellation and 
displacement mapping is the dramatic increase in visual 
quality. Tessellation in conjunction with displacement mapping 
eliminates one of the last hurdles towards achieving cinematic 
quality visuals in games.Film has been using this technique 
for years in order to provide animators with manageable 
meshes to work with during the animation portion of 
development while still providing the highest quality results at 
render time. This technique eliminates polygonal artifacts and 
provides highly detailed, smooth internal and external 
silhouettes.

Another slightly less obvious benefit of this technique is the 
effect that it has on your memory footprint. Essentially, you 
can think of real-time tessellation and displacement mapping 
as an effective form of geometry compression. This technique 
utilizes the same art assets as conventional rendering with the 
only additional storage requirement being the 16 bit 
displacement map. If we take the Froblin character as an 
example we see that the memory footprint for the low 
resolution mesh and 2k x 2k 16 bit displacement map 
requiring about 10 megabytes of video memory. This is 
compared to the 450 megabytes of video memory that would 
be required to render the high resolution Froblin model that 
weighs in at around 15 million triangles. So, for just a 
modest increase in memory footprint, we are able to 
dramatically increase the total polycount and visual detail of 
the render mesh when using this technique.

Another less obvious benefit of this technique is in animation 
quality. Transforming the low resolution mesh is faster than 
attempting to transform the high resolution equivalent. This 
means that we get better animation performance. Also, as we 
just saw in the previous slide, we are storing exponentially 
fewer vertices in video memory. This means that we are able 
to store more data per vertex. What this provides us, for 
example, is the ability to increase skinning quality by being 
able to store more influences per vertex. This would also 
allows us to store a much larger library of morph targets for 
better facial animation, etc

Performanceis yet another benefit of real-time tessellation and displacement mapping.You can see here that when implemented with multipassrendering and vertex compression we are able to render over 400 times as many polygons while only taking a 33 frames per second or 30 percent performance hit when compared to rendering only the corresponding low polygon mesh. That is a pretty good trade off.
"

memory isnt a problem, 32MB of edram should be enough for both framebuffer and tesselaition data

performance has also increased a lot since xbox 360, rv770 has lot more performance but wiiu gpu should be better than that, maybe on par with the hd6000 or maybe is using tesselator engine similar to the ones found in the hd7000(not saying its an hd7000 gp, just that the components lik the tesselator may be lie the ones in the hd7000)

hope nintendo an other developers will start to use the feature effciently

3 Things I would like for you to address, please think about what I've actually said and provide me with a response fitting my questions. Please do not provide me copy past replies that don't answer my questions but rather come off as if your preaching;

1) Your obsession with EDram bandwidth is simply put...baffling!
You keep harping on and on about the EDram bandwidth making it out to be the sole thing that will make the WiiU a tessellation monster, but you forget one critical thing each and every time you bring this up. The whole point of Tessellation other than allowing for detailed meshes is that it saves on Vram and bandwidth, but it doesn't come free as tessellation is GPU intensive, and GPU power is what the WiiU lacks. Since you know that bandwidth alone does nothing, and you know that bandwidth in conjuction with the GPU is what's required for tesselation, then  why do you keep harping on about bandwidth as if it's the only thing that counts?

 

2) The GPU isn't your 400-550GF figure, rather the most educated guesses thus far peg the WiiU GPU between 176-354GF with most thinking it's closer to 176GF, places like Neogaf have way more qualified people, plus people in the industry whom have suggested that 176GF is about right, and thus far the games released on it back this up...but even this is not 100% only because Nintendo will never reveal the specs so no one can ever confirm it.

Since the WiiU has such a low powered GPU, it'll never be the tessellation monster you make it out to be, hell it may not even see tessellation being used other than on some few games. Again I am not saying the WiiU can not do tessellation, I am saying that it can but it will be limited, and limited not by EDram bandwidth rather limited by the low specced GPU which you seem to ignore despite talking about tessellation non stop.

When the xbox360 launched it's EDram gave it one clear advantage, it basically had free Anti-aliasing, and the games showed it from day one...it's something the PS3 versions of the sames games lacked. When the PS4 launched, from day one it showed that it had a clear GPU advantage because the majority it's games ran in 1080p while most games on the Xbox One ran in 720p. In both instances despite lazy or rushed games for launch they both in their own right showed their power advantage from day one. So IF the WiiU as you imply it, has this monster like capabilities with tessellation because of it's bandwidth, then why hasn't this been obvious for all to see just like it was for the xbox360 and PS4?

I mean it's been over a year since launch and not even Nintendo have been able to tap into this massive tessellation you keep harping on about, and yet the xbox360 and PS4 had no issues showing their strengths from day one.

 

3) I've asked this question twice before, and twice it was never answered, so I'll ask it again. What is more plausible, that Nintendo designed an unbalanced system where one part of it's hardware is overly engineered resulting in an inefficient and costly design, or that Nintendo designed a balanced, efficient, and cost effective design?

