Nintendo Conference

[function]

It's a pretty low volume part (on the mobile side) anyway so I'm not sure missing some season matters much. It's also possible the parts got better simply because of TSMCs trouble with 40nm, which isn't going to happen with IBM 45nm...
There could be different reasons why it was launched later on mobile, the mobile release dates usually don't have anything to do with when notebooks appear neither and often are different to desktop launch dates (sometimes earlier, sometimes later). Simply deducing it was launched later due to die harvesting is a bit of a stretch.
Maybe they were simply too lazy to just test the chips at a lower voltage / clocks earlier...

Don't think it's likely to be laziness. As you say, there was some trouble with 40nm early on. This manifested itself for nVidia in low yields and very power hungry chips. I can easily believe that there weren't enough parts that fit into suitable perf/watt/$ envelopes for a little while. Best thing to do is sell everything as desktop parts until you have large enough number to launch with.

Sure don't disagree. But the differences between good and bad dies likely aren't all that much, you just set the bar low enough that all match it in the end. So if you think only half the chips would qualify for some given TDP and clock, probably all of them would if you lower clock by 5% and hence can lower voltage slightly too.

I expect there's a curve and a sweet spot that changes with time. Launching on a mature process will help Nintendo no doubt. I think they intend to land with mass availability, globally, before next Christmas.

Assuming they are using the POWER A2 then Nintendo would almost certainly want a custom part as Nintendo has no use for the chip-to-chip IO for SMP systems, the accelerators for server and network tasks, nor the numerous network interfaces that are supported. Uncore parts take up more than half the die on the Wire-Speed Processor.

Yeah, there was never any possibility that Nintendo would use an off the self Power 7 or Wire-Speed processor. Page 20 of the presentation linked to on the A2 Wikipedia page gives a break down of some of the stuff disabled in the different power rated processors, and 21 shows which parts use how much power. It's only 40% for the cores and caches and 2% for a memory controller!

Cant they do something like change strategy if it does make sense

Or are they so stupid that must do only the same they did in the past?

Besides how much would a die shrink save on the Wii?

Of course Nintendo can change strategy if it makes sense. But it doesn't make sense. Nintendo are not stupid. The can shrink if they get a benefit from it, but they won't launch a machine that needs one urgently to fix their business. It is no accident that the Wii - a console designed with a 6 year cycle in mind - did not need a die shrink.

Nintendo are preparing to walk away from the Wii having made huge profits, while MS and (particularly) "599 USD" Sony are still trying to cover their losses. I'd say they are doing something right.

How did the die shrinks on the N64 and GC work out btw?

Anything in the point to Wii U being less or even just equal in terms of performance? Or does it sugest that it might be somewhat (how much is unknow), a better performer.

There was nothing in there that pointed to it being 2 or 3 times more powerful than PS360. In fact, there was pretty much nothing in there. [Edit] I guess it kind of confirmed what we all expected - more memory than the six year old machines. My guess has always been 1GB + any edram [/Edit]

Is there anything in there that ruled out a Redwood level GPU?

 

[pc999]

Of course Nintendo can change strategy if it makes sense. But it doesn't make sense. Nintendo are not stupid. The can shrink if they get a benefit from it, but they won't launch a machine that needs one urgently to fix their business. It is no accident that the Wii - a console designed with a 6 year cycle in mind - did not need a die shrink.

Nintendo are preparing to walk away from the Wii having made huge profits, while MS and (particularly) "599 USD" Sony are still trying to cover their losses. I'd say they are doing something right.
[/I]

But they can release it with profit at 250$ first then with the first shrink a year later on a mature 32nm go to 200$ and keep a profit and so on (replace 250$ and 200$ with your favorite number they are just for example).

None said they would/should release it in urgent need of a shrink, but needing one later for lower price/better profit, like the others need, is a different matter.

How did the die shrinks on the N64 and GC work out btw?

I dont know too.

