whatever said:
Why would they talk to you when they know they can't take you seriously? |
Then why is you talking to me. lol
PigPen said:
|
no one knows but you can guess its weak due tothe price of th console and the fact that the graphics is pulling look hardly better than last gen do.
Looks like I'll b buying a 4 early to see this first hand.
AMD CPUs are weak, very weak compared to Intel. Therefore, the weakest spot of the PS4 (and X1) is the slow AMD CPU. GPU computing helps to transfer CPU load to the GPU which will speed up the X1 and PS4 a lot. Since the PS4 has much more shaders it will also benefit more from GPU computing.
Many types of calculations can be transfered from CPU to GPU in theory but the development is not easy if you have to invent and write it all alone. If more and more GPU calculations are natively supported by the SDK (Software Development Kit) development gets easier. But the X1 will get another huge boost by integrating eDRAM into the SDK. eDRAM is what makes the X1 more expensive than the PS4 in terms of production costs, despite being the weaker system.
eDRAM might enable the X1 to show some special effects unavailable on PS4, but PS4 will remain the more powerful system, especially on multiplattform titles.
| PigPen said:
You said a lot in there, but I'm going to jump on one. A awful CPU & GPU really. lol Nobody knows what's the Wii U GPU is. Up until now it's been all speculation. People buying Wii U's to crack them open to get little to no insight. It's also said it has more eDRAM, and no one knows what's it for. You're not completely wrong in your post though. You have some valid points. |
We don't know the specifics for the GPU, but we do know its power usage, which we can learn a lot from.
Put it like this, if the WiiU's GPU has the same wattage to GFLOPs ratio as the most energy efficient GPU AMD have EVER produced (which is rather unlikely for a lower end GPU like Latte, but for the sake of being fair let's assume it did somehow match those levels) that would put the WiiU's GPU at 0.362tflop/s.
So in the absolute best case scenario its GPU is 0.362tflop/s vs the PS4's 1.84tflop/s. In reality of course it's likely lower (to quote fatslop in another thread, 0.25tflop/s seems pretty reasonable), but it shows how far behind it's GPU is even in a perfect situation.
As for the CPU, there isn't much to say. It's more comparable to the 360's than the PS4/X1's. Power wise it's more in line with the PS3's, but comparing anything to the Cell is a nightmare so it's best to just avoid it lol.
As I've said in the past, the WiiU is a perfectly capable machine and can produce some nice visuals, but comparing it to a console that cost twice as much to manufacturer is silly. Nintendo fans should just be happy it's a huge step up from the Wii. If we were comparing the WiiU to the Wii, then i'd totally agree it was a powerhouse.
| etking said: AMD CPUs are weak, very weak compared to Intel. Therefore, the weakest spot of the PS4 (and X1) is the slow AMD CPU. GPU computing helps to transfer CPU load to the GPU which will speed up the X1 and PS4 a lot. Since the PS4 has much more shaders it will also benefit more from GPU computing. Many types of calculations can be transfered from CPU to GPU in theory but the development is not easy if you have to invent and write it all alone. If more and more GPU calculations are natively supported by the SDK (Software Development Kit) development gets easier. But the X1 will get another huge boost by integrating eDRAM into the SDK. eDRAM is what makes the X1 more expensive than the PS4 in terms of production costs, despite being the weaker system. eDRAM might enable the X1 to show some special effects unavailable on PS4, but PS4 will remain the more powerful system, especially on multiplattform titles. |
Do you mean eSRAM? The 360 had eDRAM, but the X1 moved to eSRAM.
| etking said: AMD CPUs are weak, very weak compared to Intel. Therefore, the weakest spot of the PS4 (and X1) is the slow AMD CPU. GPU computing helps to transfer CPU load to the GPU which will speed up the X1 and PS4 a lot. Since the PS4 has much more shaders it will also benefit more from GPU computing. Many types of calculations can be transfered from CPU to GPU in theory but the development is not easy if you have to invent and write it all alone. If more and more GPU calculations are natively supported by the SDK (Software Development Kit) development gets easier. But the X1 will get another huge boost by integrating eDRAM into the SDK. eDRAM is what makes the X1 more expensive than the PS4 in terms of production costs, despite being the weaker system. eDRAM might enable the X1 to show some special effects unavailable on PS4, but PS4 will remain the more powerful system, especially on multiplattform titles. |
The Xbox One has eSRAM.
think-man said:
no one knows but you can guess its weak due tothe price of th console and the fact that the graphics is pulling look hardly better than last gen do.
|
Yep. We may not know the specifics, but based on its cost, power usage and what it's currently showing us, we can create a pretty accurate range for where it has to fall into.
Zekkyou said:
We don't know the specifics for the GPU, but we do know its power usage, which we can learn a lot from. Put it like this, if the WiiU's GPU has the same wattage to GFLOPs ratio as the most energy efficient GPU AMD have EVER produced (which is rather unlikely for a lower end GPU like Latte, but for the sake of being fair let's assume it did somehow match those levels) that would put the WiiU's GPU at 0.362tflop/s. So in the absolute best case scenario its GPU is 0.362tflop/s vs the PS4's 1.84tflop/s. In reality of course it's likely lower (to quote fatslop in another thread, 0.25tflop/s seems pretty reasonable), but it shows how far behind it's GPU is even in a perfect situation. As for the CPU, there isn't much to say. It's more comparable to the 360's than the PS4/X1's. Power wise it's more in line with the PS3's, but comparing anything to the Cell is a nightmare so it's best to just avoid it lol. As I've said in the past, the WiiU is a perfectly capable machine and can produce some nice visuals, but comparing it to a console that cost twice as much to manufacturer is silly. Nintendo fans should just be happy it's a huge step up from the Wii. If we were comparing the WiiU to the Wii, then i'd totally agree it was a powerhouse. |
You don't know what you're talking about. How's this, the Wii U is genius.
| PigPen said:
|
I do know what i'm talking about. It's simple power consumption comparisons. Let me put it to you how i'd explain it to an 8 year old.
Things need energy. The WiiU's GPU uses a certain amount of energy. Each bit of its power needs a bit of energy. If the bit of energy per bit of power is the same in the WiiU's GPU as the most efficient 40nm GPU AMD (the same company who made the WiiU's) have ever made, it will have 362 bits of power.
Does that make more sense? I literally can't dumb it down any more than that.
About Us |
Terms of Use |
Privacy Policy |
Advertise |
Staff |
Contact
Display As Desktop
Display As Mobile
© 2006-2026 VGChartz Ltd. All rights reserved.
