Mass Effect 3 Face-Off - WiiU vs. 360 vs. PS3
http://www.eurogamer.net/articles/digitalfoundry-mass-effect-3-wii-u-face-off
http://www.eurogamer.net/articles/digitalfoundry-mass-effect-3-wii-u-face-off
Mass Effect 3 Face-Off - WiiU vs. 360 vs. PS3
http://www.eurogamer.net/articles/digitalfoundry-mass-effect-3-wii-u-face-off
Well, if the teardown was accurate, the Wii U has half the main memory bandwidth of the 360 and PS3. no idea on eDRAM bandwidth or size though.If the WiiU GPU isn't clocked as high as the Xbox GPU then it will probably have lower triangle and fill rates. Depending on how the WiiU's eDram is set up that may also have less bandwidth and affect fill rate accordingly.
So it's possible that the WiiU GPU isn't even as fast as the Xbox GPU in every way. That might explain some of the drops in the Mass Effect 3 cut scene graph.
Edit: maybe texturing bandwidth could be an issue for the Darksiders trees too? I can't really see how they're done in that video but if you're alpha testing and drawing lots of bits of the tree for each pixel that could possibly start eating into main memory bandwidth.
Well, if the teardown was accurate, the Wii U has half the main memory bandwidth of the 360 and PS3. no idea on eDRAM bandwidth or size though.
Is memory bandwidth really that bad?
On paper PS3 has a good chunk more bandwidth ( Nearly double? ) then 360 has because of separate memory pools but yet you don't see developers complaing about lack of bandwidth on 360 because the EDRAM takes up most of the slack.
Same concept on the Wii U but much bigger EDRAM? Also remember that on paper the first Xbox had a lot less bandwidth then PS2 and GC and yet produced much much better looking games then both.
I think a lot of it has to do with it being a new console and running ports and games that it was never designed for.
Is memory bandwidth really that bad?
On paper PS3 has a good chunk more bandwidth ( Nearly double? ) then 360 has because of separate memory pools but yet you don't see developers complaing about lack of bandwidth on 360 because the EDRAM takes up most of the slack.
Same concept on the Wii U but much bigger EDRAM? Also remember that on paper the first Xbox had a lot less bandwidth then PS2 and GC and yet produced much much better looking games then both.
I think a lot of it has to do with it being a new console and running ports and games that it was never designed for.
We don't know.Is memory bandwidth really that bad?
Much depends on the implementation of the eDRAM. Xenos had the ROPS coupled to the eDRAM, saving a massive amount of BW from having to cross the eDRAM/logic bus. If Wuu is working from the eDRAM, it'll be equivalent to another other ordinary bandwidth configuration. eg. If Wuu has 12 GBps main RAM and 30 GBps eDRAM BW, that's a total of 42 GBps available for rendering and game code vs. PS3's 48 GBps total. None of these BW figures are directly comparable as there are various read/write limitations, but Wuu's position regards BW depends entirely on that eDRAM for which we have no information. If it's 30+ GBps and has the ROPS embedded like 360, it shouldn't be an issue beyond devs learning the system. If it's < 30 GBps and which has to serve the ROPS, Wuu could be more BW starved than PS3.On paper PS3 has a good chunk more bandwidth ( Nearly double? ) then 360 has because of separate memory pools but yet you don't see developers complaing about lack of bandwidth on 360 because the EDRAM takes up most of the slack.
Same concept on the Wii U but much bigger EDRAM? Also remember that on paper the first Xbox had a lot less bandwidth then PS2 and GC and yet produced much much better looking games then both.
Is memory bandwidth really that bad?
On paper PS3 has a good chunk more bandwidth ( Nearly double? ) then 360 has because of separate memory pools but yet you don't see developers complaing about lack of bandwidth on 360 because the EDRAM takes up most of the slack.
Same concept on the Wii U but much bigger EDRAM? Also remember that on paper the first Xbox had a lot less bandwidth then PS2 and GC and yet produced much much better looking games then both.
I think a lot of it has to do with it being a new console and running ports and games that it was never designed for.
Looks like article is missing shadow LOD and other stuff (like missing normal maps).
Are you sure the former is not from the split-screen/gamepad mode and the latter was a streaming issue that someone found? They're pretty clearly identical from the captured (campaign) footage.
it was from the MP map hijacked.
Hmm, that may be the case. But I think shdow LOD screenshots (posted in IQ thread) were from SP, I'm not sure though.
For the ROPs, yes, there's a fair bit of bandwidth consumption but those presumably render to eDRAM. Of course, we don't have specs for how much bandwidth the eDRAM provides, but one would think they'd have sufficient amount if they're going to bother implementing 32MB of a relatively expensive process.
Screen-filling transparencies/overdraw do incur high demands on raw fillrates, which is what's more curious.