There was nothing in there that pointed to it being 2 or 3 times more powerful than PS360. In fact, there was pretty much nothing in there. [Edit] I guess it kind of confirmed what we all expected - more memory than the six year old machines. My guess has always been 1GB + any edram [/Edit]

How said it will be 2-3x PS360, personally I would be happy with 1,5x PS360 if that means a lower price, fast loading, low power and noise.

It mean that there is room to add a few, not necessarily, very significant features, which is nice.

Is there anything in there that ruled out a Redwood level GPU?

No.

But wouldn't that be quite superior to xenos, it is only a DX11 with 2-3x the transistors and a 5 generations newer GPU, with much better performance/watts ratios, even in the lower 5600 forms (TDP of 19w).

 

[function]

But they can release it with profit at 250$ first then with the first shrink a year later on a mature 32nm go to 200$ and keep a profit and so on (replace 250$ and 200$ with your favorite number they are just for example).

None said they would/should release it in urgent need of a shrink, but needing one later for lower price/better profit, like the others need, is a different matter.

The starting point for my line of reasoning is launching at a profit (or at the very least, not a significant loss like Sony and MS). I have a feeling Nintendo may feel they can launch at $300 this time, as they will have motion gaming, a new feature and parity (or maybe a little more) on visuals.

I dont know too.

I've been Googling around and I can't actually find any evidence of a shrink for either GC or N64. With 45 nm being a mature process, Wii U may be the first console where it makes sense.

I guess that if you're not carrying an expensive cooling system and expensive PSU and power regulation stuff then the pressure to shrink the processors is reduced.

How said it will be 2-3x PS360, personally I would be happy with 1,5x PS360 if that means a lower price, fast loading, low power and noise.

It mean that there is room to add a few, not necessarily, very significant features, which is nice.

All the talk about Radeon HD 5830M made me think people might be expecting a bit much from a small, profitable console! My hope before E3 was that Nintendo might be a little more ambitious with the GPU (with something that could run 360 games at 1080), but the case dimensions and cooling vents make me think that is unrealistic now.

I think Nintendo want to make sure they get good - or superior - versions of multiplats, but that anything else would be excessive for their plans if it cost them. A good amount of ram will also work wonders and the Wii U should have more than the PS360.

But wouldn't that be quite superior to xenos, it is only a DX11 with 2-3x the transistors and a 5 generations newer GPU, with much better performance/watts ratios, even in the lower 5600 forms (TDP of 19w).

It should be superior to Xenos. Perhaps not in every respect if it doesn't have edram vram and/or is clocked lower to save power (like in the mobile Llano parts), but on balance it should be equal or better and definitely better than RSX.

It's also not a huge part and should, I think, allow Nintendo to stay competitive in terms of processor costs. Maybe Nintendo wouldn't actually need everything in something like Redwood for their custom part (UVD?) and could save some more die space?

 

[lilbroK]

The starting point for my line of reasoning is launching at a profit (or at the very least, not a significant loss like Sony and MS). I have a feeling Nintendo may feel they can launch at $300 this time, as they will have motion gaming, a new feature and parity (or maybe a little more) on visuals.



I've been Googling around and I can't actually find any evidence of a shrink for either GC or N64. With 45 nm being a mature process, Wii U may be the first console where it makes sense.

I guess that if you're not carrying an expensive cooling system and expensive PSU and power regulation stuff then the pressure to shrink the processors is reduced.



All the talk about Radeon HD 5830M made me think people might be expecting a bit much from a small, profitable console! My hope before E3 was that Nintendo might be a little more ambitious with the GPU (with something that could run 360 games at 1080), but the case dimensions and cooling vents make me think that is unrealistic now.

I think Nintendo want to make sure they get good - or superior - versions of multiplats, but that anything else would be excessive for their plans if it cost them. A good amount of ram will also work wonders and the Wii U should have more than the PS360.



It should be superior to Xenos. Perhaps not in every respect if it doesn't have edram vram and/or is clocked lower to save power (like in the mobile Llano parts), but on balance it should be equal or better and definitely better than RSX.

