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

Forums - Gaming - Apple A9X: The Mobile Processor That Outperforms a Wii U?

spemanig said:
Soundwave said:

Most people can't reeeeeally tell screen resolution. As long as you use a decent quality screen, which nowadays is cheap (thanks Apple). 

A Vita screen looks as good as some 1080P displays to the average joe. As long as it looks "nice and shiny" they will think it's a high resolution. And a chip that powerful could legitimately run Wii U+ visuals at full 1080x720 too. A good 1280x720 panel will have a nice pixel density at 6.5 inches or lower and most people won't notice the games that are running sub-native resolution. I have an 8-inch Samsung 1280x720 res tablet and HD content still looks great on it.

Almost no iPad/iPhone games run at native resolution either, nobody really notices. People will notice the graphics are really impressive though and that the engines are the same next-gen engines on their modern consoles. 

I don't think they're using dual screen, but I'm not going over that again, I think we've done that to death. I think in general NX will be a complete break from the Wii-DS era. It was fun while it lasted, but very bitter at the end probably by Nintendo's standards and all these cycles eventually come to an end. 

To be honest I wouldn't be shocked if NX is more radical than even what I'm proposing. I think Nintendo internally is going through some radical upheaval. For example I don't think Mr. Miyamoto and some of the older guard were too happy about the smartphone change, but they got voted down by internal pressure. That really does explain his sour comments towards casuals a few months ago, because he knows he ultimately failed to keep that audience for Nintendo. 

 

They can't tell the difference between a 2016 high end tablet clearly marketed with a 1080p screen and a gaming tablet marketed with a 540p screen? You're literally saying that people are too stupid to read what's on a box. The Wii U gets a ton of shit for being too weak, and that system can still play games at 1080p 60fps, but a tablet with a big fat 540p screen in 2016 will go unnoticed and "99% of people won't tell the difference?" Give me a break. People already complain that the Wii U's gamepad picture qualitly is ugly as shit, and that streams games far more demanding than anything on smartphones or the Vita at the same 540p resolution.

Let something clear, its not same to have 540p on 5-6" screen and on 7-8" or bigger screen, same resolution with different size of screen made big differences. 540p on 5" screen will look great, but 540p on 8" screen not so good.

Vita screen have 540p resolution on 5", and guess what, all people think that games on Vita looking phenomenal even today phone have 1080p resolution on same 5" screen.

So what's a point, point is that on small screen you can't relly see big difference between resolutions (of course if is not a small resolution like 3DS). Saying that, resolution 540p-720p for NX handheld/gamepad (or whatever) screen of 5-6" will be enuf, 720p will be enuf and for 8" display. This gen we are playing 1080p games on 40" and more bigger screens and no one complains.



Around the Network

I was going to reply to a comment on thread but people have turned it into a dick comparison thread (aka way too much technical talk for me).  The only thing I know is Nintendo can shit out a better game than Apple or any mobile dev could ever dream of. 

How is that mark up on storage space on Apple products?  Tis a shame they don't allow micro SD or anything cost effective.  Tis another Sony micro memory management.  Welcome to the icloud.



sethnintendo said:

I was going to reply to a comment on thread but people have turned it into a dick comparison thread (aka way too much technical talk for me).  The only thing I know is Nintendo can shit out a better game than Apple or any mobile dev could ever dream of.  How is that mark up on space on Apple products?  Tis a shame they don't allow micro USB or anything cost effective.  Tis another Sony micro memory management.  Welcome to the icloud.


Sure but there are still people who like to discuss tech and want to be wowed by tech. Tech was the whole context of the thread, not the quality of games.



walsufnir said:
sethnintendo said:

I was going to reply to a comment on thread but people have turned it into a dick comparison thread (aka way too much technical talk for me).  The only thing I know is Nintendo can shit out a better game than Apple or any mobile dev could ever dream of.  How is that mark up on space on Apple products?  Tis a shame they don't allow micro USB or anything cost effective.  Tis another Sony micro memory management.  Welcome to the icloud.


Sure but there are still people who like to discuss tech and want to be wowed by tech. Tech was the whole context of the thread, not the quality of games.

