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

Forums - Nintendo - Hyrule Warriors shows the Wii U's CPU isn't THAT weak

Tagged games:

curl-6 on 23 September 2014
dharh said:
curl-6 said:

Out of curiosity, what other benchmark would you use? Multiplatform games seem an ill fit as they were designed for fundamentally differently CPUs. 

Cross platform high power games. Seeing how they peform on each platform would be the better indication of relative power of each system. 

The problem with cross platform games is they're built around fundamentally different hardware, so they're not the best fit for Wii U.



Around the Network
ZyroXZ2 on 23 September 2014
curl-6 said:
ZyroXZ2 said:
I get the OP's point, but unfortunately, crowd AI has been long developed for before Hyrule Warriors, and can be done on a fraction of what it seems like it requires in terms of CPU power.

Quite honestly, Pikmin 3 is, so far, the best example of CPU power. Not only are there 100 pikmin that can be running around ALL POTENTIALLY DOING INDIVIDUAL THINGS, but each one also has to follow PATH FINDING ROUTINES (since flying pikmin take different routes, for example). Crowd AI doesn't work in Pikmin 3 very effectively since you have CONTROL OVER ASSIGNING TASKS. When you have 10 carrying a fruit, another 10 carrying an enemy, 5 farming spicy berries, a captain with pikmin heading to a waypoint, another captain camping a "multi-fruit" (grapes) or build pile that has pikmin running back and forth, and you're battling enemies actively using the rest, there's a lot to keep track of, and the CPU does this just fine.

Didn't Pikmin 1 and 2 on Gamecube also have 100 Pikmin running around at once though?

And based on clock speed and core count alone, Espresso (Wii U CPU) should be about 7.5 times more powerful than Gekko (GCN CPU) and that's before you factor in the 12-fold cache increase.

The GC was actually quite a powerful machine for its time...

The GC versions didn't have the individual captains to allow you the level of task diversity that Pikmin 3 does, which is obviously attributed to having more available CPU power.



Check out my entertainment gaming channel!
^^/
curl-6 on 23 September 2014
ZyroXZ2 said:
curl-6 said:

Didn't Pikmin 1 and 2 on Gamecube also have 100 Pikmin running around at once though?

And based on clock speed and core count alone, Espresso (Wii U CPU) should be about 7.5 times more powerful than Gekko (GCN CPU) and that's before you factor in the 12-fold cache increase.

The GC was actually quite a powerful machine for its time...

The GC versions didn't have the individual captains to allow you the level of task diversity that Pikmin 3 does, which is obviously attributed to having more available CPU power.

Oh I agree that Pikmin 3 is doing more CPU work than its prdecesors, but (over) 7.5 times as much? I reckon Espresso can do more.



ZyroXZ2 on 23 September 2014
curl-6 said:
ZyroXZ2 said:
curl-6 said:

Didn't Pikmin 1 and 2 on Gamecube also have 100 Pikmin running around at once though?

And based on clock speed and core count alone, Espresso (Wii U CPU) should be about 7.5 times more powerful than Gekko (GCN CPU) and that's before you factor in the 12-fold cache increase.

The GC was actually quite a powerful machine for its time...

The GC versions didn't have the individual captains to allow you the level of task diversity that Pikmin 3 does, which is obviously attributed to having more available CPU power.

Oh I agree that Pikmin 3 is doing more CPU work than its prdecesors, but (over) 7.5 times as much? I reckon Espresso can do more.

You seem to be ignoring the part where the CPU feeds the GPU, lol... The drastically improved graphics, particularly in the physics and particle effects area, do still require CPU power.  A GPGPU doesn't completely remove the CPU from the equation: the CPU still has to process the frames.



Check out my entertainment gaming channel!
^^/
curl-6 on 23 September 2014
ZyroXZ2 said:
curl-6 said:

Oh I agree that Pikmin 3 is doing more CPU work than its prdecesors, but (over) 7.5 times as much? I reckon Espresso can do more.

You seem to be ignoring the part where the CPU feeds the GPU, lol... The drastically improved graphics, particularly in the physics and particle effects area, do still require CPU power.  A GPGPU doesn't completely remove the CPU from the equation: the CPU still has to process the frames.

Someone with more technical knowhow than me can correct me if I'm wrong here, but I'm pretty sure its the GPU that processes frames. And I don't recall Pikmin 3 doing much in terms of physics besides the (quite impressive) dynamic water, which itself could have been a GPU simulation.



Around the Network
Tachikoma on 23 September 2014
errorpwns said:
Tachikoma said:

It really isn't the big deal you're making it out to be, and isn't a good indicator of the WiiU's power, I've been a game developer for an extremely long time, I have worked on games from all platforms, I was working on a WiiU project up until I resigned to handle my pregnancy, and now, take care of my child.

So I will leave it at this, since you're not going to agree regardless of which information is presented to you, regardless of how qualified the person presenting it is.

You're not a very good game developer then if you think one script handles every enemy on the battlefield.

Script?

Try harder.



dharh on 24 September 2014
curl-6 said:
dharh said:

Cross platform high power games. Seeing how they peform on each platform would be the better indication of relative power of each system. 

The problem with cross platform games is they're built around fundamentally different hardware, so they're not the best fit for Wii U.


You can't benchmark the Wii U against your arbitrary notion of what you consider computationally intensive, which again is _not_ really that intensive, and say that the Wii U is really powerful. The Wii U follows the same traditional philosophy that other Nintendo consoles have followed and that is not focusing on being the most powerful console, but rather focusing on whatever unique game style they are making at the time



A warrior keeps death on the mind from the moment of their first breath to the moment of their last.
curl-6 on 24 September 2014
dharh said:
curl-6 said:
dharh said:

Cross platform high power games. Seeing how they peform on each platform would be the better indication of relative power of each system. 

The problem with cross platform games is they're built around fundamentally different hardware, so they're not the best fit for Wii U.


You can't benchmark the Wii U against your arbitrary notion of what you consider computationally intensive, which again is _not_ really that intensive, and say that the Wii U is really powerful. The Wii U follows the same traditional philosophy that other Nintendo consoles have followed and that is not focusing on being the most powerful console, but rather focusing on whatever unique game style they are making at the time

Link me to where I said that.



errorpwns on 24 September 2014
Tachikoma said:
errorpwns said:
Tachikoma said:

It really isn't the big deal you're making it out to be, and isn't a good indicator of the WiiU's power, I've been a game developer for an extremely long time, I have worked on games from all platforms, I was working on a WiiU project up until I resigned to handle my pregnancy, and now, take care of my child.

So I will leave it at this, since you're not going to agree regardless of which information is presented to you, regardless of how qualified the person presenting it is.

You're not a very good game developer then if you think one script handles every enemy on the battlefield.

Script?

Try harder.


Point is active A.I on screen IS and always has been CPU intensive. To suggest otherwise and to suggest it doesn't have anything to do with processor power is ignorant. Neither is it okay to suggest there aren't many commands needed to control a.i. Multiplayer lag exist due to network connection issues and if it's on a server A.I spikes a servers CPU usage.



curl-6 on 24 September 2014
errorpwns said:
Tachikoma said:
errorpwns said:

You're not a very good game developer then if you think one script handles every enemy on the battlefield.

Script?

Try harder.


Point is active A.I on screen IS and always has been CPU intensive. To suggest otherwise and to suggest it doesn't have anything to do with processor power is ignorant. Neither is it okay to suggest there aren't many commands needed to control a.i.

Okay guys, let's try to keep this is polite discussion, please?