Wii: More Than Meets the Eye *Spin-off*

[Shifty Geezer]

IJust read the part were NEC says that Gamecube had 24MBits(3MBytes) of embedded DRAM and that the new UX6D can put as much as 256MBits in half-size of the typiical SoC of embedded DRAM.

256MBits = 32MBytes

Flipper =110mm2
half of Flipper = 55mm2

55mm2 = 32MBytes
1mm2 = 0.58181818MBytes

So how much eDRAM are you saying is in Wii?

Mario Galaxy, jajajaja, even ATI laughed at what Mario Galaxy did on the E32006, the tip of the iceberg remember.

You're putting words into his mouth. Or rather, imagingin responses. There's no 'laughing' at what was shown. Let's quote a piece of that article you haven't referenced...

He continued, "I really don't think that it's about the [specs]; I think it's about the innovation that it brings to the table—the motion-sensing, the always-on capability, which is really cool too—the fact that the chip is powerful enough and responsive enough to be there at a moment's notice, and I think that's pretty cool for the average gamer."

Nothing at all about amazing new graphics technologies. Why, if Wii has this awesome displacement tech, is no-one using it here or in any other field??

ATI is also responsible for providing the custom GPU for Microsoft's Xbox 360, so we tried to find out how the "Hollywood" chip compares to what's in the 360. Once again, however, Swinimer sidestepped the question.

It appears you ahve no idea how to read PR remarks.

So is a GPU(wii) different form another GPU(360)?
or is a GPGPU(wii) different from a GPU(360)?

Different chips for different uses.

Do you even know what GPGPU means?! It means using a GPU to do non-graphics work. You don't design a GPU to do non-graphics work. A processor designed for a high vector calculation throughput that isn't for graphics work is a maths processor, not a GPGPU.

so does a gpu have different use from another gpu thst is more powerful?
or does a gpgpu have different uses from a gpu that has great power?

A GPGPU is a GPU that's being used for non graphics tasks.

Now do you remeber this
http://www.videogamesblogger.com/200...ta-storage.htm

read this part.-

With Nintendo, developers like [Shigeru] Miyamoto decide. As long as they are comfortable with the current technology’s ability to deliver meaningful surprises to the users, we don’t need new hardware. However, when they start demanding something new, when they see the existing hardware can’t provide what they need, then that is when we decide to launch the new hardware. As for timing, it may be three years from now, five years from now or eight years from now.” That’s between 2012 and 2017 people

Why would they talk about launching new hardware if all this time they've hidden secret capabilities in Wii?

Now this is a reasoning from a common person, we are talking about a company, there is no way people will keep playing Wii for 8 years from now just for gameplay and with graphics at the level that have been shown right now?

Sure. Look how PS2 bombed the moment this gen launched...

Note that's sarcasm. If Wii is cheap, it can still sell while new, more expensive technologies are on the market.

Your argument has absolutely zero foundation, because it's utterly preposterous. The idea that a company would incur additional design and fabrication costs to include features that they wouldn't use for years is utterly insane reasoning. As you say yourself...

there is no way people will keep playing Wii for 8 years from now just for gameplay and with graphics at the level that have been shown right now?

If Wii were capable of better graphics (on the hardware level, and beyond the optimisations of software) then developers would be using that to attract customers. There is no special magic mystery performance hidden in Wii. All these links you're finding are hypotheticals and best-cases. eg. Lithographic reductions don't always yield the gains we'd anticipate, such that calculating a predict die size based on a shrink can lead to wrong expectations. Wii has 3MB eDRAM, 24 MB 1T-SRAM and 64 MB GDDR. It has a GPU based on a dual-pipe, fixed function Flipper architecture. It has a PPC processor. This is what developers have said, and is what the end-results demonstrate. It's simple, cheap tech as Nintendo likes, and which they make a killing on, so they certainly made a good business decision to go with cheap, simple tech.

 

[tapionvslink]

So, do you all remember the the appox results that my calculations using NEC UX6D came up with?

