Wii U hardware discussion and investigation *rename

[Grall]

Drawing pretty much the same amount of power in-game as on the menu shows that Nintendo really didn't put a whole lot of effort into power management in this thing, they just hard-capped the max draw to a low number that was easily manageable. Not very elegant on the whole.

At least we can determine from the CPU die that it's not just three broadways stapled together, it's gotta be something else - or at least something more. The die's twice the area at 40ish nm compared to the Wii CPU at 90nm.

 

[AlphaWolf]

It's still more expensive than the X360's DVD-ROM, even if by just a few dollars...

Did Nintendo pay the dvd playback license? Nope. That would be your few dollars.

 

[TheLump]

Drawing pretty much the same amount of power in-game as on the menu shows that Nintendo really didn't put a whole lot of effort into power management in this thing, they just hard-capped the max draw to a low number that was easily manageable. Not very elegant on the whole.

At least we can determine from the CPU die that it's not just three broadways stapled together, it's gotta be something else - or at least something more. The die's twice the area at 40ish nm compared to the Wii CPU at 90nm.

Although you may turn out to be right - we have no way of coroborating that right now and that info could be looked at in a number of ways, drawing a number of conclusions.

Did Nintendo pay the dvd playback license? Nope. That would be your few dollars.

But they bothered to make their own media (complete with funny disc edges!) - for whatever reason. I wonder why? Surely it was easier to just stick a BD drive in there?

 

[Ika]

You're assuming the GPU has enough left-over power to do GPGPU, when currently most evidence (mainly chip size) points otherwise. It's probably just something slower than a redwood and I wouldn't be surprised if the edram is only there to assure BC and cheaper ports from the X360.

I for one have accepted that, like the Wii before it, the Wii U doesn't have any magic powder that makes it a powerful console. It's really just weak and dirt-cheap and there's no other way around it.

Nintendo's hardware/electronics division is proving to be a one-trick poney. Just make something that doesn't look too horrible and extra-cheap and hope the ideas + hard work from the other divisions make up for it.

I agree that Nintendo won't pursue state-of-the-art hardware anymore, they had a very bad experience with the GC which was the last good hardware they had (I mean good in its own time ofc).
I think they truly understand Sturgeon's law now, and don't care about the 1% enthusiast anymore. That being said, the main question is now that if they can convince third party developers to release games on the hardware or not, which is quite a big question in times when a tablet or a phone can do exactly what they have with the controller. That's it. Only the games people want to play are important, the rest is just technical bla-bla nobody cares about, except freaks like us.

But - on the other hand - I don't think that they are absolutely careless/clueless about making console hardware, and if you combine that with the experience IBM and AMD have from working on the other consoles and on previous Nintendo systems, I still think that there is a possibility that we will see some surprise with the Wii-U, even if the possibility is really small now.
It will probably do like how the Wii did against the other consoles , but lets not forget how many years passed while the Wii was the most established and best selling console out there.

Yes, releasing a console with such slow ram, is "frightening" indeed, but I still have some hope about the configuration of the edram and the power of the things inside the SOC.

 

[snarfbot]

so the console is out, why do we not have videos up of the launch titles, even on youtube im finding nothing...

 

[Shifty Geezer]

Don't forget the touch screen controler of the Wii U, that thing is probably not cheap...

It's effectively a Dualshock 3 controller made larger. The added costs will be screen, battery, and video decoder. Oh, and camera. What are they going to add? $30? $40? As much as $50? If you reverse engineer Wii U, the design spec would be a PS360 at a lower wattage for the same price, plus $50 of extra controller. I wonder if the result is value for money?

 

[Ika]

so the console is out, why do we not have videos up of the launch titles, even on youtube im finding nothing...

I found one for the very first search-try, (but it's interlaced for some weird reason.)

edit: if you think about it that the guy is playing 60fps 720/1080i (or p) while his sisters also plays on the gamepad (at least that's what he claims), ...well it's an easy dx9-ish title, but still, it's not a bad effort from such a low profile GPU, me thinks.

