[willardjuice]

Originally Posted by french toast

I havnt got a clue to be honest, but I was making reference to bg assassin and another member who mentioned something like that.

Then what's the point of guessing? If you don't have a clue, maybe you should do more reading instead of blindly posting. Random guesses don't further the debate (in fact they detract from it because now we have to spend 5+ posts discussing why x random guess is total nonsense).

[Graham]

Originally Posted by Earendil

Yes, I am aware of that. My point was that if it is hardwired into the GPU, it will have significant performance gains. So, if that is the case it may be easier to implement these effects and still have enough juice left over for ones that are not hardwired.

Not really.

Now day's GPU hardware is typically limited by bandwidth and how quickly it can shuffle data around - not so much the actual grunt work of doing calculations. So having fixed hardware designed to do calculations for a specific effect really doesn't make much sense - it'll just eat up silicon budget.

The best places for fixed function hardware are still in areas where a significant saving on data transfers can be made. Eg; texture fetch.

I guess...

[bgassassin]

Originally Posted by french toast

I havnt got a clue to be honest, but I was making reference to bg assassin and another member who mentioned something like that.

I also noted that the "dedicated" fixed functions are just one of many possibilities. ERP proposed something that's possible. If we are looking at a GPGPU, then those features may tie in with how the GPU handles computing tasks. Which in part may deal with how Nintendo will handle lighting in their games.

[Sonic]

Originally Posted by french toast

It is you who needs to do the reading mate, I never said I was guessing I said quite clearly I was referencing someone else's (ie bg assassin &someone else with sketchy English who claims to either have one or knows someone who does..quite a few pages back)

So instead of just coming on to post a negative rant about something you have obviously not even bothered to read, why not contribute some special insights of yourself?..no wait you can't can you because you would have to ...er guess?

If one member comes on this thread who claims to have inside knowledge and says the gpu will be on par on a lot of areas but have some special functions that would take it above xenos/rsx, then unless everyone has their own dev kits laying around then I'm inclined to take that onboard.

Why shouldn't I reference that?

This other person has been asked questions regarding the hardware and he/she hasn't answered. Whether this person actually has the knowledge they are claiming they have or he/she is full of poopy poop remains to be seen. I'm personally curious to see what this fixed function(ality) will bring if it's actually present in the GPU.

[Sonic]

Originally Posted by Kaotik

And you can't go judge the performance solely based on those builds 'till the end

And you keep saying this, but the thing is we have seen videos and game actually being played on some type of hardware that is supposed to be Wii U. We haven't seen anything in real time that makes us go "wow this thing really can show up PS360". Instead all we have are a bunch of forum goers who are disappointed that that hasn't happened, and a bunch of others who are saying "wait til the games get released, no wait until 5 years after the Wii U is out to see its true capabilities". We're judging the game's graphics in the current state of the game's development whether you like it or not. I will reiterate that I find it sad that I'm not seeing games that make me go "wow this is a step ahead of PS360."

If it turns out that Nintendo didn't gimp their hardware and it truly does have some nice power to it then I'll be the opposite of disappointed. But let's make this clear, the tablet controller will only hold the Wii U over for so long. Sony and MS aren't stupid enough to not capitalize on tablet controllers if the thing takes off, and judging from those companies abilities while they may not have innovated it, they sure as hell can implement it in probably a better way than Nintendo can, all the while selling it as a standalone add-on and make a profit from it. So I hope Nintendo's system has some decent power to back it up, because I just don't see them selling by the truckloads like the Wii did. But hey, I can be wrong, and I am a lot of times.

[Entropy]

Originally Posted by Shifty Geezer

You don't need fixed-function hardware for that.

The aim doesn't have to be to add new functionality. Rather, the purpose could be to perform common code faster, and/or at lower power draw. Those with experience writing current graphics code might be able to say what functionality has gained sufficient traction to warrant hardwiring.