Flipper 90nm without embedded memory
27.5mm2 * 3 /8 = 10.3125mm2
27.5mm2 - 10.3125mm2 = 17.1875mm2

So, if vegas was the gpu with 3MBytes of eDRAM(72mm2 - 5.28mm2 = 66.72mm2)
then
vegas approx = 66.72mm2 / 17.1875 = 3.88189 times bigger

vegas with 5MBytes of eDRAM(72mm2 - 8.8mm2 = 63.2mm2)
then
vegas approx = 63.2mm2 / 17.1875mm2 = 3.67709 times bigger

if napa was the gpu(47.76mm2 for gpu considering 24MBytes of embedded eDRAM as cache)

napa gpu approx= 47.76mm2 / 17.1875mm2 = 2.778763 times bigger

ajjajaja, as Satoru Iwata said = Wii will be 2 to 3 times more powerful than Gamecube

ajajajajajaj

One thing that bothers me is that even today most people believe that the term 1.5 overclocked Gamecube means that Wii is 1.5 more powerful. Why?

Speed is not equal to power, but if we incrase the size of a gpu we ca put more pipelines, texture units, and stuff.. and that can be traduced as power

Now then, it would seem that from I have read so far thet vegas is the GPGPU, which menas that if we take into account the increase of speed of 77Mhz on Hollywood(243Mhz) against Flipper(166Mhz) and make the assumption that perhaps the vegas might have 6MBytes(10.56mm2) of embedded NEC UX6D macro for performing HD(720p), and antialaising efficiently, then we could end up with.-

vegas = 72mm2 - 10.56mm2 = 61.44mm2

vegas = 61.44mm2/18mm2(flipper 90nm no memory)
vegas = 3.413times bigger

And taking into account the 46.3855% increase in speed of the Hollywood, we could en up with maybe 3.2 or even 3 times bigger

Sorry about this part, but I have not found how that much the increase in speed can affect the die size.

But one thing is clear for me, it cannot affect that much since I have seen examples of cpus and the increase of clock speed doesnt affect that much.

 

[tapionvslink]

So how much eDRAM are you saying is in Wii?

You're putting words into his mouth. Or rather, imagingin responses. There's no 'laughing' at what was shown. Let's quote a piece of that article you haven't referenced...

Nothing at all about amazing new graphics technologies. Why, if Wii has this awesome displacement tech, is no-one using it here or in any other field??

It appears you ahve no idea how to read PR remarks.
Do you even know what GPGPU means?! It means using a GPU to do non-graphics work. You don't design a GPU to do non-graphics work. A processor designed for a high vector calculation throughput that isn't for graphics work is a maths processor, not a GPGPU.

so does a gpu have different use from another gpu thst is more powerful?
or does a gpgpu have different uses from a gpu that has great power?

A GPGPU is a GPU that's being used for non graphics tasks.

Why would they talk about launching new hardware if all this time they've hidden secret capabilities in Wii?

Sure. Look how PS2 bombed the moment this gen launched...

Note that's sarcasm. If Wii is cheap, it can still sell while new, more expensive technologies are on the market.

Your argument has absolutely zero foundation, because it's utterly preposterous. The idea that a company would incur additional design and fabrication costs to include features that they wouldn't use for years is utterly insane reasoning. As you say yourself...
If Wii were capable of better graphics (on the hardware level, and beyond the optimisations of software) then developers would be using that to attract customers. There is no special magic mystery performance hidden in Wii. All these links you're finding are hypotheticals and best-cases. eg. Lithographic reductions don't always yield the gains we'd anticipate, such that calculating a predict die size based on a shrink can lead to wrong expectations. Wii has 3MB eDRAM, 24 MB 1T-SRAM and 64 MB GDDR. It has a GPU based on a dual-pipe, fixed function Flipper architecture. It has a PPC processor. This is what developers have said, and is what the end-results demonstrate. It's simple, cheap tech as Nintendo likes, and which they make a killing on, so they certainly made a good business decision to go with cheap, simple tech.