It's also not a huge part and should, I think, allow Nintendo to stay competitive in terms of processor costs. Maybe Nintendo wouldn't actually need everything in something like Redwood for their custom part (UVD?) and could save some more die space?

Everyone seems to be forgetting, Nintendo has "NEVER" used a standardized processor or gpu, so I can assure you that everyone of you is wrong. Nintendo always uses processors and gpu's custom tailored to their desired specifications that generally do really specific things exceptionally well but don't really do other things that they find less important much at all much at all.

They could make a processor that excelled at tessellation but not so well at parallax mapping(this is just a conceptual example, don't quote this one unimportant sentance to make an argument about while ignoring the actually points like what happens so often for I will ignore you, it may not be accurate or even possible but that doesn't matter. Its just an example). Going by what people are saying they may have dropped money on HD but not AA. I'm sure it will do native 1080p because

1. 1080p is nothing now ,and was never really anything that special to begin with if you ask me.
2 That's what all of the fbs used as a grounds of attack as well what the users base requested much.
3. Most modern GPUs can output beyond 1080p. It costs nothing to implement now whether in performance or money.
4. They already said it outputs in 1080p...


Making a PC build that outperforms the PS3 or 360 can be done for under $300. I built mine for 250. Played Crysis 1 at full setting. Crysis 2 is nothing on max settings for my PC. You are definitely on the mark with the price. Also, with modern tech and specialization I'm sure the size of the chips can be strunk down with ease.

What should be discussed instead of which GPU model they will use(It's a null point) is what features the chips will have.

Here are some of the features I am sure will be there.: They will still have a TEV unit as its going to be backwards compatible with the GC and Wii. They will probably also have a standardized shader or a specialized version of it. Native 1080p support. Support for all modern texture effects. 300 mil poly count minimum. At least a 512 GB gpu RAM. Probably either GDDR4 or GDDR5. I'm looking to 4 as it will outperform all current consoles and still be cheap. 512 system ram. Couldn't say what kind. 4 cores on the cpu. I don't see why they would limit to three unless the cpu is the Power7 like everyone suggests then I could see it actually being 2 cores.

Thats what I'm guessing right now.

 

[function]

Everyone seems to be forgetting, Nintendo has "NEVER" used a standardized processor or gpu, so I can assure you that everyone of you is wrong.

The discussion for the last page has been about the kind of custom processors Nintendo will use.

Nintendo always uses processors and gpu's custom tailored to their desired specifications that generally do really specific things exceptionally well but don't really do other things that they find less important much at all much at all.

But who doesn't use custom processors?

They could make a processor that excelled at tessellation but not so well at parallax mapping(this is just a conceptual example, don't quote this one unimportant sentance to make an argument about while ignoring the actually points like what happens so often for I will ignore you, it may not be accurate or even possible but that doesn't matter. Its just an example). Going by what people are saying they may have dropped money on HD but not AA. I'm sure it will do native 1080p because

Hang on, who said Wii U can't do AA?

1. 1080p is nothing now ,and was never really anything that special to begin with if you ask me.
2 That's what all of the fbs used as a grounds of attack as well what the users base requested much.
3. Most modern GPUs can output beyond 1080p. It costs nothing to implement now whether in performance or money.
4. They already said it outputs in 1080p...

Who has tried to deny that the Wii U can output in 1080p? I don't think any console user base has been requesting native 1080 tbh, least of all the current Nintendo user base!

Making a PC build that outperforms the PS3 or 360 can be done for under $300. I built mine for 250. Played Crysis 1 at full setting. Crysis 2 is nothing on max settings for my PC. You are definitely on the mark with the price. Also, with modern tech and specialization I'm sure the size of the chips can be strunk down with ease.

Nintendo are using a 45 nm process, so they're unlikely to be ahead of the likes of AMD and nvidia for transistor density. I don't think this is where Nintendo intend to convince folks to buy their console though.

What should be discussed instead of which GPU model they will use(It's a null point) is what features the chips will have.

