Wii U hardware discussion and investigation *rename

[shinobi]

Because quite frankly, most of those folks are delusional cheerleaders for Nintendo opting to live in their own version of the world.

That's what i thought.
really sad some people can be so emotionally attached that they would start making up things up like that.

 

[shinobi]

I think that's fair to say. Some are so obsessed with "500gflops or more" talk and are utterly convinced that the Wii U has some super secret tech that'll make it comparable to Durango.

"Oh but it technically has the capability to do DX11 effects just like the other new consoles! Oh but it has GPGPU! Oh but it also has embedded ram!"

My view is, we would actually being seeing that substantial increase in GPU power on the screen, even in half baked ports if it was there.

Even if the GPU is superior to the 360's and PS3's, its A) bottle-necked by the other design choices, B) not much stronger anyway or C) Both of these.

I've always thought that the Wii U's GPU would be in the 300-350 gflop range. Its stronger than the 360 and PS3's 250 gflops i'm sure, just because its based on a(more) modern architecture by default and a GPU under 250glops would probably be more expensive than just going with something like a cut down 4650.

I mean all these facts being thrown in there face, i can't believe they still believe in GPU magic, the system has so many bottlenecks, just to save a few dollars and they expect the gpu to perform magic

 

[Well]

My question is, does it matter? Assuming you are a person who owns multiple consoles, you are only buying a Wii U for Nintendo games which will be heavily optimized for the system anyway. Plus, the art style Nintendo often uses tends to hide flaws. Heck, if most Wii games had their internal frame buffer set to 720p HD, you might think it was a Wii U game (SSB and Skyward Sword definitely come to mind).

No it doesn´t matter.

I mean all these facts being thrown in there face, i can't believe they still believe in GPU magic, the system has so many bottlenecks, just to save a few dollars and they expect the gpu to perform magic

All the facts?

Some people keep saying the ports doesn´t deliver so Wii U is on par with PS360.

Lets see what Nintendo has to say:
http://www.gamnesia.com/news/nintendo-wii-u-cpu-isnt-weak-gpu-more-pronounced

The developer didn´t had enough time with the final devkits. I don´t know how powerful the Wii U really is, because Nintendo didn´t released the full specs.

We don´t have enough facts. This thread is only speculation.

 

[BRiT]

We don´t have enough facts. This thread is only speculation.

We have enough facts to form highly educated premises. To deny that and say this is purely speculation is disingenuous at best.

 

[Inuhanyou]

It doesn't matter to me no, but this is what a certain subsection of Nintendo fans seem to want, and they just have to realize its not going to happen.

When comparing closed architectures, a console with 1gb of ram for games with half the speed of current generation consoles and a 300-350gflop GPU running on an older achitecture, against a console with 5gb for games at the very least, with 6 times the normal bandwidth of the Wii U and a 1200gflop gpu with a GCN architecture. They are just not compatible.

 

[XpiderMX]

Ontopic: Any news about the "x-ray" picture from the GPU?

 

[AzaK]

reading the neogaf wiiu tech thread, some are convinced its more powerful then current gen, why is it so different here, fanboy speculation?

Because quite frankly, most of those folks are delusional cheerleaders for Nintendo opting to live in their own version of the world.

What a great idea, I wouldn't mind giving 5 bucks to find out how weak the Wii U actually is and finally end fanboy dreams of 500 GFLOP GPUs and hardware underutilized by MP titles.

That's what i thought.
really sad some people can be so emotionally attached that they would start making up things up like that.

I mean all these facts being thrown in there face, i can't believe they still believe in GPU magic, the system has so many bottlenecks, just to save a few dollars and they expect the gpu to perform magic

Awesome, high quality series of posts guys. If anyone's emotionally attached it seems you all are. For what it's worth there are actual developers on NeoGAF and people who do have a pretty good understanding of core tech inside consoles on there; as much as you guys would like to believe you're the only ones that know about anything.