I hope to see your replies when I wake :)

At least with five stages you get a bit of variety, all Wii U supporters get is PS4 fanboys who are Wii U dev experts powered by google. 

At least with five stages you get a bit of variety, all Wii U supporters get is PS4 fanboys who are Wii U dev experts powered by google. 

At least with five stages you get a bit of variety, all Wii U supporters get is PS4 fanboys who are Wii U dev experts powered by google. 

Perhaps the Sony/Microsoft fanboys should be the ones that need to accept the Wii U. 

Wii U has given me plenty of hours of fun with great looking games. The only game I didn't like the looks of was Batman: Arkham City. Great game nevertheless, but if that was the highest rated metacritic game for the PS3/XBOX360... Graphical wise you wouldn't say it...(Gameplay wise definitely though)

A HDD is not going to bridge the gap between <500MB of RAM and 1GB. Any time you need over 500MB of assets in play at once, PS3/360 will hit a brick wall, HDD or no.

So it seems we agree on one thing; fear of low sales is causing devs not to invest in properly leveraging Wii U's potential.

Any multiplatform game that uses textures on par with PS3/360 is a clear case of failing to fully utilize the Wii U hardware, and hence should be discounted as an accurate indicator of the system's capabilities.

1.- may be gpu intensive but wiiu is powerful enough to handle it, 400 to 500 gigaflops at 720p is more than enough for that purpose, and tesselation requirements have also decreased over time with optimizations and shinen says wii u can handle it ithout problems

http://hdwarriors.com/shinen-on-the-practical-use-of-adaptive-tessellation-upcoming-games/

"

Shin’en on the Practical Use of Adaptive Tessellation, Upcoming Games

Posted by: Iran White in Iran W, Wii U May 29, 2013 0

It has been rumored that Shin’en may be working on a sequel to FAST Racing League, and they have stated in the past that they will be using tessellation in their next game. When asked about this, and how resource heavy the feature might be, Manfred Linzner gave us a realistic outlook for use of the feature for games in general. He also informed us that Shin’en in fact, has two Wii U games in development. But in any case, if you haven’t yet bought Nano Assault Neo on the Nintendo Wii U eShop, you are missing out! Check it out today! 

Linzner:

‘We learned a lot with Nano Assault Neo. For one of our upcoming games we will use all that and will unlock more of the ‘Wii U’s power.’

‘Tessellation itself is not resource heavy on recent GPUs but it depends on actual usage. Although even previous consoles had these features you saw it only very rarely used. People often think of it as an easy way to get free ‘level of detail’. That doesn’t work. It’s because of certain visual problems associated with adaptive tessellation.
We already tried various tessellation ideas and it is a very handy tool for certain situations.’

‘We think FAST would certainly deserve a sequel because it had a very fresh take on an age old genre. However, we can at least confirm that we currently work on two Wii U games that will be announced after this summer.’

"

and shinen isnt the only one, already precursor games was using tessleation on shadow of the eternals on wii u and pc(precursor games said that wii u and pc would look identical and the difference would be unoticeble so obiously tesselation is included, not to mention that you can see the wii u controls on the demo so obviously is runningon the wii u engine)

here

minute 7:50

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QlREuZz7MwE

"we have tesselation and displacements"

2.- your figure about the 176gigaflops is not possible, ports wouldnt even work on wii u, if even bayonetta1 in ps3 sucked eventhough ps3 is more powerful than xbox 360 and despite developers were more used to the hardwrae after like 3 years on the market and having optimized engines, then how a wiiu port would work better on wii u if it was less powerful than xbox 360, has not even a year o the market and engines are not even optimized? lets not forget that developers are not used to the hardware so thats another problem

even if wiiu is more efficient with all the above issues is impossible to port a game, you would have to do a ground up game and also max it out usin he dirctx9 limitations found in the game, but no, we are tlking about a lazy port done very quicly without much of an efort with developers not used to the hardwrae and using not optimized engines like unreal engine 2.5 and still ports are on par with the xbox 360 games, sometimes with little less framerate(at least not as bad as bayo ps3 vs xbox bayo) and sometimes with better depending on the degree of work by the developers

sorry, answer is no, 176gigaflops the ports woldnt even run considering all those issues and even ps4 cant run assesins ceed 4 at 1080p 60fps despite being 7.5x more powerful than xbox 360 when it would require only about 3x the power to do it so since 360 runs it at 720p 30fps, and ps4 is more easy to develop for thanls to the x86 cpu, main gdr5 ram and not dealing with edram and still cant get 1080p 60fps, only 1080p 30fps wich requires only 2.25x the power from 360 and ps4 is 7.5x that?, lets not forget that assesins creed 4 for ps4 was actually 900p 30fps before the update so why it took so much effort to achieve the 1080p at first and developers had to do a patch later if ps4 is so damn powerful?

