I said it was essentially a 4830 because it had two disabled SIMDs. I never said it was a 4830 though that's pretty much the same thing.

I wasn't discrediting your info because it came from you or anything, just tossing stuff against the wall so to speak. It's just a lot of conjecture at this point so you notice a lot of "IF this is true" and "IF that is true".

IF the Wii U is as low power as arkam said, THEN it's hard to imagine any 640 SP part in there. That's all. So one of you is probably wrong...

Interesting info on Killer Freaks then.

But that's the thing. Earlier in this thread by your own admittance you have a tough time accepting positive news on Wii U. Wsippel makes a "positive" post and it's obvious he knows someone and you say you're skeptical, but then a poster comes out of nowhere with no validation saying it weaker than PS360 and you are ready to give credence to it without question. Just like Alstrong made a point about it, another poster said it could because their game depends heavily on Xenon's VMX128. Think about it. At worst we've heard since around E3 that Wii U is "50% more power" or "2x as powerful". Now one person comes out of nowhere and says it weaker and that's all of a sudden correct or even valid? You like to latch on to lherre's comments when they go against Nintendo...

but arkam's post also contradicts lherre when it comes to the memory in the dev kit. Like I said in that thread. Either he's not being honest or he doesn't have the latest updates.

As for Killer Freaks, here is an example of what I was talking about. I'm sure the button to reload looks familiar.

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v3...ssin/KF360.jpg


I think they were focused on getting the game running on Wii U hardware and implementing the controls in time for E3 over anything else.

Yeah, I'm biased toward expecting Wii U to be a "disappointment". Not trying to hide that.

Although, I expect Wii U to be 30% more powerful than PS360, or even with PS360. So if that turns up, that's not disappointing to me, but it certainly would be to you. I would be disappointed only if it's only even with PS360. If it's 30% better, I would almost be surprised at this point. I've actually become more pessimistic.

Wsippel was just a random poster, and IIRC his info was all shown false later (I dont even remember what he said). Arkam at least SEEMED to be a developer (he posted about Nintendos cert practices and such as that, as you know).

For lherre's RAM info, it was basically 1-1.5GB imo, so Arkam's 1GB fits fine.

I'm not saying arkam's info is gospel nor yours. But yes, I'm biased to those pointing to a low spec Wii U, just as you're biased to the high side. Sorry but the pure fervor of that GAF thread has created a lot of false info amongst itself imo, with people trading a lot of wanton speculation now as fact because enough other people in the thread said it based on shadowy whispers.

As for the killer freaks pic, that doesnt look exactly like an X360 X button. It could be, but it looks a little off, and do we presume Wii U might also have a blue X button?

Not saying it is or isnt X360 version, just thats not ironclad evidence.

WiiU > X360.

:razz:

Now see, for some reason I trust this. See BG, it's not all my biases, I evaluate things rationally.

What you don't know is just how much of a fanboy, Ingenu is. :p

:D

LOL. Yeah because 30+% falls in line with that.


But going back to why I harped on your bias. I'm pointing that out because it means you can't form a proper, acceptable view. If you believe I've been focusing on the high end, then you haven't been reading my posts. Since last year I have been saying no more than 1.5GB of memory when others were saying 2GB. When it comes to the GPU we've gotten at least three rumors that pointed to an RV770 in the Wii U dev kit. The one with the GPU having two disabled SIMDs. IGN's where they said they were told it's comparable to a 4850. And the Japanese site where it was said the GPU was beyond 1TFLOP, but not a 4890. The 4870 is the only other R700 that exceeds 1TFLOP at stock. So if you noticed I've focused more on 640 ALUs, and as you can see that's far from high end. At the same time nothing has pointed to it being an RV730.

As for lherre this is what he told us about the memory in the dev kit.

http://www.neogaf.com/forum/showthre...3#post32744593

So I guess the third thing is that arkam has a kit and just doesn't know what he's talking about.

And as for KF, I know you aren't trying to make that argument are you? There's only one controller with a blue X. If you're even trying to attach that with the Wii U controller then you really invalidate any points you try to make on Wii U as that's basic info people like us who discuss consoles should know.

