[liolio]

Originally Posted by bgassassin

Don't worry. You're not the only crazy person around here.

http://www.neogaf.com/forum/showpost...ostcount=12624

I considered the option earlier (based on the difference in the amount of L2) but discard it.
I remember discussing here with 3dilletante which knows a lot more than I do on those matters about the odds about having for example a power7 and power a2 cores in the same chip a bit like the small/big ARM a15 and a7 philosophy.
He told me that actually the powe7 and power a2 may have slight difference in implementation of the ISA that could hinder the implementation. The A15 and A7 were developed hand in hand.

Looking at Nintendo I think it's unlikely, putting together a CPU is complex and costly enough, 2...
The whole thing sound like quiet an expanse.

Honestly I still believe that the best bang for buck would have been a redesigned Cell (like a cut power7 + 3/4 SPUs). Either way using low power cores and a SMP set up they could have gone with more cores (like 6/8).

To me the best system with their high constrains (cost and power) would have been sonething like that:
Cell 2 Power7 + 3/4 SPu, would end barely above 100 sq.mm on IBM 45nm process.
A ~redwood (so 4/5 SIMD) including 16MB of scratch pad 9edram) memory on the same process (around the size of MS vahalla chip?).
the gpu is the north bridge, 1 or 2 gb of ddr3.

We are going to find out soon how much silicon Nintendo invested on WiiU, that's gonna prove interesting.

[Kb-Smoker]

Originally Posted by Butta

Could the e6760 be the WiiU GPU?

http://www.em.avnet.com/en-us/design...rocessors.aspx
http://www.amd.com/us/Documents/E676...duct-Brief.pdf

480 shaders
3DMark™ VantageP score of P5870
DirectX® 11, Shader Model 5.0, OpenGL 4.1
35W
40nm

no way in this world. Goes against every piece of info we have on wiiu. Just the kids in gaf wishful thinking. Same way the gpgpu rumor started and just about everything else. It funny watching happen on gaf.

[Kaotik]

Originally Posted by Kb-Smoker

no way in this world. Goes against every piece of info we have on wiiu. Just the kids in gaf wishful thinking. Same way the gpgpu remote started and just about everything else. It funny watching happen on gaf.

What is this "every piece of info"? The rumor mongering which was going towards soon suggesting it's in fact weaker than original Wii?
(of course it won't be off-the-shelf part, but other than that those shader counts etc could be close to truth easily)

[AlStrong]

Originally Posted by Kb-Smoker

no way in this world. Goes against every piece of info we have on wiiu.

Can you elaborate?

It's not exactly an earth-shattering set of specifications. 8 ROPs and 24 TMUs is pretty tame.

[Kb-Smoker]

Originally Posted by AlStrong

Can you elaborate?

It's not exactly an earth-shattering set of specifications. 8 ROPs and 24 TMUs is pretty tame.

Just the fact that we have the dev specs and none match this gpu family. Matches exactly r700 series core. We had many dev and insiders confirm the leaks.

Bg also even stated the wiiu is still r700 based today.

" Idon't see it as a base. Just what Wii U's GPU would have similarities with. Istill believe it will have R700's base architecture. Beyond that it could resemble the E6760."

Here is the back story behind this rumor.
http://www.neogaf.com/forum/showpost...postcount=6275

What do you think base off the info we know?

[AlStrong]

Originally Posted by Kb-Smoker

What do you think base off the info we know?

I'm just looking at the raw specs* and not the GPU feature capabilities with respect to DX, so pretty much what bg just said. So sure, the WiiU GPU might not be DX11 compliant (so that'd apply to everything past the rv7xx generation), but then why did you even bother listing the specs? It's the rest of the hardware you're looking at, no?

*480/24/8 (ALU/TMU/ROP) is the most likely configuration for the E6750 given the existing 6570/desktop (650MHz) or 6750M/mobile (600MHz) products.

If you just want to stick purely to existing DX10.1 products, there are parts configured as 320/32/8 as well (though you wouldn't be able to tell too much about power draw for WiiU speculation since they're 55nm parts).

-------------

So basically... ballpark speculation that we've had before (and even since the original article here with 400/20/8 - Redwood). *shrug* These aren't really outrageous throughputs we're looking at here.

[Kb-Smoker]

Yes a Redwood PRO underclock would work. I was more speaking about the feature set that went along with the rumors.

From a raw spec or performance that rumor would be the high end of the scale right now. I do agree with the point you made in your post.

Too bad we are going to have to wait until these things to go on sale to find out really anything. I love to get the power consumption numbers.