 

[Deleted member 13524]

Perhaps. There's probably going to be some more miscellaneous silicon for I/O controllers (USB/ODD/WiFi) or other things (i.e. DSP, GamePad image processing).

*shrug*

Not to mention a supposed ARM CPU for I/O management and silent updates, so it could even be a bit less than 100mm^2 for the GPU.

I agree that Nintendo won't pursue state-of-the-art hardware anymore, they had a very bad experience with the GC which was the last good hardware they had (I mean good in its own time ofc).
I think they truly understand Sturgeon's law now, and don't care about the 1% enthusiast anymore. That being said, the main question is now that if they can convince third party developers to release games on the hardware or not, which is quite a big question in times when a tablet or a phone can do exactly what they have with the controller. That's it. Only the games people want to play are important, the rest is just technical bla-bla nobody cares about, except freaks like us.

But - on the other hand - I don't think that they are absolutely careless/clueless about making console hardware, and if you combine that with the experience IBM and AMD have from working on the other consoles and on previous Nintendo systems, I still think that there is a possibility that we will see some surprise with the Wii-U, even if the possibility is really small now.
It will probably do like how the Wii did against the other consoles , but lets not forget how many years passed while the Wii was the most established and best selling console out there.

Yes, releasing a console with such slow ram, is "frightening" indeed, but I still have some hope about the configuration of the edram and the power of the things inside the SOC.

Given that the other consoles will probably be 6-10x faster than the Wii U, that a PS4+Vita and/or Durango+SmartGlass can do almost the same with the screen thingie, I don't think developers will be willing to lower their assets to fit in the Wii U.




And BTW, the screen is probably dirt-cheap too. It's a 6" WVGA (800*460) probably-TN panel.
Even the 15000mAh battery in the controller is dirt-cheap and anemic, which is why it only works for 3 hours. Teardown pics are showing an empty space in the controller that would be good for 3 or 4 of those batteries.

 

[TheLump]

But - on the other hand - I don't think that they are absolutely careless/clueless about making console hardware, and if you combine that with the experience IBM and AMD have from working on the other consoles and on previous Nintendo systems, I still think that there is a possibility that we will see some surprise with the Wii-U, even if the possibility is really small now.
It will probably do like how the Wii did against the other consoles , but lets not forget how many years passed while the Wii was the most established and best selling console out there.

Of course they're not. Its not like they were trying to engineer somthing else and this is what came out This was intended to be a low-wattage 360 with a few extra bells & whistles for a little bit of future proofing. Plus the big gamepad and whatever extra juice it takes to run separate visuals on that simultaneously. And thats exactly what it is. Nintendo have all the info we have 9and alot of R&D), they are working with AMD & IBM etc and are experienced in putting systems together, so people need to stop acting like they're incompetant at designing hardware. Maybe their design won't succeed, but it'll definitely be well designed for its job and we've had nothing which confirms otherwise - yet. (dodgy ports dont count...)

It's effectively a Dualshock 3 controller made larger. The added costs will be screen, battery, and video decoder. Oh, and camera. What are they going to add? $30? $40? As much as $50? If you reverse engineer Wii U, the design spec would be a PS360 at a lower wattage for the same price, plus $50 of extra controller. I wonder if the result is value for money?

Plus NFC, gyro/accelerometer (more complex than DS3), speakers, whatever thats worth.

Not to mention a supposed ARM CPU for I/O management and silent updates, so it could even be a bit less than 100mm^2 for the GPU.

Given that the other consoles will probably be 6-10x faster than the Wii U, that a PS4+Vita and/or Durango+SmartGlass can do almost the same with the screen thingie, I don't think developers will be willing to lower their assets to fit in the Wii U.