Pre-release 360 dev kits used R420/R480 and then later had R580. WiiU surely is not going to have an RV770 inside or anything else from the PC world.

Since it will undoubtedly have eDRAM, equipping the devkits with a 4830 with 256-bit GDDR5 would make sense in order to get closer emulating that eDRAM. I imagine it also has similar-to-final GPU performance. 4770/5770 can't get near that bandwidth. Cypress and Barts are probably way beyond the final hardware spec so don't make sense.

Why on earth are people so hellbent on thinking it has to be RV7xx-generation?
I'm at leas expecting Evergreen/NI DX11-level chip, something along the lines of Turks and Juniper perhaps

I agree about the 360 dev kits since we had that discussion earlier in this thread. But for some reason some act like the alpha kit will be a 1:1 representation of the final. That line of thinking makes no sense.

I also agree with your assessment as I've said something similar (regarding the GPU choice for the dev kit).

I know I don't expect the final to be in that generation. I think the only thing the final GPU will have in common with an RV770 is the ALU count.

Rangers and BabyBump jumps on any negative news that fuels their Wii U is a wii-like upgrade agenda.

Having said that, I don't think BG's expectations for Wii U are high at all, especially considering the specs people are expecting from next gen consoles. It seems pretty reasonable for a 2012 console that won't break the bank.

Considering what Nintendo's strategy is with Wii U and what little info we've got I am expecting a modest upgrade over PS360.

Hey everyone, first post here.

I've been reading through the thread and (forgive me if this has already been discussed and I missed it) personally I think Nintendo would have to seriously go out of their way to make a system that is barely more powerful, or even weaker, than the 360.

Granted, my understanding of GPU tech is vastly outdated because I haven't really kept up with it since the days of fixed pixel pipelines and DX7 chips, but based on what I have read here and at GAF, it would seem far more costly to intentionally gimp a modern chipset. Maybe I'm wrong, and I'd really like to get caught up on the new technologies, but until then I'm going to stick with the belief that the Wii U is a noticeable step up from the current gen platforms.

Because a french site that was uncannily accurate on Nintendo rumors called 01.net posted that the Wii U GPU was derived from AMD R700 series. To this day that's why I use it for speculation. BG Assassin also seems to focus on GPU's from that line, not only me.

That site seems to have lost their source, so they havent been coming up with new info, but what they used to have was pretty ironclad, unlike say the garbage IGN posts.

As far as I know, the few info we have since then that seems from legit devs also point at R700 series.

Not to say the WII U GPU couldn't change, but I'd bet it wont.

Yeah, you look reasonable but only in the context of the GAF hyperbole thread :razz:

The rumors are so thinly sourced. IGN has absolutely no idea what they're talking about. In the same article that mentioned 4850 they claimed Wii U would simply run PS360 like Call of Duty games with a little more AA and a little sharper textures (because hey, that's what a 4850 on PC does!). They're complete morons. If any console really did have a 4850 it would be a major leap over PS360 but IGN isn't tech savvy enough to know that.

I've heard of the Japanese 1tflop thing, unless we can get somebody fluent in Japanese to actually confirm what the article says, anything translated from Japanese is pretty thin. It's always hard to tell whether theyre speculating or what the context is. Besides that it's one old, trivial tidbit.

The two disabled SIMD's thing only comes from you that I know of, and I have no idea where you got it.

I evaluate each evidence on a case by case basis. And you all jump on me for "blindly believing arkam", well, if another person that seems to be a dev, comes along and posts stuff, I'll tend to believe that too. lherre for example, I think is very legit, whether he posts that Wii U has a great GPU or a poor one, that will count a lot for me.

I would venture a guess that by the time Nintendo and AMD are done with the GPU, it will share very little in common with a stock R700 chip other than an approximate range of SPs.

My experience with Magazine rumors FWIW is that they usually draw/publish very odd conclusions from the facts.
Often when they do publish accurate rumors, I can guess the piece of information it's based on, but the actual published info is extremely misleading.
I know nothing about WiiU, but a magazine/website stating R700 series could just be because there was one in an early dev kit, or a box Nintendo used for demos.