your answer to this alos applies to wiiu, dont fortget that

wii u obviously would have to pak twice the power to even run the ports correctly under these circunstances, and is not just that, the power consumption and the die size of the wii u gpu also tell us that the wiiu could have at least 400gigaflops to 550 gigaflops. Once the games stopped t be being ported form older generation to new geneation then thats when these limitations will dissappear, only ground up games and using the appropiate engines will do to deliver better graphical games

3.- wii u edram is more than just framebuffer, shinen already old us it only requires like 16MB of edram for the 1080p framebuffer(dont confue bandwidth for power) which means that if 16MB provides enough bandwidth for 1080p then wii u has more bandwidth than xbox 360 since it required 256GB/s of bandwidth for the 720p using the whole 10MB of edram

here

http://hdwarriors.com/general-impression-of-wii-u-edram-explained-by-shinen/

"

‘Wii U eDRAM usage is comparable to the eDRAM in the XBOX360, but on Wii U you have enough eDRAM to use it for 1080p rendering.

In comparison, on XBOX360 you usually had to render in sub 720p resolutions or in mutliple passes.

Even if you don’t use MSAA (MultiSample Anti-Aliasing) you already need around 16Mb just for a 1080p framebuffer (with double buffering). You simply don’t have that with XBOX360 eDRAM. As far as I know Microsoft corrected that issue and put also 32MB of Fast Ram into their new console.

We use the eDRAM in the Wii U for the actual framebuffers, intermediate framebuffer captures, as a fast scratch memory for some CPU intense work and for other GPU memory writes.

Using eDRAM properly is a simple way to get extra performance without any other optimizations.

"

Er, the amount of "Gigaflops" has absolutely ZERO correllation with Tessellation performance, Tessellation does not and will not rely on the shader hardware to actually be performed.

GPU's have fixed function hardware that is dedicated to doing tasks such as Tessellation.
However, the thing with the WiiU is that it's using AMD's 6th generation Tessellator, which is woefull in it's geometry performance.

AMD managed to increase Tessellation performance by storing Tessellation data in the GDDR5 memory and doubling the amount of geometry engines in it's 7th generation tessellators, however the WiiU doesn't have this luxury, the dedicated eDRAM is better suited to handling other tasks as it's storage space and bandwidth is a premium, The WiiU's SOC is also a transister-sensitive part, we aren't looking at a 5 billion+ transister monolothic die here, so you need to face facts, it cant do everything.

Basically, the 6th generation Tessellator is what is found in the Radeon 5000 and 6000 series minus the Cayman (VLIW4) derived hardware, which were generation 7, the generation 7 tessellators had significantly improved Tessellation performance at lower tessellation factors due to the doubling of geometry engines and storing the Tessellation data in the GDDR5 memory. (Previously and afterwards that data was stored on the GPU's geometry cache.)
Generation 8 that is found in the GCN hardware puts it all to shame.

So at a minimum, regardless of how many gigaflops or bandwidth the WiiU has, the Tessellation performance will be at-least 4-8 times worse than the Next-Gen twins. (Xbox One and Playstation 4.)
Only so much you can do with a single Generation 6 Tessellation unit...
At higher Tessellation factors you could even be looking at a 100x performance difference.

The Xbox 360's Tessellator is based on ATI's "Truform" technology, which is a bad comparison to use against the WiiU as it's under-featured and not exactly a great performer, it also relies on the use of n-patches to tessellate, thus it was used sparingly like in Halo 3's water for example or in Viva Pinata.
It's certainly not like what you would achieve in Unigen...

The Playstation 3 didn't have any dedicated Tessellation hardware.

When you conclude that "Gigaflops" is the single defying denominator that determines a devices performance... Then you have already lost the argument.
At the same amount of "gigaflops" as the Xbox 360 and Playstation 3, the Wii U's GPU is faster.
Why? Well that's simple, it's more efficient, it can do more work per flop thanks to improvements and additions in the fixed function hardware and with added efficiency optimisations such as more advanced compression algorithms.
The same works for the GCN derived parts in the next-gen twins when compared to the WiiU's VLIW derived hardware, at the same amount of GFLOPS they can do more work.

The eDRAM is just a very fast piece of storage, no one doubts or even argues that.
However, with that in mind you can have over 9,000 Petabytes of bandwidth and it wouldn't make a difference if the compute hardware cannot make full use of it all.

A good example is a 10-lane high-way with 2 cars travelling along it, suddenly you have 8 lanes doing absolutely nothing, not a fantastic use of a road is it? Same applies to bandwidth.

It's not an ideal replacement for a singular massively fast amount of memory like GDDR5 (And eventually, GDDR6) memory on a 256bit bus.
There is a reason why dedicated GPU's on the PC do-not and will-not sacrifice compute resources for eDRAM-like bandwidth.

Simple fact is, both the WiiU and Xbox One as well as the Xbox 360 could have been *significantly* faster if they used faster system memory and used the die-area used by the eDRAM and eSRAM for actuall compute hardware.