Originally Posted by Kaotik

What is this "every piece of info"? The rumor mongering which was going towards soon suggesting it's in fact weaker than original Wii?
(of course it won't be off-the-shelf part, but other than that those shader counts etc could be close to truth easily)

Yes if you just took the shader count part of the rumor. From a raw performance this would be the high end of the scale.

I think that is just silly to say its weaker than the wii. From just speaking of the gpu side it is unlikely weaker than the ps360. I dont even think that was up for debate here.

[bgassassin]

Originally Posted by Butta

Could the e6760 be the WiiU GPU?

http://www.em.avnet.com/en-us/design...rocessors.aspx
http://www.amd.com/us/Documents/E676...duct-Brief.pdf

480 shaders
3DMark™ VantageP score of P5870
DirectX® 11, Shader Model 5.0, OpenGL 4.1
35W
40nm

Nah. That started with us on GAF. A poster named Fourth Storm brought it to my attention through a PM and then I posted it a few months ago stating how I could see Wii U's GPU having similarities to it. Every now and then I touched back on it after seeing something related to passed things we discussed there. Apparently a site consolidated the info we (I) have been posting and made their own article or whatever.

Originally Posted by liolio

I considered the option earlier (based on the difference in the amount of L2) but discard it.
I remember discussing here with 3dilletante which knows a lot more than I do on those matters about the odds about having for example a power7 and power a2 cores in the same chip a bit like the small/big ARM a15 and a7 philosophy.
He told me that actually the powe7 and power a2 may have slight difference in implementation of the ISA that could hinder the implementation. The A15 and A7 were developed hand in hand.

Looking at Nintendo I think it's unlikely, putting together a CPU is complex and costly enough, 2...
The whole thing sound like quiet an expanse.

Honestly I still believe that the best bang for buck would have been a redesigned Cell (like a cut power7 + 3/4 SPUs). Either way using low power cores and a SMP set up they could have gone with more cores (like 6/8).

To me the best system with their high constrains (cost and power) would have been sonething like that:
Cell 2 Power7 + 3/4 SPu, would end barely above 100 sq.mm on IBM 45nm process.
A ~redwood (so 4/5 SIMD) including 16MB of scratch pad memory on the same process (around the size of MS vahalla chip?).
the gpu is the north bridge, 1 or 2 gb of ddr3.

We are going to find out soon how much silicon Nintendo invested on WiiU, that's gonna prove interesting.

Your "best bang for the buck" idea is similar to what my thinking was in that the modified POWER7 core would be the "PPE" and the two 476FPs would be the "SPEs". Just OoO.

[Rangers]

The rumor mongering which was going towards soon suggesting it's in fact weaker than original Wii?

Too be fair, there have plenty of points on GAF where the rumor mongering was basically leading to the point it was unquestionably more powerful than what they were speculating for Durango (Eg, Durango= 480 SP 6670, while Wii U=800 SP 4850+)

[Tysan]

Originally Posted by Kb-Smoker

no way in this world. Goes against every piece of info we have on wiiu. Just the kids in gaf wishful thinking. Same way the gpgpu rumor started and just about everything else. It funny watching happen on gaf.

It actually fits very nicely with all that is known since its an VLIW5 chip.

And whatever chip goes into WiiU it has GPGPU support 100% since r700 line was able to do that kind of tasks allready.

Btw, not saying this is what WiiU will use as a GPU but "No way in this world?" or "Goes against every piece of info que have on WiiU" are both incorrect.

[Grall]

Originally Posted by Tysan

And whatever chip goes into WiiU it has GPGPU support 100% since r700 line was able to do that kind of tasks allready.

"Was able to do" is not the same as "actually being good at it". Which wasn't the case for the 4xxx series Radeons. We've been over this already.

[french toast]

Well from the reading between the lines that I have so far, that the gpu is out balancing the cpu... and that improving difficult.

So I have no idea how that is possible...how the hell can you make a cpu in late 2012 that is weak?

An quad OoO power 7 running at 2.5gHz would be more than enough for a decent cheap console...and the expected 45xx gpu wouldn't out balance that would it? 2gb ram with 50gb/s would also hit the sweet spot very nicely.

If they serve something like that which is entirely reasonable then I will take the bait.

[Tysan]

Originally Posted by Grall

"Was able to do" is not the same as "actually being good at it". Which wasn't the case for the 4xxx series Radeons. We've been over this already.

More like "not being as good as GPUs really made to use GPGPU tasks" OpenCL can do some tasks better in r4000 series than CPUs so the point remains. Besides Im not talking about performance just noting that the above comment regarding GPGPU in WiiU more or less as nonsense its wrong.