I expect at least 2-3x jump.

If somehow we end up with 30-50% more performance I'd be disappointed.

More like I don't look reasonable to someone with unreasonable views. :wink:

You haven't made much of an argument against those things. IGN definitely shouldn't have built that PC. But that doesn't discredit the info they got.

There was really no way to misinterpret that section in the Japanese article as it was its own paragraph. Plus the info supposedly came from a Marc Diana with AMD.

And you don't have to believe me (nor would I tell you where I got it to try and convince you), but as you can see the info I have is inline with the others.

And we "jump on you" because you essentially admitted that you only accept the things that line up with your view. I showed you that lherre said there was at least 2GB of memory in the dev kit and you didn't even respond to it. So since that's well beyond what arkam said and puts it in a "positive" light are you not going to acknowledge it now?

Umm, yeah I did. He said 2GB would be double what is in the console. So 2GB in the dev kit, means the lower bound would be 1GB in the retail.

1GB is exactly what arkam said.

I have to agree. Wii was a shocker in being underpowered but that's because Nintendo chose old tech. Anyone using new tech would have to have a smaller transistor budget than PS360 to stand a chance of being less powerful. That'd be of the order of 500 million transistors. That and/or much lower clocks. TBH it would be hard to assemble off-the-shelf components that aren't competitive with PS360 unless going for a very low cost and power consumption.

No, you just focused on the GPU part of my post. And Arkam didn't say that at all. You're just reading what you want to read.

Lherre said if had at least 2GB and had indicated in another post Nintendo were targeting the max which would put it at 3GB (1.5GB for the retail kit).

Normally I try to give people the benefit of the doubt, but I have a hard time believing what Arkham said. It just doesn't jive with the other comments we've heard from people. Why would developers like Crytek be happy with the specs if it were less powerful than an X360? I remember a comment by Peter Moore that it was a very powerful machine (I'll have to find the quote). Why would he say that if it what Arkham says is true? His statements just don't sit well.

Part of me thinks exactly the same..
AMD has stopped developing GPUs slower than Juniper since early 2011, as that class of performance belongs to APUs now - the OEM-only HD7300/7400/7500/7600 are all rebadges from Northern Islands and Evergreen.
The thought of Nintendo going out of their way to pay AMD to build a custom GPU for a late 2012 console that is slower than AMD's slowest discrete off-the-shelf part in early 2011 is a bit ridiculous, to say the least.


But then I remember: Nintendo actually launched, in Q1 2011, a console with a dual ARM11 @ 268MHz, no wireless N, no pixel shaders, an infrared port (this last one is so stupid it's funny) and in the end they still managed to get a piss-poor battery life out of it.

Sometimes, it's like the company enjoys using low-tech just for the lulz.

Their handheld philosophy is different from their console philosophy. They have always used older tech in their handhelds, but their consoles have usually been quite powerful for their time, with the Wii being the only outlier.

I don't think I'd call the 3DS LCD retro though. More like they spent most of the budget on that aspect alone. The same seemed to happen with Wii and the complex remote, plus the backwards compatibility boat anchor.

Nintendo also goes for a lower price point while maintaining profitability on the hardware.

It looks like they are going to the next level with remote/pad complexity with WiiU while also trying to steal their competitors' libraries. Cross platform backwards compatibility in addition to more control scheme innovation.

I try to as well, but if he does have a kit then either they aren't getting their firmware updates, he doesn't know what he's talking about, or the issues they have are programmer related. Or some combination of those. But yeah his viewpoint doesn't line up with anything we've heard including the "50% more powerful" statement around E3.

Like you said, it was until the Wii. And it's also true that it's been over a decade since they've release any hardware that could be considered competitive with contemporary tech. I guess if you insist on saying handheld and home consoles are separate then one data point does not constitute a trend, but there's no real evidence that the Wii strategy is not the new standard operating procedure either.

I'd say the fact that Nintendo's Wii U strategy is to attract some core gamers and put themselves in line for next gen ports indicates otherwise.

I doubt they think to be successful next gen they just need to repeat their Wii strategy.