But at least I have proved many point by now using calculations, can you do the same, prove me that I am wrong using only official information, since I could also play your game at the grade that if I wanted I could say that the eDRAM on wii is GDDR3 and can go up to 512MBytes just because I say it

And if I am wrong, why do my calculations end up with a wii that is 2 to 3 times more powerful than gamecube(raw numbers), something that Satoru Iwata claimed long time ago.

1.5 overclocked gamecube is just speed, is not power

 

[tapionvslink]

So how much eDRAM are you saying is in Wii?

You're putting words into his mouth. Or rather, imagingin responses. There's no 'laughing' at what was shown. Let's quote a piece of that article you haven't referenced...

Nothing at all about amazing new graphics technologies. Why, if Wii has this awesome displacement tech, is no-one using it here or in any other field??

It appears you ahve no idea how to read PR remarks.
Do you even know what GPGPU means?! It means using a GPU to do non-graphics work. You don't design a GPU to do non-graphics work. A processor designed for a high vector calculation throughput that isn't for graphics work is a maths processor, not a GPGPU.

so does a gpu have different use from another gpu thst is more powerful?
or does a gpgpu have different uses from a gpu that has great power?

A GPGPU is a GPU that's being used for non graphics tasks.

Why would they talk about launching new hardware if all this time they've hidden secret capabilities in Wii?

Sure. Look how PS2 bombed the moment this gen launched...

Note that's sarcasm. If Wii is cheap, it can still sell while new, more expensive technologies are on the market.

Your argument has absolutely zero foundation, because it's utterly preposterous. The idea that a company would incur additional design and fabrication costs to include features that they wouldn't use for years is utterly insane reasoning. As you say yourself...
If Wii were capable of better graphics (on the hardware level, and beyond the optimisations of software) then developers would be using that to attract customers. There is no special magic mystery performance hidden in Wii. All these links you're finding are hypotheticals and best-cases. eg. Lithographic reductions don't always yield the gains we'd anticipate, such that calculating a predict die size based on a shrink can lead to wrong expectations. Wii has 3MB eDRAM, 24 MB 1T-SRAM and 64 MB GDDR. It has a GPU based on a dual-pipe, fixed function Flipper architecture. It has a PPC processor. This is what developers have said, and is what the end-results demonstrate. It's simple, cheap tech as Nintendo likes, and which they make a killing on, so they certainly made a good business decision to go with cheap, simple tech.

Of course I know that, but GPGPU can be used for both things, graphics and aritmetic,
and gpgpu is necessary for realtime displacement mapping graphics since this techniques requiere a lot aritmetic power that previously only cpus were designed to do so.

But wait, this is not an assumption, since even Epic Games makes clear that GPGPU can achieve better graphics

Tim Sweeney: GPGPU Too Costly to Develop
http://www.tomshardware.com/news/Sweeney-Epic-GPU-GPGPU,8461.html

http://www.tomshardware.com/news/Sweeney-Epic-GPU-GPGPU,8461.html

 

[AlNom]

I have seen those documents of 1T-MIM of TSMC long time ago, and is for sure 50% less than an 1T-SRAM-Q, just check in wikipedia the die size of the 1T-SRAM-Q(full macro) and just take half of it´s die.

You said so yourself they're not using quad density. Those figures are a general guide as to what MoSys was capable of. Different manufacturing houses obviously have different capabilities.

90nm from NEC is different from 90nm at TSMC. When you're working on such scales, there are bound to be differences due to different manufacturing formulae. This is why you don't see the chemical processes being patented. Trade secrets.

Besides, I were are talking about NEC here, or do you see the firm of TSMC in the Hollywood package?

You don't understand. I was using the TSMC figures to show you how wrong it was to use wikipedia figures as a basis for your calculations on 1T-SRAM. The 24MByte die. The one that's 72mm^2.

256MBits = 32MBytes

Flipper =110mm2
half of Flipper = 55mm2

Flipper isn't all eDRAM. If you took a look at the actual die shot with the sections:

You can see this clearly. There is the actual graphics logic. This division by two is flawed.

You're calculations are wrong.

 

[tapionvslink]

You said so yourself they're not using quad density. Those figures are a general guide as to what MoSys was capable of. Different manufacturing houses obviously have different capabilities.