And to clarify myself further Im not saying GPGPU is a key to WiiU development or anything, just that the chip itself its capable of it, nothing more nothing less.

[steviep]

Originally Posted by french toast

An quad OoO power 7 running at 2.5gHz

If they serve something like that which is entirely reasonable then I will take the bait.

How is a quad core power 7 in any way reasonable?

[Earendil]

Originally Posted by steviep

How is a quad core power 7 in any way reasonable?

It can't be. The power requirements would be far too high...

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=I9Ajm_6Vz8M&t=0m26s

[ninzel]

Are these rumors new?
Courtesy Wiiudaily.
__________________________________________________ ___________________
The Wii U GPU is made by AMD and is based on a modern Radeon HD design. Nintendo has been working with AMD for two console generations now, and this will be the third time AMD/ATI supplies the graphics processor in a Nintendo console. The Wii U CPU will be made and supplied by IBM. According to reports, the Wii U GPU is based on the Radeon HD 5000 series GPU, which was introduced to the PC gaming market in 2009. However, while the based architecture will be the same, the Wii U GPU will be custom made with additional features. For more on the console hardware, check out the complete Wii U system specs.
Wii U GPU specs

The Wii U GPU specs have yet to be announced, but based on developer comments and on the already available design sheets from AMD, we can estimate the following features for the graphics chip:

Based on Radeon HD 5000 “Evergreen” series
Built on 40nm manufacturing technology
Unified shader architecture
GDDR5 memory support (memory is likely to be shared with CPU and system)
Shader count: 400 unified shaders (rumored)
75 GB/S bandwidth
Low power design, 50W TDP
Full 1080p, 60 frames per second support

The Wii U GPU has been in development since 2010 according to sources, and it’s likely that AMD created a highly specialized chip for Nintendo, with many modern features incorporated into the 3 year old Evergreen design.
Wii U GPU power and performance

While the above specs don’t sound much compared to the current generation graphics chips from AMD, where up to 2000 unified shaders are possible, the specs are feasible for a console. Due to pricing, power, and resource issues, the GPU is estimated to have 400 unified shaders with extra features added. This would still make the Wii U GPU many times faster than what’s found in the Xbox 360, which only has 48 shader units. It has been rumored that the Wii U GPU includes a small amount of RAM (32 MB) embedded with the graphics processor and aside from the main system memory, although this report hasn’t been confirmed. This RAM is supposedly used as a framebuffer and to assist with some of the other GPU features.
__________________________________________________ _________________

The Wii U CPU is based on IMB’s latest PowerPC technology, the POWER7 architecture. The processor will use most of the modern features from POWER7, including multi-threading and power saving controls. The Wii U CPU speed is estimated to be at 3 GHz by developers who have access to dev kits. The processor is the key part in the Wii U system specs, which include a Wii U GPU from AMD, and an unspecified amount of RAM. According to reports obtained by Wii U Daily, the console will use a processor based on the “IBM 710 Express”, but will be heavily modified to suit the needs of the console and video game software.
Wii U CPU specs

The Wii U CPU uses most of the features from the POWER7 architecture, the rumored and leaked specs so far indicate:

4 CPU Cores and 2 MB shared L3 cache
3 GHz clock speed
Multi-threading: 4 threads per core, 16 threads in total
45 nm process
Advanced power savings features and design
256 KB L2 cache per core

The processor of course includes a whole slew of additional features, but the main attribute is the addition of multi-threading: the Wii U CPU can handle up to 16 threads at the same time. Compared to the older Xbox 360 chip, which can only run 6 threads at a time, the new chip is much more capable when it comes to multi-threading and simultaneous executions of code. Production of the Wii U processor will take place at IBM’s facility in New York, USA, while the final console and components will be assembled in China and shipped worldwide.
Wii U CPU power and performance

The power output of the Wii U CPU is debatable at this point, as no clear technical specifications are available. The IBM Power7 architecture is rated at maximum 33 GFLOPS(Giga FLOPS) per core with the full amount of cache available at max clock speed. Per CPU, the maximum performance output is over 260 GFLOPS, albeit this is based on a fully specced out 8 core chip at 4 GHz. Realistically, the Wii U CPU power output could be at around 50 GFLOPS, with 4 cores at 3 GHz. This would make the Wii U CPU over 20 times faster than the old Wii Broadway processor, and twice as fast as the PlayStation 3 Cell processor, and 2.5X as fast as the Xbox 360 chip.