We saw Sony and MS dupe the Wii strategy. It's the way things usually go for Nintendo. They need to innovate and have a new gimmick with mainstream appeal or they probably can't compete with the giants and their infinite budgets. See Gamecube's mediocre story.

Hopefully whatever they're doing with WiiU and those giant Wiimotes works out better than 3DS's 3D gimmick.

Uh apart from the GameCube that flopped if you compare it to the ps2 saleswise Nintendo always had consoles that sold well and in the handheld market nintendo has always been untouched. Yes, even with the 3ds as its selling faster than the DS did. They only launched one console that was really different from the rest so they defenitly don't need to come up with gimmicks. Hell, most of the stuff nintendo came up with is now considerd to be normal so can we PLEASE stop the nintendo = gimmick bs? Because it's simply not true.

Btw who are those giants with infinite budgets? It's certainly not Sony and MS might be able to trow in billions but I doubt they are willing to keep trowing money at it without a chance of earning it back.

Anyway it's not like nintendo is a small company struggling to stay alive. They got plenty of cash and I don't see what MS or Sony can do what nintendo can't. Given at the facts, apart from Live Nintendo is the one that took console gaming forward for the past 20 years or so.

He also said 360 and WiiU were similar in power difference to PSP and 3DS respectively. Then he says WiiU is weaker than 360, quite clearly doesn't know what he's talking about. Now he's gone missing for days since a mod asked him to send him some proof of his credentials.

Logic that Wii is just blip and does not indicate what the company is now very flawed and wishful thinking by enthusiasts

Firstly it was the first console fully under Iwata so any strategies prior to that are hardly relevant. Secondly it was the homeconsole that brought the most profits by far.

Wii U is clearly just another extension of the Wii strategy. Affordable console with healthy profit margin. Even if it is more up to date than Wii graphics will not be the biggest selling point at all..

Would you mind if I borrowed your crystal ball? I could use the numbers for this week's Powerball. $350 million would buy a lot of games.

Until proven otherwise, the Wii is indeed a blip. Assuming it's not at this point before we have real specs is wishful thinking on your part. Look, I'm not saying I expect dual 7990's or some crap like that, but thinking it's less powerful than the 360 is just as stupid.

This isn't a Wii-like situation for them this time. They have made it clear they want third parties on board this gen. If they want that, they have to go with a modern architecture. If they are going with a modern architecture, it stands to reason that it has to be more powerful than the current consoles. As I said earlier, to make a modern GPU with such little power would be as expensive, if not more, than making a moderately powered one. Plus, it would put them in nearly the same situation as the current gen with third parties. You may want them to be that stupid, but they aren't.

As Teasy noted, he hasn't returned since he was asked to prove he really is a developer. Maybe he really is who he says he is, but he's the only one who has said it's less powerful than the current systems. The most negative thing said by a developer was when Brian Martel from Gearbox called it a "stop-gap in between this generation and the next generation", implying that it's more powerful than the current systems. So, like you said, his claims don't add up.

Except that's not the case. Iwata has already laid out their strategy with Wii U. He has said numerous times that they want to get third party support and have a capable online.

He has said they are considering taking a loss with Wii U so I don't know how that signals them wanting a healthy profit margin.

The only thing you are right about is that Wii U is an extension of the Wii and that graphics will not be the biggest selling point.

It's pretty obvious that just trying to repeat the Wii would in no way guarantee them even close to as much success so there's no wishful thinking there, just common sense.

Problem with the online is what he wants and what they have said they are going to do to achieve it seem to be at odds.

Well, in fairness to arkam, he seemed pretty skittish about the whole thing, as I would be.

He probably doesnt want to prove he's a dev. He probably just wants to disappear into the woodwork. Proving he's a dev could only get deeper into NDA troubles.

Again not saying he is, just that that issue is easily understandable, and honestly is the behavior you might expect of a real dev who may have shot his mouth off a little too much initially.

Taking account the info we got on the Nintendo Network at the Investor's Conference, I'm very optimistic.

If they cripple online again, they better hope the controller does wonders, cause that would likely kill hardcore support.