People are using GPUs are reference points I think. The GPU will have features based on an AMDs Radeon line, and so the Radeon processors are useful reference points to use in discussion.

Here are some of the features I am sure will be there.: They will still have a TEV unit as its going to be backwards compatible with the GC and Wii.They will probably also have a standardized shader or a specialized version of it. Native 1080p support. Support for all modern texture effects. 300 mil poly count minimum. At least a 512 GB gpu RAM. Probably either GDDR4 or GDDR5. I'm looking to 4 as it will outperform all current consoles and still be cheap. 512 system ram. Couldn't say what kind. 4 cores on the cpu. I don't see why they would limit to three unless the cpu is the Power7 like everyone suggests then I could see it actually being 2 cores.

Thats what I'm guessing right now.

Your Wu is a little different from mine, but I'm sure they'll both support multiplats and allow Nintendo to sell their unique controller!

 

[lilbroK]

The discussion for the last page has been about the kind of custom processors Nintendo will use.



But who doesn't use custom processors?



Hang on, who said Wii U can't do AA?



Who has tried to deny that the Wii U can output in 1080p? I don't think any console user base has been requesting native 1080 tbh, least of all the current Nintendo user base!



Nintendo are using a 45 nm process, so they're unlikely to be ahead of the likes of AMD and nvidia for transistor density. I don't think this is where Nintendo intend to convince folks to buy their console though.



People are using GPUs are reference points I think. The GPU will have features based on an AMDs Radeon line, and so the Radeon processors are useful reference points to use in discussion.



Your Wu is a little different from mine, but I'm sure they'll both support multiplats and allow Nintendo to sell their unique controller!

Go back in the thread and read. I'm not going to go out of my way show you if you don't care enough to look for yourself.

Mutliplats is not a feature. Its not something that is0 supported and of course it will have them. The Wii had them, every system has had them. It would be ludicrous to think otherwise.

I'm talking about system specs. Games on the system are completely inconsequential to that point. The console will likely have a gpu conceptually based off of Hollywood. If people want a GPU to start with then that is the one. I'm interested in seeing the shading capabilities because I am sure that they will keep the TEV in the system.

What exactly could you do with a system that had both a standardized shader model and a TEV?

 

[obonicus]

I don't think any console user base has been requesting native 1080 tbh, least of all the current Nintendo user base!

There's a number of Nintendo fans and anti-fans who were hoping for a significant leap forward graphically (or the absence of one), mostly for the schadenfreude. These people are looking towards 1080p as a benchmark for 'lots more power'. As in 'if the Wü can/can't output the same games at 1080p we know it is/isn't way beyond the PS360'.

 

[pc999]

All the talk about Radeon HD 5830M made me think people might be expecting a bit much from a small, profitable console! My hope before E3 was that Nintendo might be a little more ambitious with the GPU (with something that could run 360 games at 1080), but the case dimensions and cooling vents make me think that is unrealistic now.

I think Nintendo want to make sure they get good - or superior - versions of multiplats, but that anything else would be excessive for their plans if it cost them. A good amount of ram will also work wonders and the Wii U should have more than the PS360.



It should be superior to Xenos. Perhaps not in every respect if it doesn't have edram vram and/or is clocked lower to save power (like in the mobile Llano parts), but on balance it should be equal or better and definitely better than RSX.

It's also not a huge part and should, I think, allow Nintendo to stay competitive in terms of processor costs. Maybe Nintendo wouldn't actually need everything in something like Redwood for their custom part (UVD?) and could save some more die space?