90nm from NEC is different from 90nm at TSMC. When you're working on such scales, there are bound to be differences due to different manufacturing formulae. This is why you don't see the chemical processes being patented. Trade secrets.



You don't understand. I was using the TSMC figures to show you how wrong it was to use wikipedia figures as a basis for your calculations on 1T-SRAM. The 24MByte die. The one that's 72mm^2.


You're confusing 24Mbits with 24MBytes in the discussion along with the memory types.


Flipper isn't all eDRAM. If you took a look at the actual die shot with the sections:

You can see this clearly. There is the actual graphics logic. This division by two is flawed.

You're calculations are wrong.

Again with TSMC.

Hollywood has the firm of NEC , I just mentioned TSMC because of the MIM technology and so, if NEC is the one who will be fabricating the 1T-SRAM macros, then Nintendo woul have to have chosed them since their thecnology was equal to TSMC or better.

And un purrpose, NEC UX6D at 90nm uses MIM2 not MIM.

If TSMC is the one who fabricated the eDRAM for Wii prove it.

I dont see any indications of that, and even Hollywood has the frim of NEC.


And about the image, just put eFB + eTM together and thats the total amount of embedded memory, which, obviously, occupies a litlle less than the half of the total die.

As you can see, your assumption are wrong

 

[AlNom]

If TSMC is the one who fabricated the eDRAM for Wii prove it.

You didn't read the part where I said I was talking about TSMC and the 1T-SRAM.

I'm not talking about the eDRAM. You are again confusing 24Mbits and 24 MBytes. The 1t-sram is the 24MBytes chip.

 

[tapionvslink]

You said so yourself they're not using quad density. Those figures are a general guide as to what MoSys was capable of. Different manufacturing houses obviously have different capabilities.

90nm from NEC is different from 90nm at TSMC. When you're working on such scales, there are bound to be differences due to different manufacturing formulae. This is why you don't see the chemical processes being patented. Trade secrets.

You don't understand. I was using the TSMC figures to show you how wrong it was to use wikipedia figures as a basis for your calculations on 1T-SRAM. The 24MByte die. The one that's 72mm^2.

Flipper isn't all eDRAM. If you took a look at the actual die shot with the sections:

You can see this clearly. There is the actual graphics logic. This division by two is flawed.

You're calculations are wrong.

24MBytes are the amount of memory of the early wii sdks, besides, havent you heard of the Wii SDK 2.1, the one that provides 128MBytes of GDDR3 instead of 64MBytes ?

They do that arrengement ij the SDK so the developer can do sloppy code while the sdk does something with the code that the developer doesnt see.

Is obvious that by this way the SDK is hidding somthing, pehaps they do not want anyone to see the true amount of memory on the eDRAM and decided to increase the amount of the confirmed 64MBytes of main memory in order to ease work and not to show more than the speculated 24MBytes.

 

[AlNom]

the one that provides 128MBytes of GDDR3 instead of 64MBytes ?

This is typical of development kits because the developers will need more RAM for debugging tools. That's it. They don't need more of any other resource.

Is obvious that by this way the SDK is hidding somthing, pehaps they do not want anyone to see the true amount of memory on the eDRAM and decided to increase the amount of the confirmed 64MBytes of main memory in order to ease work and not to show more than the speculated 24MBytes.

No it is not obvious. Your conspiracy theory is unfounded.

Adding another 64MB DRAM chip is trivial compared to manufacturing a larger chip of eDRAM.

 

[Shifty Geezer]

...since I could also play your game at the grade that if I wanted I could say that the eDRAM on wii is GDDR3 and can go up to 512MBytes just because I say it

Except that assertion wouldn't fit with both what other developers have said and what the Wii is outputting. I'm not going to go into the effort of finding links because, unlike you, my job doesn't allow me hours and hours of net searching! Plus I'd have to find links going back to some basics like GPGPUs, to correct your wonky foundations of understanding which are leading to wonky theories.