That's a fair point. But it still does not explain how his claims do not match up with what other devs have said.

Crippled is entirely subjective. I just don't think allowing publishers to do what they want (that's what I read into their flexible online experience comments) or counting on them to offer a cohesive online experience is going to work. I'd love for them to prove me wrong, but they are essentially starting from scratch and the publishers aren't going to be interested in offering a cohesive experience without significant regulation.

(nevermind) :)

From what I gathered that's not completely the case. Here is an old post I made consolidating the news bits they said.

http://www.neogaf.com/forum/showpost...postcount=2659

Then at the recent investor's meeting Iwata officially confirmed individual user accounts for Wii U that are not tied to the hardware.

How does that even work?

I didn't even notice he said that. Shows the asininity level of the post.

Rangers didn't say anything contradictory in that quote. It's possible to recall a post being said to be false, but not recall the details of the post.

You don't try to discredit someone and then say you can't prove it.

if proof were required for discussion most forums would be pretty empty.

Well I think boards like B3D are good for posters providing proof. :razz:

I guess. Still, if he remembered the details (or looked them up), he'd notice that he most certainly didn't remember correctly about them being proven false. So the whole post was completely baseless.

That doesn't mean he doesn't know what he's talking about. It's possible Wii U will be weaker than 360.

Would be horrendously disappointing if true though.

I just thought I remembered you saying some pretty far out stuff...

Glancing quick at your post history, one that jumps out is you said Wii U uses an SOC according to your source. I'm going to bet bgassasin isn't going to like that one...

http://forum.beyond3d.com/showpost.p...4&postcount=64

Some others that seem questionable (that I suspect will end up proven false):

http://forum.beyond3d.com/showpost.p...&postcount=413

http://forum.beyond3d.com/showpost.p...&postcount=453

The more I like at it the more I think you must be BG's super secret source LOL. Except for the SOC part everything seems to be in line with BG's stuff.

So his opinions are what you were referring to (though the taping out post seems like common sense)? Please stop. You're only making yourself look bad.

I think the fact that his own comparison contradicts his conclusion gives a very good indication that he doesn't know what he's talking about. He also contradicts other very specific posts from Lherre about the dev kit. I honestly don't see a single reason why anyone should give his posts the time of day.

Also I really don't think it is possible, not even slightly :)

If the Wii U was simply a continuation of the Gamecube architecture like the Wii was, than I might agree with you. But we know for certain that it's not. And has been said many, many times in just the last few pages, there's no way a modern architecture would yield a console less powerful than the 360. But, by all means, continue to live in a dream world. It's not an opinion I understand, but hey... free will, right?

I've seen worse, in this very same thread.

Nonetheless, it would be really hard for Nintendo to come up with something slower than a 65W Llano, which is by itself quite a bit faster than a X360 (especially if it's coupled with 1866MHz DDR3).

I really hope that was sarcasm... :???:

The stuff you refer to is all speculation. I never claimed it to be inside information or anything - and in fact knew nothing about the hardware back in April 2011.

I've said this before but I'm surprised that WiiU doesn't just use Llano or Trinity. It's quite a tight package for a console really. Lots of integration, ready to go, fairly low power, more powerful and featureful than PS360, budget oriented ... Backward compatibility is the issue I suppose.

Efficiency, too. And volume I guess. Nintendo needs at least a million chipsets per month.

Well I was dealing with this post

I'm not sure what info BG is referring to you as your "positive posts" then if by your own claim it's all just your own "speculation" now. In that case BG is the one who should reassess.

Also here's where you said it was an SOC

http://forum.beyond3d.com/showpost.p...9&postcount=72

You're still saying that, correct?

Edit: I guess the point is how is it "obvious you know someone" (BG's words) if then all your actual specific posts on the hardware are played off as speculation? If not, which of your hardware/info specific posts are not speculation, for reference?

Maybe you should stop posting in this thread if you are just going to make a bunch of claims without basis or not pay attention to what is even going on in the thread.

http://forum.beyond3d.com/showpost.p...&postcount=406

The fact that you also responded makes your recent posts even worse than they already were.

bg, why dont you get off your high horse. This isn't GAF where fanboys rule and can shout down anybody they dont agree with in certain threads. Try addressing the issues.