I wouldnt rule out a 3x PS360, like lilbroK said it is pretty cheap to build such a PC (with the PC bussines model where is much pricier even to build), here is one I made in 3minutes:

Computador Personalizado

AMD ATHLON II X4 640 (3.0GHZ) BOX SKT AM3 [86,70 €]
ASUS M4N68T-M LE V2 [42,40 €]
CORSAIR KIT 2GB DDR3 1333MHZ DHX (CL9) [37,10 €]
1LIFE c:STARK BLACK (FONTE 500W) [28,90 €]
WESTERN DIGITAL 500GB SATA III 16MB [36,00 €]
SAMSUNG DVD±R 22X SH-S223 PRETO BULK (SATA) [17,40 €]
SAPPHIRE HD6670 1GB DDR5 PCI-E [87,30 €]
Montagem de PC sem instalação de software [15,00 €]

Preço 350,80 €

Here http://globaldata.pt/index.aspx?p=Configurator

The PS3 costs 300€and the XB360 260€ IIRC. Then think in how much stuff in that PC that you dont need in a console.


Made of custom chips they can do a lot to reduce price and heat power consumption, specially if they are really designed to Nintendo and not adapted designs. The 5650 just helps to show that power/heat should be a big concern, special in a custom chip that took it in consideration.

Anyway given the state of Battlefield 3/Crysis 2/Rage, I prefer see things like low price, more innovations/stuff (like a camera in the sensor bar), fast loadings, low noise/power...Over big advancements in specs, but I would like a few advancements (already confirmed in the links above) and all 720p and better framerate (1,5x PS360 ? ).

 

[Grall]

Here are some of the features I am sure will be there.: They will still have a TEV unit as its going to be backwards compatible with the GC and Wii.

The TEV can easily be emulated with a pixel shader, like more modern GPUs did with EMBM and DOT3 bumpmapping for example, which were dedicated hardware blocks in early designs. Why pack in obsolete, fixed hardware that will just cost money and sit unused 99+ percent of the time?

They will probably also have a standardized shader or a specialized version of it.

What are you talking about?

 

[function]

I wouldnt rule out a 3x PS360, like lilbroK said it is pretty cheap to build such a PC (with the PC bussines model where is much pricier even to build), here is one I made in 3minutes:

Oh I don't think building a console three times as fast as the 360 is an outrageous proposition, but just as a thought experiment try taking the silicon in that PC you specced out and put it, under load, in the Wu case. Remember that you've got what looks looks like being a single 5cm case fan to cool it with, and it has to stay quiet.

Nintendo can probably save silicon and power compared to an x86 processor so it's not really a fair comparision, but any way I look at it the case and the cooling will be a limiting factor earlier than for their competition. Nintendo, of course, have newer designs.

Anyway given the state of Battlefield 3/Crysis 2/Rage, I prefer see things like low price, more innovations/stuff (like a camera in the sensor bar), fast loadings, low noise/power...Over big advancements in specs, but I would like a few advancements (already confirmed in the links above) and all 720p and better framerate (1,5x PS360 ? ).

I'm glad they're pushing their new controller and not just a Wii HD, but more power is always nice. It's interesting how they've prioritised size - I can't see them blowing it by using intrusive, noisy cooling which is why I'm so interested in power draw and heat.

Regarding loading, how fast will the Blu Ray drive be I wonder? 4x CAV?

 

[Shifty Geezer]

I wouldnt rule out a 3x PS360, like lilbroK said it is pretty cheap to build such a PC (with the PC bussines model where is much pricier even to build), here is one I made in 3minutes:

Here http://globaldata.pt/index.aspx?p=Configurator

Remember all the similar estimations of what Wii would have inside, looking at what was possible in the PC space at the time?

 

[function]

There's a number of Nintendo fans and anti-fans who were hoping for a significant leap forward graphically (or the absence of one), mostly for the schadenfreude. These people are looking towards 1080p as a benchmark for 'lots more power'. As in 'if the Wü can/can't output the same games at 1080p we know it is/isn't way beyond the PS360'.

That's a fair point. I'd like to have seen the Wu able to do that. But in terms of the general game buying public (who Nintendo ultimately have to cater to) do you think there's a real appetite for "full HD" native rendering? The Wii has done well as an SD console, and console heavy hitters like CoD don't make 1280 x 720 as a conscious decision (frame rate over resolution) and are still seen as setting the bar.