And if I am wrong, why do my calculations end up with a wii that is 2 to 3 times more powerful than gamecube
...
1.5 overclocked gamecube is just speed, is not power

1.5X clockspeed multiplied by two Flipper TEVs = 3x the graphics power. Simple answer is your maths is wrong.

 

[tapionvslink]

You didn't read the part where I said I was talking about TSMC and the 1T-SRAM.

I'm not talking about the eDRAM. You are again confusing 24Mbits and 24 MBytes. The 1t-sram is the 24MBytes chip.





Yes, this assumption is wrong because NEC is talking about a comparison to other companies' efforts with eDRAM.

I know what are MBits

24MBiyes are 3MBytes and thats for gamecube not wii

http://www.necel.com/magazine/en/vol_0039/vol_0039.pdf


"

Leaping out of the trenches​

Years ago, NEC Electronics saw that embedded DRAM would be enormously valuable for
SoCs and began looking for ways to meet all the requirements of high-performance
embedded DRAM for CMOS chips. The company invested heavily in developing new
stacked-capacitor methods and materials, and these investments have paid off in a series
of embedded DRAM technologies that are fully compatible with standard CMOS. While
hardly a handful of other companies have managed this achievement, NEC Electronics has
done it with amazing performance results.
The latest generation of NEC Electronics embedded DRAM (using the 90-nm UX6D
process) offers random access times shorter than those of competing products by a factor
of 10. That means the NEC Electronics DRAM can provide data to an SoC's processor far
faster than other embedded DRAM.
If the SoC is in a game system, the system gains the ability to run Mario and Metroid with
stunning realism at a breakneck pace. An SoC made by a previous generation of the NEC
Electronics process is indeed at the heart of every Nintendo GameCube? system. This
complex graphics chip contains six million logic gates and 24 megabits of embedded
DRAM. NEC Electronics has fabricated millions of these chips.
The new UX6D generation allows designers to pack even more DRAM and processing
power into a single chip. If half of a typical-size UX6D SoC consists of embedded DRAM,
for example, the DRAM capacity is about 256 megabits.​

"

256MBits are 32MBytes and flipper die was about 110mm2

half of flipper is 55mm2 approx

Then
1mm2 = 0.58181818MBytes

Get it

Ok so you dont believe me that nec is the manufacturer then read

http://gear.ign.com/articles/713/713254p1.html

See, even they show you what eDRAM wii will use


Not enough well
http://edn.firstlightera.com/EN/Mic...erica/EmbeddedDRAMsolutionsfromNECElectronics


"Embedded DRAM Overview

White Papers

• NEC 55nm eDRAM Backgrounder
  (09/2006) (
  
  111KB)
• New ASIC Process Technology Makes Embedded DRAM Practical Choice For High-Performance Applications
  (02/2003) (
  
  249KB)
• NEC Electronics Embedded DRAM Over 10 GBPS SONET/SDH and Ethernet Takes Off
  (11/2003) (
  
  2.80MB)

As the industry leader in performance and volume delivery, NEC Electronics has traditionally delivered embedded DRAM (eDRAM) solutions with each new generation of its standard process. This was true of the 90 nm and 55 nm nodes, and it will remain true for the 40 nm node. In this new eDRAM family as well as previous generations, our technology leadership spans many features.
Following are some of the features that make eDRAM from NEC Electronics the ideal solution for a wide variety of applications.

• Random access time an order of magnitude shorter than competitor offerings
• Fully CMOS-compatible process using a single fab and few extra masks to minimize cost
• SRAM-like access for easy integration with existing intellectual property (IP)
• SoC-friendly macros that simplify integration, with orientation in any direction and over-the-top routing
• The latest 55 nm family, which adds significant process enhancements to the improved materials that have proven so successful in our previous 90 nm family

These characteristics have helped fuel the growing popularity of eDRAM for a variety of applications – from communications systems to home electronics, from enterprise servers to entertainment systems. NEC Electronics has shipped high volumes of ASICs with eDRAM for all of these application areas. The success complex system LSI chip for the Nintendo Wii™ and Microsoft® XBox 360™ has propelled fabrication volume to many millions of devices.