OK, so that was the post you were referring too, was that so hard? I already figured as much.

You're the one consistently spreading claims and innuendo without any provable basis in fact. We're all just supposed to believe that you have all these shadowy contacts. I certainly hope Wii U GPU is at least 640 SP's for your sake, otherwise you're going to look like a fool, and I suspect post a whole lot less. I'm quite confident in my current position on Wii U's power, somehow I think you dont have that same confidence, and I think you know why.

It still doesn't change your unsubstantiated claims that wsippel "clearly knows someone" (based on no evidence you can point too, since I've already combed his posts for specific hardware tidbits and found little, other than it's an SOC, which I doubt), therefore I should believe him and not Arkam, whatever that even means. I might as well say, you believe wsippel who is a random poster rather than arkam who is clearly a dev. It would have about as much meaning and evidence. Much has been made of arkam's supposed refusal to "prove" he's a dev, therefore he is clearly an abject troll (though no real dev would do that, save lherre who has big balls :razz:), where's wsippel's proof of anything? Can I ask him to pm me some credentials and photos and see where that gets me? I'm not calling wsippel a liar either, I'm just questioning. Where's your proof of anything? You even claim to have see a dev kit, apparently, in person? The hilarious thing was when one of your biggest supporters on GAF, stevieP, saw a picture of a huge PC with about 75 fans from some lan party and instantly believed it was a Wii U dev kit (teh power!!!11 :rolleyes:). That about sums up most of the tech knowledge in the Wii U thread.

I take every tidbit of info into account, arkam and wsippel and all the news accounts and dev statements alike, to try to get a feel. I'm not taking arkam as gospel as all, just one more fading piece of evidence amongst dozens. I've probably written already more about him on B3D due to your charges then I ever thought about him in the first place.

From now on we should take this to the Wii U general thread since it's not discussing the Wii U GPU. Please respond in there if at all.

The funny bottom line in all this is I would love to see Wii U be a nice crunchy domination of PS360, because I'm sick to death of this gen's graphics and it would kick Sony/MS in the butt and force them to move along.

But Nintendo didn't even put a decent, not even a half modern, decent, GPU in the Wii back then. I wrote many posts years ago on B3D wondering why Nintendo didn't just stick a nice X1600XT in the Wii instead of what they did. It's stuff like that that really makes me not trust them. And for that matter the 3DS as well, from what I can digest of it's engineering.

Not meaning to interfere in your discussion, but the above definitely grabbed my attention. Care to elaborate what your current position is, along with what makes you so confident about it? You can PM me if you feel like it.

1-1.5x 360? Something like that.

I have to admit it seems like you have to go some to even design a console where that's possible, so maybe I'm wrong. But Nintendo has certainly shocked me in a bad way before.

Except you have no actual evidence to back up that claim, just unsupported pessimism and one random comment from some guy who won't back up his claims to be a dev. And because his comment lines up with your belief, you take it as gospel truth. If you want to believe that, fine. But at least admit your bias.

Err no, I'm not basing it all on arkam's comments, but rather on everything so far (including all the vague public dev comments to date, E3 demos, the hearsay on message boards, some good some bad, all of it, and yes, my highly pessimistic view of Nintendo, go head and tar and feather me).

And I already admitted my bias in previous posts. Everybody here has a bias, we should be more open about admitting it.

Nobody is on a high horse and GAF has nothing to do with anything. I've done no "shouting" whatsoever. What I have done is addressed the asinine posts that you have made. Anyone can see that's what some (if not most) of them have been when it comes to Nintendo. Heck, if it wasn't for you I wouldn't have asked lherre questions and got him to talk like he has over there. And we probably wouldn't know some of the things we know now thanks to you mentioning him. I don't know you to have a problem with you. But I have had problems with things you've been saying because you don't give anything to truly back them up other than admitting your own bias.