Yet it is comparing a mobile device to a home console system.  The Wii U shits all over anything in the Apple app store for ipad and iphone.  Let me just bring up controller options which Wii U has way more diverse offerings.  The only thing the iphone can outperform is perhaps web surfing and a few apps designed for it (that I have no use for). 

This is a gaming site so I am considering gaming on the top of the list.  There is nothing on Andriod or Apple store that I give a shit about.  The only games that I liked perform way better with actual buttons and d pad (Gunman Clive which by the way made more money from the 3DS version than any mobile version).  Fuck touch controls.  ( https://play.google.com/store/apps/details?id=com.cloudworth.operationbarbarossa )  This game was fun while I had an Android phone but it is TBS.  That is about the only genre that touch controls can compete with real controls.



spemanig said:
Soundwave said:

Most people can't reeeeeally tell screen resolution. As long as you use a decent quality screen, which nowadays is cheap (thanks Apple). 

A Vita screen looks as good as some 1080P displays to the average joe. As long as it looks "nice and shiny" they will think it's a high resolution. And a chip that powerful could legitimately run Wii U+ visuals at full 1080x720 too. A good 1280x720 panel will have a nice pixel density at 6.5 inches or lower and most people won't notice the games that are running sub-native resolution. I have an 8-inch Samsung 1280x720 res tablet and HD content still looks great on it.

Almost no iPad/iPhone games run at native resolution either, nobody really notices. People will notice the graphics are really impressive though and that the engines are the same next-gen engines on their modern consoles. 

I don't think they're using dual screen, but I'm not going over that again, I think we've done that to death. I think in general NX will be a complete break from the Wii-DS era. It was fun while it lasted, but very bitter at the end probably by Nintendo's standards and all these cycles eventually come to an end. 

To be honest I wouldn't be shocked if NX is more radical than even what I'm proposing. I think Nintendo internally is going through some radical upheaval. For example I don't think Mr. Miyamoto and some of the older guard were too happy about the smartphone change, but they got voted down by internal pressure. That really does explain his sour comments towards casuals a few months ago, because he knows he ultimately failed to keep that audience for Nintendo. 


I think you're vastly overexadurating how stupid people are.

They can't tell the difference between a 2016 high end tablet clearly marketed with a 1080p screen and a gaming tablet marketed with a 540p screen? You're literally saying that people are too stupid to read what's on a box. The Wii U gets a ton of shit for being too weak, and that system can still play games at 1080p 60fps, but a tablet with a big fat 540p screen in 2016 will go unnoticed and "99% of people won't tell the difference?" Give me a break. People already complain that the Wii U's gamepad picture qualitly is ugly as shit, and that streams games far more demanding than anything on smartphones or the Vita at the same 540p resolution.

I think the NX will be a break from the Wii-DS, in firmware. In hardware, no. It'll be an iterative upgrade. No tablet. No portable console. And there's definitely internal change happening. But not the sort that'll produce a gaming tablet to replace a dual screen handheld that's part of a unified platform meant to share games seamlessly when the home console is still dual screened.

The quality of the screen makes a huge difference. A Vita screen (even the new models) and the Wii U tablet are very close in resolution from a technical sense, but you put them side by side and it's a laughable difference, clearly Nintendo is using really poor quality screens. 

I'd advocate more for a 1280x720 display. That is a nice pixel density for a 6-6.5 inch panel.

If a developer wants to port a game that's a next-gen engine because they want to cash in on the portable userbase that Nintendo actually has, like say Square-Enix wants Dragon Quest XI or Kingdom Hearts III on the portable, then I think it's OK in those cases for them to "cheat" a little go with a non-native resolution like 960x540. Most people won't notice and even if they do it's not enough of a difference to really have a stick up your bum about, because you can't exactly put your PS4 in your coat pocket. 

If you want to put a game like Mario Maker or even Mario 3D World (or in that range of visual fidelity), something like that could run at the native 1280x720 screen res. There's no device comparable to that on the market, so it's not like people will have anything to compare it to since Sony is likely bowing out of the handheld market. 