In chip after chip, ASIC designers are seeing the benefits of embedded DRAM as well as the advantages of NEC Electronics' broad experience with eDRAM applications. That experience continues to pay dividends in our latest generation. This 90 nm technology leverages process enhancements to achieve fast access times while keeping power consumption surprisingly low, making this eDRAM ideal for portable applications such as mobile phones.
"

 

[Shifty Geezer]

Is obvious that by this way the SDK is hidding somthing, pehaps they do not want anyone to see the true amount of memory on the eDRAM

Can you link to any precedent where a tech company has included better tech in their hardware but kept it hidden from the users and developers? As this is a core principle to your argument, you need to make it plausible. convince us that it's in Nintendo's interests to release a machine and deliberately 'deactivate' part of it to make it perform at a significantly lower level. I can think of some cases, like PSP's downclocking and disabling processing cores, but they have been for clear reasons, like battery life or securing yields or product differentiation for different market sectors.

 

[AlNom]

Ok so you dont believe me that nec is the manufacturer then read

Again, you seem to have a reading comprehension issue, I am not disagreeing that NEC is the eDRAM producer. I was talking about the 1T-SRAM at TSMC.

 

[tapionvslink]

Except that assertion wouldn't fit with both what other developers have said and what the Wii is outputting. I'm not going to go into the effort of finding links because, unlike you, my job doesn't allow me hours and hours of net searching! Plus I'd have to find links going back to some basics like GPGPUs, to correct your wonky foundations of understanding which are leading to wonky theories.

1.5X clockspeed multiplied by two Flipper TEVs = 3x the graphics power. Simple answer is your maths is wrong.

clock speed is just for a better communication betweeb a device on one side of the bus to another at the other side. Speed is a matter of bandwith, not power

I think you shoul feel for saying lame thinks just for trying to go against me.

You need strong infrastructure, not just comments

This is not the first formun I have posted, I already got expeirence, and all what you are saying is the same as other forums that are wii haters , and all of them havent yet proved me wrong.

Why dont you say things like, it doesnt matter how much power wii has hidden, as long is not used it wont matter?

that would be a valid assumption, and not just a comment.

 

[tapionvslink]

Again, you seem to have a reading comprehension issue, I am not disagreeing that NEC is the eDRAM producer. I was talking about the 1T-SRAM at TSMC.

You also do it, I am employed TSMC as example.

And is not my fault that 1T-SRAM and neither 1T-SRAM-Q are not available at 90nm production.

The only thing that the table doesnt provide is NEC as a manufacturer, since even in the 180nm production you cant see it and only TSMC is mentioned, so obviously we have to find our answers in NEC´s homepage

NEC is the manufacturer and mosys the macro designer.

UX6D is 1T-SRAM-Q fabricated with mim2 technology of nec

while 1T-SRAM-MIM is 1T-SRAM-Q fabricated with MIM technology of TSMC

 

[Shifty Geezer]

clock speed is just for a better communication betweeb a device on one side of the bus to another at the other side.

No, it isn't. This is another example of where your fundamental understanding is flawed, and thus your whole argument is off. The clock speed determines how many times the logiuc units can executre a command in a second. Increase the clock speed by 1.5x and you increase the number of instructions and thus processing throughput be exactly 1.5 times. Double up the number of execution units and you have exactly 3x the processing performance.

This is not the first formun I have posted, I already got expeirence, and all what you are saying is the same as other forums that are wii haters , and all of them havent yet proved me wrong.

Here's a tip - they're not Wii haters, only tapionvslink haters.

If everywhere you go the reception is the same, that's some pretty stellar evidence that it is you at fault. The only way that would not be the case is if the whole world is out to get the Wii, and that's a very irrational view if you understand human psychology. Reality is most of us just plain don't care what is inside any particular box. Here on B3D, we like to understand tech, and we look into it, so a sensible person presenting sensible arguments would be welcome. A person spamming links and opinions and yet not following through the rebutals, instead criticising everyone who's trying to engage in the debate, is not welcome here nor anywhere else.