That said, I don't believe AMD has added such functional blocks to their Nintendo product.
I just wanted to point out that you could argue in favour of such, particularly for consoles. Arguably their 3DS GPU choice traded flexibility for performance/cost/power.

[Shifty Geezer]

Originally Posted by Entropy

The aim doesn't have to be to add new functionality. Rather, the purpose could be to perform common code faster, and/or at lower power draw. Those with experience writing current graphics code might be able to say what functionality has gained sufficient traction to warrant hardwiring.

french toast's post was specifically talking about enabling features not possible on Xenos. I guess one could argue that a possible effect that takes too much time could benefit from fixed-function, high speed silicon. The significant problem with fixed-function hardware is you tie yourself into an art-style. Programmable hardware that has ended up driving forward and deferred renderers, various lighting implementations, added SSAO and postFXAA, would have been lost to us if the hardware was locked in to fixed MSAA forward rendering or somesuch. Maybe a fast blur device would be very useful, as gaussian blurs have a lot of use, but I don't know if hardware can be designed to do that faster than a GPU. Per pixel blur radius is not a trivial probelm to solve AFAIK. And if Wuu has got hardwre blur, does it mean every game is giong to look miniature?!

[darkblu]

Originally Posted by ERP

Random thought on the WiiU GPU, and the earlier mention of Nintendo specific functionality.
It occurred to me that what I would want to do is render the tablet screen at a different frame rate than the main display, possibly with one or the other taking priority.
It's actually somewhat difficult to do efficiently purely in software, the OS could handle it, much like a desktop OS, but there is a large overhead for doing that, since every time you change context you have to flush the pipleline.
It occurred to me that given the fixed requirement, one TV + upto 2 tablets, you could just implement multiple contexts into hardware.

That's always an option, but a think a good sync/fence implementation* and some batching discipline can largely address that (given the user has control of how many virtual contexts the gpu will see). I mean, yes, a context needs to be flushed before you can re-use it, but you don't have to sit there blocked waiting for the flush to occur.

* I'm saying a good sync/fence implementation as believe it or not, there are some "not so good" implementations out there.

[XpiderMX]

Originally Posted by bgassassin

I also noted that the "dedicated" fixed functions are just one of many possibilities. ERP proposed something that's possible. If we are looking at a GPGPU, then those features may tie in with how the GPU handles computing tasks. Which in part may deal with how Nintendo will handle lighting in their games.

Fixed functions? like 3DS?

[itsmydamnation]

dedicated Voxel setup and hardware support for a voxel tree

[XpiderMX]

Originally Posted by itsmydamnation

dedicated Voxel setup and hardware support for a voxel tree

But is it not a waste of transistors? what if only UE4 use voxel tree for lighting?

[itsmydamnation]

Originally Posted by XpiderMX

But is it not a waste of transistors? what if only UE4 use voxel tree for lighting?

carmack seems to be pretty hard for voxels as well.

[Shifty Geezer]

If you put in fixed hardware for a feature, it'll get used. But it does mean tying dowen the look and feel of your games. eg. Imagine if PS1 had a hardwired lens-flare chip, because lens-flare was the fashion. Every game would have thrown in lens-flare just to make use of the hardware despite the artistic conflicts that would have in many titles.

[Clockwork]

Originally Posted by Shifty Geezer

If you put in fixed hardware for a feature, it'll get used. But it does mean tying dowen the look and feel of your games. eg. Imagine if PS1 had a hardwired lens-flare chip, because lens-flare was the fashion. Every game would have thrown in lens-flare just to make use of the hardware despite the artistic conflicts that would have in many titles.

Oh lord, I'm glad nobody suggested this/implemented this back then.

[Grall]

I liked the lens flares in the original Turok for N64. I thought they rocked...

[bgassassin]

Originally Posted by XpiderMX

Fixed functions? like 3DS?

Only hypothetically. What I do know is there are "Nintendo-patented" features. What they could be exactly is open to interpretation right now. Fixed functions was only one of many possibilities.