I think NX will be radically different, even moreso than maybe what I can come up with. Like for example I don't think there will be only 2 form factors. I think eventually there could even be like 5 or 6 different NX models. That's going to change. I just feel Nintendo is shifting massively internally and that will reflect on the products they make. But again I don't really care enough about that particular discussion to really argue about it again and again, that's just my read I've been following the company since the early 90s. 

Nintendo fans can kinda be violently opposed to changes at times too, so that's nothing new, I've seen that movie before maaaany times. Forget the "lets cancel Metroid Federation Force!" and "Celda" meltdowns. I remember before we knew exactly what the Revolution/Wii was, Perrin Kaplan (then of NOA) made a statement in an interview where she said the Revolution was only going to be 3x the horsepower of the GameCube, and the Nintendo fanbase at the time online erupted in rage. "That stupid b**ch! She doesn't know what she's talking about! Nintendo would never make a system that's so far behind Sony and Microsoft! They'll never just recycle the GameCube!". It's kinda embarassing to think back about it now, but they couldn't really at that time fathom the concept behind the Wii, all they knew was what Nintendo had done in the past to that point. 



Around the Network
sethnintendo said:
walsufnir said:
sethnintendo said:

I was going to reply to a comment on thread but people have turned it into a dick comparison thread (aka way too much technical talk for me).  The only thing I know is Nintendo can shit out a better game than Apple or any mobile dev could ever dream of.  How is that mark up on space on Apple products?  Tis a shame they don't allow micro USB or anything cost effective.  Tis another Sony micro memory management.  Welcome to the icloud.


Sure but there are still people who like to discuss tech and want to be wowed by tech. Tech was the whole context of the thread, not the quality of games.

Yet it is comparing a mobile device to a home console system.  The Wii U shits all over anything in the Apple app store for ipad and iphone.  Let me just bring up controller options which Wii U has way more diverse offerings.  The only thing the iphone can outperform is perhaps web surfing and a few apps designed for it (that I have no use for). 

This is a gaming site so I am considering gaming on the top of the list.  There is nothing on Andriod or Apple store that I give a shit about.  The only games that I liked perform way better with actual buttons and d pad (Gunman Clive).  Fuck touch controls.  ( https://play.google.com/store/apps/details?id=com.cloudworth.operationbarbarossa )  This game was fun while I had an Android phone but it is TBS.  That is about the only genre that touch controls can compete with real controls.


It is comparing a mobile device *technically* to a home console system. If you don't like tech threads, ignore them.

Yes, it is a gaming site and it has tech threads every once in a while. Because it's tech that enables you to play games. Nobody cares in a tech thread which games you prefer and how do you want to control your games. It's not the right thread for such a talk.

If you want to discuss how tech is irrelevant to you because mobile games are worse and no matter how much more power than WiiU they have, feel free to make a thread about it.



walsufnir said:


It is comparing a mobile device *technically* to a home console system. If you don't like tech threads, ignore them.

Yes, it is a gaming site and it has tech threads every once in a while. Because it's tech that enables you to play games. Nobody cares in a tech thread which games you prefer and how do you want to control your games. It's not the right thread for such a talk.

If you want to discuss how tech is irrelevant to you because mobile games are worse and no matter how much more power than WiiU they have, feel free to make a thread about it.

Sounds like a semi good thread.  I know there are plenty of people out there that perfer gameplay over graphics.  I'm more entertained by some NES games than current games.  I'll leave this thread for the graphic lovers and never venture forth into such realms again.  You are talking to a person that is rocking a R7 260x who only dreams of getting a cheap R9 at some point.  Now if this A9X can outperform a R9 than I might have some pre cum.



sethnintendo said:
walsufnir said:


It is comparing a mobile device *technically* to a home console system. If you don't like tech threads, ignore them.

Yes, it is a gaming site and it has tech threads every once in a while. Because it's tech that enables you to play games. Nobody cares in a tech thread which games you prefer and how do you want to control your games. It's not the right thread for such a talk.

If you want to discuss how tech is irrelevant to you because mobile games are worse and no matter how much more power than WiiU they have, feel free to make a thread about it.