 

[tapionvslink]

No, it isn't. This is another example of where your fundamental understanding is flawed, and thus your whole argument is off. The clock speed determines how many times the logiuc units can executre a command in a second. Increase the clock speed by 1.5x and you increase the number of instructions and thus processing throughput be exactly 1.5 times. Double up the number of execution units and you have exactly 3x the processing performance.

Here's a tip - they're not Wii haters, only tapionvslink haters.

If everywhere you go the reception is the same, that's some pretty stellar evidence that it is you at fault. The only way that would not be the case is if the whole world is out to get the Wii, and that's a very irrational view if you understand human psychology. Reality is most of us just plain don't care what is inside any particular box. Here on B3D, we like to understand tech, and we look into it, so a sensible person presenting sensible arguments would be welcome. A person spamming links and opinions and yet not following through the rebutals, instead criticising everyone who's trying to engage in the debate, is not welcome here nor anywhere else.

Proves of your plotting amigo, proves

 

[tapionvslink]

No, it isn't. This is another example of where your fundamental understanding is flawed, and thus your whole argument is off. The clock speed determines how many times the logiuc units can executre a command in a second. Increase the clock speed by 1.5x and you increase the number of instructions and thus processing throughput be exactly 1.5 times. Double up the number of execution units and you have exactly 3x the processing performance.

Here's a tip - they're not Wii haters, only tapionvslink haters.

If everywhere you go the reception is the same, that's some pretty stellar evidence that it is you at fault. The only way that would not be the case is if the whole world is out to get the Wii, and that's a very irrational view if you understand human psychology. Reality is most of us just plain don't care what is inside any particular box. Here on B3D, we like to understand tech, and we look into it, so a sensible person presenting sensible arguments would be welcome. A person spamming links and opinions and yet not following through the rebutals, instead criticising everyone who's trying to engage in the debate, is not welcome here nor anywhere else.

If you are an adult show respect and defend your position with proves, do not act as an spoiled child. You may be the moderator, but that doesnt give you the right to treat me this way.

 

[tapionvslink]

No, it isn't. This is another example of where your fundamental understanding is flawed, and thus your whole argument is off. The clock speed determines how many times the logiuc units can executre a command in a second. Increase the clock speed by 1.5x and you increase the number of instructions and thus processing throughput be exactly 1.5 times. Double up the number of execution units and you have exactly 3x the processing performance.

Here's a tip - they're not Wii haters, only tapionvslink haters.

If everywhere you go the reception is the same, that's some pretty stellar evidence that it is you at fault. The only way that would not be the case is if the whole world is out to get the Wii, and that's a very irrational view if you understand human psychology. Reality is most of us just plain don't care what is inside any particular box. Here on B3D, we like to understand tech, and we look into it, so a sensible person presenting sensible arguments would be welcome. A person spamming links and opinions and yet not following through the rebutals, instead criticising everyone who's trying to engage in the debate, is not welcome here nor anywhere else.

Pity, since my all I am trying to do is prove that wii is really capable so that customers start to demand quality. I am not even attaking 360 or ps3 and you still try to embarrass the Wii system with the only purpose of defending the HD consoles and so that those of the wii community cannot enjoy good games until maybe in a long time.

You just want to slow down things

 

[tapionvslink]

No, it isn't. This is another example of where your fundamental understanding is flawed, and thus your whole argument is off. The clock speed determines how many times the logiuc units can executre a command in a second. Increase the clock speed by 1.5x and you increase the number of instructions and thus processing throughput be exactly 1.5 times. Double up the number of execution units and you have exactly 3x the processing performance.

Here's a tip - they're not Wii haters, only tapionvslink haters.

If everywhere you go the reception is the same, that's some pretty stellar evidence that it is you at fault. The only way that would not be the case is if the whole world is out to get the Wii, and that's a very irrational view if you understand human psychology. Reality is most of us just plain don't care what is inside any particular box. Here on B3D, we like to understand tech, and we look into it, so a sensible person presenting sensible arguments would be welcome. A person spamming links and opinions and yet not following through the rebutals, instead criticising everyone who's trying to engage in the debate, is not welcome here nor anywhere else.

3X PERFORMANCE, but not power