[BRiT]

Those rumors don't sync with the the 75 Watt power brick rumor.

With the GPU being 50 Watts that leaves less than 25 watts for everything else in the system. A 16-thread 3Ghz 45nm CPU using less than 10 Watts? And that's with assuming Nintendo would be crazy enough to draw 100% power.

They definitely don't fit one another.

[bgassassin]

It's from WiiUDaily. That's all you need to know. But just in case don't waste your time with their site.

[liolio]

Originally Posted by bgassassin

It's from WiiUDaily. That's all you need to know. But just in case don't waste your time with their site.

Too bad though it sounded "right" too me. I don't mean I read the stuffs as it was true but the choices and the system they describe make sense to me.

Originally Posted by bgassassin

Your "best bang for the buck" idea is similar to what my thinking was in that the modified POWER7 core would be the "PPE" and the two 476FPs would be the "SPEs". Just OoO.

Well I guess that in your view the system is heterogeneous, so the code running on the main core can't always run on the other ones which is not the case in the a7 a15 where it's just a matter of performance.
Looking at the throughput of the 476 I'm not sure it's worse it. Moving away for SMP for the sake of 2 476 cores doesn't sound like a good compromise to me.

The thing with SPU is that at least you get quiet some rewards from moving away from SMP, not too mention that SPU are tinier than a PPC476 + its L2. They may have more than 2 for the same "price".
Then there is the (sustained) throughput and even clocked lower than in the ps3 they are not in the same ballpark.

If I look at an engine and a game like BF3 and the matching FB 2 engine, I'm convince that a lesser cell would do the job (especially once you remove lot of the graphical tasks the GPU would have handled) for now and even for quiet some years coming (assuming devs have intensive to continue to develop for the arch ie the hypothetical WiiU sales well).

Anyway we are sure Nintendo didn't take that road but to me it was the best one if they wanted to be "in between" or remain at the tail (viable) end of PC gaming for a few years.

[french toast]

Well I can tell you now if those specs were anywhere near real then we would be looking at games much much better than what they hag shown..I don't care about early software...we are talking 2-4 times ps360.

Oh and it make s an obvious mistake...xenos has 240alu against 400 in the supposed wii u gpu...not 48..

If that were really the specs then I would snap that console up when it comes out...certainly devs and iwata would be saying it blows current gen omit of the water...they don't.

[liolio]

Originally Posted by french toast

Well I can tell you now if those specs were anywhere near real then we would be looking at games much much better than what they hag shown..I don't care about early software...we are talking 2-4 times ps360.

Oh and it make s an obvious mistake...xenos has 240alu against 400 in the supposed wii u gpu...not 48..

If that were really the specs then I would snap that console up when it comes out...certainly devs and iwata would be saying it blows current gen omit of the water...they don't.

Yes there are obvious mistakes in that so called report, indeed Xenos is 48 "vec4 +1 scalar unit" so 240 alus.
As said by others 4 power7 cores at 3GHz migh consume more than the whole power budget for the wiiU.

[Grall]

Originally Posted by liolio

Too bad though it sounded "right" too me.

It sounded what a low-spec, modern console should offer, except a bit too many threads on the CPU and not enough L2. The 360 has 1MB for 6 threads, which is not really enough, Wuu would have 2MB for 16 threads? No I don't think so, that's even worse cache/thread ratio...

[liolio]

Originally Posted by Grall

It sounded what a low-spec, modern console should offer, except a bit too many threads on the CPU and not enough L2. The 360 has 1MB for 6 threads, which is not really enough, Wuu would have 2MB for 16 threads? No I don't think so, that's even worse cache/thread ratio...

Not to mention that the power7 may need 1 MB of L3 per core. Actually with 256 KB of L2 512KB of L3 per core doesn't make sense.

[french toast]

I have thought of a scenario that no one has put forward yet....what if it is a 4 thread....but single power 7 with 4x smt @ 3.2ghz??

In that scenario the complaints about wuu having less cpu power/threads than 360 and having to use gpgpu would make sense...however I could see that cpu still being much more powerfull than xenon.

Still think everything we have heard so far is complete rubbish...
I'm going for a single core 4x smt power 7 with 4mb. L2...maybe 32mb edram shared between gpu and cpu....a hd 4570 class gpu...custimised and 1-2 gb ram.

That set up mentioned would yield the early game demoes seen and hit tdp/cost targets @ 45nm

[liolio]

Well dimishing the number of cores has a non linear effect on power consumption.
basically 1 power7 core doesn't consume 4 times less than a quad core.

Your prediction is more than unlikely in my opinion.