[XpiderMX]

Originally Posted by bgassassin

Only hypothetically. What I do know is there are "Nintendo-patented" features. What they could be exactly is open to interpretation right now. Fixed functions was only one of many possibilities.

What if those functions or features are for data transfer between console and controller?

Sorry if it sound dumb

[Sonic]

Originally Posted by XpiderMX

What if those functions or features are for data transfer between console and controller?

Sorry if it sound dumb

That's not dumb at all and if you searched the USPTO you would be able to see those patents so that's probably not the patents bgassassin is referring to.

It will be interesting to see if a former console manufacturer makes a fuss about similar patents and goes after Nintendo for infringement.

[Butta]

Can someone please explain to me the huge difference between DirectX 10 vs 11. Seems to me that the biggest risk is not entirely power related but more feature related with regards to the tesselator... but without a tesselator you can make the same graphic with less detail... no? I mean seems like on the overall the GPU will be in the neighborhood of 700 Gflops with 2GB of RAM and the others will be at 1500-2000 Gflops running at double the resolution by default... seems so much better than last gen. Unless of course it's purely a problem with CPU which could affect gameplay or memory bandwidth which could make the GPU seem worse off than it is.

[french toast]

Yes I head over at the other thread that the gpu is much more powerfull, and 4x the ram also so that is looking really good if true.(pinch of salt) bit there is rumours of a bottle neck..maybe cpu? Bandwidth? It would certainly explain the gpgpu rumours being a problem if nintendo had to ask devs to compensate for the lack of cpu threads or whatever.

I can't imagine bandwidth really being a factor..they would only need about 40-60 gbps.

It's all rumours of course, probably being led up the garden path as usual

[Blazkowicz]

Originally Posted by Grall

I liked the lens flares in the original Turok for N64. I thought they rocked...

you need big muzzle flashes. and lots of chrome!

[Blazkowicz]

Originally Posted by french toast

I can't imagine bandwidth really being a factor..they would only need about 40-60 gbps.

this is still significant bandwith that you won't even get if you're too much after saving money and power.
the geforce gt640 has a state of the art GPU and 28.5GB/s, I'm scratching my head. it gets murdered by a gts 450 or a radeon 7750, I don't know what they were thinking.

perhaps they strategically make it a piece of crap because the gddr5 model would be too successful for their limited production capacity, but making an indesirable product on purpose is weird.

[french toast]

Originally Posted by Blazkowicz

this is still significant bandwith that you won't even get if you're too much after saving money and power.
the geforce gt640 has a state of the art GPU and 28.5GB/s, I'm scratching my head. it gets murdered by a gts 450 or a radeon 7750, I don't know what they were thinking.

perhaps they strategically make it a piece of crap because the gddr5 model would be too successful for their limited production capacity, but making an indesirable product on purpose is weird.

I know nintendo has a nasty habbit for such things so I wouldn't put it past them, I doubt they would be so stupid.

The cpu rumours might make more sense as the cpu has the potential to take up a considerable power budget so would be an area that they would want to cut back on in that tiny little match box.

[Ika]

Originally Posted by Blazkowicz

the geforce gt640 has a state of the art GPU and 28.5GB/s........ I don't know what they were thinking.

It's a business model for a saturated market. They would kill their own sales if they would release stronger product on the "low" segment. It's the same reason why the 660 is delayed, or why you can't find unlocked i3 intel CPUs anymore, because gamers would just buy those and overclock them to oblivion if needed. The consumption must go on or the hardware industry dies, so they are making sure that you will buy the expensive stuff if you want good performance. No "cheap" shortcuts anymore.

[Strange]

Originally Posted by Blazkowicz

you need big muzzle flashes. and lots of chrome!

LOL

does anybody have link to the article?
The really dysfunctional boss with lots of chrome and bullets not coming out of the muzzle post.


Edit: Ah, shootmymonkey. Found it. Google is wonderful.