I think you also need to go and actually read the NeoGAF Wii U threads? There really are very few regular contributors who believe there is any "Secret sauce" in the thing. Most people are just trying to piece together information based on what we know and what's leaked and come up with some sort of idea as to what the GPU is capable of. No more, no less.

In fact, we're the ones who were keen enough to fork out some money to try and get to the bottom of it. Which is more I can say for anyone else.

It doesn't matter to me no, but this is what a certain subsection of Nintendo fans seem to want, and they just have to realize its not going to happen.

When comparing closed architectures, a console with 1gb of ram for games with half the speed of current generation consoles and a 300-350gflop GPU running on an older achitecture, against a console with 5gb for games at the very least, with 6 times the normal bandwidth of the Wii U and a 1200gflop gpu with a GCN architecture. They are just not compatible.

Do you have a link to the 300-350GFlops thing? And what's this "1/2 speed of current generation console thing", I'm seriously confused.

Ontopic: Any news about the "x-ray" picture from the GPU?

1-2 days.

 

[Hardknock]

Do you have a link to the 300-350GFlops thing? And what's this "1/2 speed of current generation console thing", I'm seriously confused.

From what I understand the RAM has half the speed of the 360/ps3.

Edit: lol @ the Tags at the bottom of this thread

 

[shinobi]

Do you have a link to the 300-350GFlops thing? And what's this "1/2 speed of current generation console thing", I'm seriously confused.


1-2 days.

The ram bandwidth is half the speed of current gen, which should bottle neck the GPU, and the 300-350 gflops is just his estimate.

 

[shinobi]

I think you also need to go and actually read the NeoGAF Wii U threads? There really are very few regular contributors who believe there is any "Secret sauce" in the thing. Most people are just trying to piece together information based on what we know and what's leaked and come up with some sort of idea as to what the GPU is capable of. No more, no less.
.

I'm reading them now, most of it is fanboy speculation the last few pages, every single bottle neck seems to have some sort of magical solution.

 

[Inuhanyou]

Do you have a link to the 300-350GFlops thing? And what's this "1/2 speed of current generation console thing", I'm seriously confused.

The Wii U's main memory bandwidth is 12gb/s. Compared to 21gb/s for 360 and something similar for PS3. I'm surprised you don't know about that, the bandwidth speed of the main memory was one of the first things actually uncovered.

What is holding the Wii U's bandwidth up to begin with in order to run any kind of modern game is the EDRAM, and who knows what speed that is. It would not run any game without the EDRAM being used in some fashion.

As for my GPU statement, its simply my prediction, but don't be angry when it comes close to that. Sonic Racing Transformed dev said something to the effect of "comparable to the current generation but maybe slightly more". That fits a 300 to 350gflop gpu pretty well in comparison to 360 and PS3's 250gflops.

Either way, Nintendo probably wasn't incompetent enough to put in a GPU that was more powerful relative to the other components in the machine(ram, cpu ect), it would be bottle-necked to high heaven, held back from achieving its potential and in short, would just be a waste of silicon/money for Nintendo's budget.

I'm personally going with something comparable to a slightly cut down 4650 with some DX11 effects support pasted on.

I want Nintendo to succeed just as much as anyone, that's why i bought a Wii U and plan to support it by purchasing games in the years ahead. But facing facts, the Wii U is not a graphical powerhouse and is comparable to the current generation.

 

[Kb-Smoker]

Really I feel sorry for the wiiu fans. They were sold by insider on something and they got taken for a ride.

Power usage this is what we got?

33 watts max from wall @ 90% psu ~30 watts

Disk drive ~4 Watts Cpu ~8 watts

Whats left ~18

My guesses,anyone have hard numbers?
2GB DDR3 Ram ~2 Watts
wifi ~.5 Watts
Flash Storage/misc .5 Watts

Leaves about 15 watts for the whole gpu chip

Its very impressive that this little bit of power can keep up with the ps360. With 15 watts it will be tough to get even 352 gflops on 40nm.