It depends entirely on the architecture of the other two. If they're GPU heavy/centric? Then developers won't miss the opportunity to sell to a (probably by then) very big established audience without too much extra work. If their CPU heavy and and its too much hassle to down-port, then they probably will just come up with dodgy ports/version of the games and we'll have the same result as Wii's 3rd party support by mid next gen. Either way they aren't going to ignore that big fresh WiiU market this early dude. They're businesses and need to be on whatever platform can make them money. Beggars can't be choosers, as they say.

And BTW, the screen is probably dirt-cheap too. It's a 6" WVGA (800*460) probably-TN panel.
Even the 15000mAh battery in the controller is dirt-cheap and anemic, which is why it only works for 3 hours. Teardown pics are showing an empty space in the controller that would be good for 3 or 4 of those batteries.

It's 4-5 hours quoted, to be more accurate. And this seems to be what people have experienced with continuous gaming use aswell.

At least it can be replaced, which is somthing I guess.

 

[Grall]

Battery compartment seems pre-rigged for an official extended capacity battery peripheral of some sort. ...And if Nintendo refuses to release one (which would be JUST LIKE THEM), someone else will, within a matter of weeks of Wuu launch probably.

 

[dumbo11]

Battery compartment seems pre-rigged for an official extended capacity battery peripheral of some sort. ...And if Nintendo refuses to release one (which would be JUST LIKE THEM), someone else will, within a matter of weeks of Wuu launch probably.

Or to keep the weight down...

 

[function]

Give mucho thanks and condolences to Anand for sacrificing his unit the photos and die size measurements. Wii hardly knew U.

CPU: 32.76mm^2
GPU: 156.21mm^2
3rd die: 2.65mm^2

A SoC friendly silicon budget but spread over a package instead. I feel let down!

I bet that CPU kicks ass.

33.0W while running a game...

Gamecube power consumption for a Gamecube fan.

 

[TheLump]

Battery compartment seems pre-rigged for an official extended capacity battery peripheral of some sort. ...And if Nintendo refuses to release one (which would be JUST LIKE THEM), someone else will, within a matter of weeks of Wuu launch probably.

I'm pretty sure there already is one (edit: 3rd party, I mean. not official)

 

[Ika]

33.0W while running a game...

If this is true, I wonder why they didn't also sell it to TV manufacturers (Samsung, LG, etc) as oem, to put the whole thing inside TVs, and just sell the games to those costumers...33W will be 10W after the third revision of the hardware, it's almost meaningless to keep it as a separate "box"

 

[Kaotik]

I got a feeling that Super Mario U isn't stressing the system really

 

[Love_In_Rio]

I got a feeling that Super Mario U isn't stressing the system really

No, but we can´t expect it to differ a lot from let´s say AC 3 as seeing the wii u menu and gaming wattage difference talk very much about not being very power fine tunned, at least with initial firmware...

 

[TheLump]

So it has a dual-core ARM in there, aswell as a separate DSP? Any one want to have a stab at the reeasoning behind that?


Edit: 100th post!

 

[Ika]

So it has a dual-core ARM in there, aswell as a separate DSP? Any one want to have a stab at the reeasoning behind that?


Edit: 100th post!

I think it's still needs to be somewhat Power Architecture based (pure speculation tho).
Perhaps they enhanced the Broadway with good things from the Xenon and other successful CPUs along with the things Nintendo asked for.... or is it possible to emulate the Broadway on a dualcore ARM?

edit:

I remember that nintendo stated that wii u will use 75 w at max. So, we can assumed still not of potential power not being used yet?

Perhaps they meant peak under full load, which never happens during normal usage?

 

[yipchunyu]

No, but we can´t expect it to differ a lot from let´s say AC 3 as seeing the wii u menu and gaming wattage difference talk very much about not being very power fine tunned, at least with initial firmware...

I remember that nintendo stated that wii u will use 75 w at max. So, we can assumed still not of potential power not being used yet?

 

[wsippel]

So it has a dual-core ARM in there, aswell as a separate DSP? Any one want to have a stab at the reeasoning behind that?


Edit: 100th post!

The DSP is for audio, the ARM is for IO. I guess the ARM also handles OS background tasks - messaging, download management and such.