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.
Last edited by a moderator:
Wii U hardware discussion and investigation *rename
- Thread starter AlNom
- Start date
- Status
As said by others 4 power7 cores at 3GHz migh consume more than the whole power budget for the wiiU.
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
Veteran
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
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
Well its development began with R700 as the starting point so obviously it has to be R700 based by definition. However that doesn't tell us much about the chips capabilities.
I mean obviously I agree that e6760 isn't literally the WiiU GPU, it doesn't have 32MB eDram for a start. But could it be very similar?, possibly.
Last edited by a moderator:
Sure the r700 tells us it feature set. This matches exactly the sdk doc that were leaked.
It all we have at this point.
french toast
Veteran
Correct, but it would consume much less power and be a smaller die...it would also add up to 4 threads....
Judging by what we have heard...and the size of the box...it would make perfect sense to have a powerfull OoO power 7....blocked high with smt...and couple that to a relative low power hd 4570+ custom gpu...with 2 gb ram and some edram that would actually be a very nice and balanced little system.
It is also plausible in both cost,tdp,as well as would fit in with all rumours so far...
No it doesn't, it tells just the starting point. Evergreen was "based on R700" too, but that doesn't mean the feature set is the same.
Evergreen was out, if they wanted those feature sets why start at r700? Then we have the leak sdk that matches r700. At this point we have nothing that suggests they moved from r700.
Further confirmation of CPU problems. This time specifically stating that the clock speed is lower than current gen:
http://www.digitalspy.co.uk/gaming/...compared-to-360-ps3-says-tekken-producer.html
http://www.digitalspy.co.uk/gaming/...compared-to-360-ps3-says-tekken-producer.html
DaSorcerer
Newcomer
That's a bit of creative writing, it says its slightly lower. Also a lower clock speed doesn't mean less efficient.
D
Deleted member 13524
Guest
french toast
Veteran
This is not good news..at least on the cpu front, makes you think just what they have gone with if it's inferior to 7 year old consoles....that's impossible surely?.
If they went for a modern OoO single core with 4x smt, and set it up @ 3ghz ..that would be better would it not?
Graphics seem to be better than ps360...which would be incredibly hard not to be...mmm.
If they went for a modern OoO single core with 4x smt, and set it up @ 3ghz ..that would be better would it not?
Graphics seem to be better than ps360...which would be incredibly hard not to be...mmm.
I posted this on GAF and is certainly in a less technical language than much of Beyond3D, but the logic still applies:
"Did you perhaps think that their code for the game is optimized for a deep-pipelined, heavily parallel and/or tri-core console (those are your 2 HD choices this gen to port from) with high clocks?
A 476fp runs at 1.6ghz and eats somewhere around 1w per core. It is impressive for what it does, is OoO and short-pipelined and is better for some tasks than a deep-pipelined 3ghz PPE. It will also be worse at some tasks. It's simply "different""
french toast
Veteran
I get what you are saying..but they clearly have less cpu resources to play with...no one mentions " un tapped"
Of course I may well be better in certain scenarios..but that's not the point.. they need easy ports from ps360 at least..never mind 12 months from now...they should not be struggling.
Of course I may well be better in certain scenarios..but that's not the point.. they need easy ports from ps360 at least..never mind 12 months from now...they should not be struggling.
I do not believe that's the case. The Green Hills compiler shows support for the 47x line (not the old G3-750s) which also happens to be 45nm. I think that's the direction where you need to look.
What they are struggling with is an interesting question. My immediate guess would be floating point power, for some reason (phsyics?), which may be inaccurately attributed to clock-speed where it's more a matter of speed x ALUs/vector units. We all know lower clocked CPUs can perform extremely well and efficiently, so I can only assume the reference to clock speed is either inaccurate, or a reference to the design being very Xenon-like but lower clocked.
- Status