 

[-tkf-]

The vents:

http://www.ripten.com/wp-content/uploads/2011/06/100_4450.jpg
And the backside
http://www.ripten.com/wp-content/uploads/2011/06/100_4437.jpg

There is no build in PSU!

 

[Mobius1aic]

The vents:

http://www.ripten.com/wp-content/uploads/2011/06/100_4450.jpg
And the backside
http://www.ripten.com/wp-content/uploads/2011/06/100_4437.jpg

There is no build in PSU!

Good, that means they can put some decently substantial shit inside! While I wouldn't see it as completely necessary, there is no reason why Nintendo couldn't have parts in there that use 100W or so total.

 

[AlNom]

The vents:

http://www.ripten.com/wp-content/uploads/2011/06/100_4450.jpg
And the backside
http://www.ripten.com/wp-content/uploads/2011/06/100_4437.jpg

There is no build in PSU!

Doesn't the two-pin imply an internal unit? (not that there are pics of the entire power cable to confirm either)

 

[Iron Tiger]

Doesn't the two-pin imply an internal unit? (not that there are pics of the entire power cable to confirm either)

The Wii had a similar connector, but an external power supply.

 

[function]

The vents:

http://www.ripten.com/wp-content/uploads/2011/06/100_4450.jpg
And the backside
http://www.ripten.com/wp-content/uploads/2011/06/100_4437.jpg

There is no build in PSU!

Good find! Looks like a separate CPU and GPU.

Small intake to towards the front fits under the optical drive, probably for the GPU.

Large intake to the rear probably for the CPU. Much bigger, CPU will get two or more times the air. Could be a heatpipe moving some GPU heat to the larger rear intake I guess, but it's likely the CPU will use a lot more power.

Fan looks about the same size as the one in the Gamecube, so about 5cm, with possibly a little more intake area. Depending on fan speed and heatsink(s) it could dissipate more heat than the Gamecube, but it won't be anything like the 360S or PS3 slim.

I'm going to make a Special Guess and say that whatever is in the unit itself won't generate more than double the heat that the Gamecube does, and probably less than that.

 

[function]

Good, that means they can put some decently substantial shit inside! While I wouldn't see it as completely necessary, there is no reason why Nintendo couldn't have parts in there that use 100W or so total.

One good reason is that they have to cool it with a 5cm fan!

 

[pc999]

Oh I don't think building a console three times as fast as the 360 is an outrageous proposition, but just as a thought experiment try taking the silicon in that PC you specced out and put it, under load, in the Wu case. Remember that you've got what looks looks like being a single 5cm case fan to cool it with, and it has to stay quiet.

Nintendo can probably save silicon and power compared to an x86 processor so it's not really a fair comparision, but any way I look at it the case and the cooling will be a limiting factor earlier than for their competition. Nintendo, of course, have newer designs.

I am just not ruling it out, like I said if they can put X86 in a laptop with a lot more of stuff they can put in there they certainly have options for a custom console.

I'm glad they're pushing their new controller and not just a Wii HD, but more power is always nice. It's interesting how they've prioritised size - I can't see them blowing it by using intrusive, noisy cooling which is why I'm so interested in power draw and heat.

Regarding loading, how fast will the Blu Ray drive be I wonder? 4x CAV?

They can put as much power as they want inside I wouldnt bother . As long as that dont cost to much in the above mentioned things.

Remember all the similar estimations of what Wii would have inside, looking at what was possible in the PC space at the time?

I do remember some very cool Pentium M (?) designs for laptops

Fun times.

 

[lilbroK]

I am just not ruling it out, like I said if they can put X86 in a laptop with a lot more of stuff they can put in there they certainly have options for a custom console.





They can put as much power as they want inside I wouldnt bother . As long as that dont cost to much in the above mentioned things.




I do remember some very cool Pentium M (?) designs for laptops

Fun times.

Indeed. Iwata said that it would be priced competitively with the 360 and PS3 so I'm expecting no more than 300.