Sounds like a semi good thread.  I know there are plenty of people out there that perfer gameplay over graphics.  I'm more entertained by some NES games than current games.  I'll leave this thread for the graphic lovers and never venture forth into such realms again.  You are talking to a person that is rocking a R7 260x who only dreams of getting a cheap R9 at some point.  Now if this A9X can outperform a R9 than I might have some pre cum.


Don't take it personal, at all. It is just the wrong thread. It's like saying "Ok, but I like apples more than bananas". Fine. But we want to talk tech here and make comparisons and when it comes to pemalite, educate people on tech and show where they are wrong :)



Soundwave said:
spemanig said:


I think you're vastly overexadurating how stupid people are.

They can't tell the difference between a 2016 high end tablet clearly marketed with a 1080p screen and a gaming tablet marketed with a 540p screen? You're literally saying that people are too stupid to read what's on a box. The Wii U gets a ton of shit for being too weak, and that system can still play games at 1080p 60fps, but a tablet with a big fat 540p screen in 2016 will go unnoticed and "99% of people won't tell the difference?" Give me a break. People already complain that the Wii U's gamepad picture qualitly is ugly as shit, and that streams games far more demanding than anything on smartphones or the Vita at the same 540p resolution.

I think the NX will be a break from the Wii-DS, in firmware. In hardware, no. It'll be an iterative upgrade. No tablet. No portable console. And there's definitely internal change happening. But not the sort that'll produce a gaming tablet to replace a dual screen handheld that's part of a unified platform meant to share games seamlessly when the home console is still dual screened.

The quality of the screen makes a huge difference. A Vita screen (even the new models) and the Wii U tablet are very close in resolution from a technical sense, but you put them side by side and it's a laughable difference, clearly Nintendo is using really poor quality screens. 

 

Vita have 5" screen with 540p resolution = 220 ppi, Wii U gamepad have 6.2" screen with 480p resolution = 158 ppi. It's pretty big difference between 220 ppi and 158 ppi. I currently have phone with 220 ppi display and graphic is pretty good.

Today you dont have poor quality displays, almost all phones are now using IPS or better screens, so resolution is only thing that make big difference.



Pemalite said:
Eddie_Raja said:

Dude you still have to shuffle stuff from much slower ram into the ESRAM and hope it can give it a nice speed boost.  The bandwidth on the 8GB acts as a massive bottleneck.


No. It doesn't.
You have this thing called "Prediction" where you predict the data you are going to require ahead of time, it's a technique which has been used to varying degree's for decades, extremely effective on fixed-hardware devices such as consoles for obvious reasons.
Converesly, both devices will be streaming a significant amount of data not from Ram, but from mechanical and optical disc storage which is stupidly slow, we saw that put to great use last generation.

The real limitation to the Xbox One is not Bandwidth, it's actually the reduced GPU resources used to draw all the pretty things on your screen.
Look at other GPU designs in the PC space as an example, AMD Fury has an abundance of bandwidth, more than any other graphics card to ever exist, more than several Geforce cards combined... Yet has minimal benefit from it. Why? Because there is not enough hardware to make use of such a wide and fast highway.

Haha that extra bandwidth IS going to use in 4K and will make a massive difference in a year or two when it is actually utilized.  Just look at the 7970 vs the 680 for an example.  At first everyone acted like the extra bandwidth in the 7970 was wasted, but once games actually started needing to feed that much information it got pathetic - so pathetic that a 7970 pretty much matches a 780 now.

Not to mention that the ESRAM isn't even much faster than the GDDR5 the PS4 is using.  Usually this special RAM is like 2-4x faster (Or more), but its not evn 50% faster.  In fact it is slower than the 10MB of ESRAM in the Xbox 360.



Prediction for console Lifetime sales:

Wii:100-120 million, PS3:80-110 million, 360:70-100 million

[Prediction Made 11/5/2009]

3DS: 65m, PSV: 22m, Wii U: 18-22m, PS4: 80-120m, X1: 35-55m

I gauruntee the PS5 comes out after only 5-6 years after the launch of the PS4.

[Prediction Made 6/18/2014]