I've been able to talk about all the consoles without belittling any of them for any reason, yet you clearly put down Nintendo. For example I posted what I thought the next consoles would look like in the prediction thread and IGN's rumor about Xbox 3's GPU was well below my guess. And as of now I still think there is a hole or two in that info, but there's nothing to contrast it to other than the "SoC 7000-series" rumors that doesn't give us enough info to at least say what level that 7000-series GPU is. I think it should be obvious that if anyone is the "fanboy" it's you. Once we start getting more info on PS4 and Xbox3, I'm going to have more posts about them. But for now Wii U has the "most" tangible info and I'm going to focus on that for now. And at the same time I'm going to focus on accuracy over making baseless assumptions.

Also it shouldn't have been hard at all as you were the one that called it positive news in the first place. What else would I have been referring to? You decided to go on looking at other posts for whatever reason making it way harder than it should have been.

Isn't that the pot calling the kettle black? Just because you don't accept the proof I've given, doesn't make it invalid. I've given three different examples of where it was indicated to be an RV770 in the dev kit. What have you given to support it being an RV730? I even gave an example of how the dev kit GPU could be on par with an RV730 since it was underclocked. What have you given? Looking at an early demo on incomplete hardware? I have plenty of confidence in my position. I have no clue how you have confidence in yours. And whether I'm right or wrong about Wii U, once the info is out I'm going to be posting less about it either way. I'm only here for the speculation on the three consoles. Once all three consoles have been officially revealed I'm going to be pretty much gone from the B3D console boards and probably all boards including GAF. The only reason I even started back posting on GAF was due to the Cafe leak and I got that info from a different site.

For someone who does a lot of GAF thread reading you sure have selective memory. The main reason why I believe wsippel knows someone is because on January 16th I made this post.

http://www.neogaf.com/forum/showpost...ostcount=19651

A few days later someone posted a link to an article about the final kits coming out.

http://www.neogaf.com/forum/showpost...&postcount=867

And then of course wsippel bumped this thread with the info he heard.


You also apparently like to twist things to support your view. I didn't say you should believe him over arkam. What I have done is questioned how you readily are willing to accept a poster who comes out of the blue with claims that have not lined up with anything we've heard to date, but by your own admittance have a tough time accepting wsippel's post because it was "positive news" in your own words. And we still don't even know if arkam is "clearly" a dev. I gave him the benefit of the doubt, but his info compared to lherre's and others began to take that away.

As for stevieP I'd have to see this post you are talking about as I don't recall him saying that.

As for me I never said I saw the dev kit in person. If you read the post again since I linked to it in the prediction thread you would know that. But I'm not concerned about trying to get you believe people have told things to me. I post what I'm allowed to and leave it up to others to accept it or not.

We can more over there after this post. :razz:

Don't even lie like that. You brought arkam up before I called you out on bringing him up. Go back and look at your own post. At the same time you don't take every bit of info into account evenly. We've already established you don't. That's my main issue on the subject.

And Wii and 3DS are irrelevant. Nintendo handhelds have been "underpowered" since the Gameboy started getting respectable competition. And Wii on it's own has not established a provable trend.

Where is the Wii U general thread? Is is the "Fact: Nintendo to release HD console + controllers with built-in screen late 2012" thread?

Yes.

Question for anyone that knows: is anyone fabbing large, relatively fast processors with large amounts of edram on them other than IBM yet?

Also: do we know for definite that the GPU has direct access to the edram?

@Shifty Geezer

Thanks

It is an SoC, but then again, so was Hollywood. Hollywood consisted of the GPU, an ARM core responsible for IO and security, and an audio DSP. The main CPU wasn't part of the SoC (and the ARM core couldn't access the GPU, but that's a different story).

In that case every chip is an SOC, but that's not what's meant by the term. Are you saying the CPU and GPU are on one die?

As large as IBM's? Unlikely - the 1Mb edram macro making that possible is IBM's tech they've been perfecting for a few (power) generations now - power4 already relied on massive (off-die) edram L3. I suppose IBM are the de-facto market leader ATM.

We don't, but I'd expect GPU's access to be at least as 'direct' as Xenos'. For reference, Yamato (Xenos' little cousin in the handheld space) has way more direct access to its sram/edram tile buffer.