 

[shinobi]

Really I feel sorry for the wiiu fans. They were sold by insider on something and they got taken for a ride.

Power usage this is what we got?

33 watts max from wall @ 90% psu ~30 watts

Disk drive ~4 Watts Cpu ~8 watts

Whats left ~18

My guesses,anyone have hard numbers?
2GB DDR3 Ram ~2 Watts
wifi ~.5 Watts
Flash Storage/misc .5 Watts

Leaves about 15 watts for the whole gpu chip

Its very impressive that this little bit of power can keep up with the ps360. With 15 watts it will be tough to get even 352 gflops on 40nm.

Well the GPU findings be the end of fanboy speculation?

 

[Inuhanyou]

Its very impressive that this little bit of power can keep up with the ps360. With 15 watts it will be tough to get even 352 gflops on 40nm.

I'm not going to comment on your mathematical speculation there, but i will just say that Wii U's efficiency does more to show how ancient the 360 and PS3's architectures are in the computing world than it shows how good Nintendo is designing technology.

Its actually pretty tough to find modern GPU's that go that low(to Xenos and RSX level) without the vendor intentionally neutering an existing GPU to get to that level.

33watts is absurdly low, and shows Nintendo's commitment to the small form factor with super low power draw. On the upside this helps with reliability of the hardware a ton. I'd be surprised if the Wii U even has a 3% breakdown ratio.

The power draw is only roughly double what the slim PS2 and Wii were actually.

 

[AzaK]

The Wii U's main memory bandwidth is 12gb/s. Compared to 21gb/s for 360 and something similar for PS3. I'm surprised you don't know about that, the bandwidth speed of the main memory was one of the first things actually uncovered.

Sorry I saw your "1/2 the speed comment" and thought you were talking about general speed as opposed to attaching it to the previous RAM comment. I've know about the RAM speed.

What is holding the Wii U's bandwidth up to begin with in order to run any kind of modern game is the EDRAM, and who knows what speed that is. It would not run any game without the EDRAM being used in some fashion.

As for my GPU statement, its simply my prediction, but don't be angry when it comes close to that. Sonic Racing Transformed dev said something to the effect of "comparable to the current generation but maybe slightly more". That fits a 300 to 350gflop gpu pretty well in comparison to 360 and PS3's 250gflops.

Oh I won't be angry as I don't expect the Wii U to be much more than the 360/PS3. I just take issue that everyone here seems to brush off everything that's been talked about in the NeoGAF Wii U threads as if everyone there has no clue.

Either way, Nintendo probably wasn't incompetent enough to put in a GPU that was more powerful relative to the other components in the machine(ram, cpu ect), it would be bottle-necked to high heaven, held back from achieving its potential and in short, would just be a waste of silicon/money for Nintendo's budget.

I'm personally going with something comparable to a slightly cut down 4650 with some DX11 effects support pasted on.

I just see Wii U as a machine optimised for low power consumption and budget prioritised for the GamePad. Within those limits Nintendo seems to have made a machine that's reasonably efficient with "moderate" capabilities. i.e. No where near Orbis/Durango but also a step above 360/PS3 when everything's taken into account (RAM size, GPU features etc)

Well the GPU findings be the end of fanboy speculation?

Who really cares whether it's fanboy this or hater that. Isn't it just great that we'll finally get some solid information on the GPU?

 

[shinobi]

Who really cares whether it's fanboy this or hater that. Isn't it just great that we'll finally get some solid information on the GPU?

that's what i'm saying, we will finally know the truth, no more speculation, while people here deal more with facts, on neogaf, it's more like wishful thinking.

 

[Shifty Geezer]

Oh I won't be angry as I don't expect the Wii U to be much more than the 360/PS3. I just take issue that everyone here seems to brush off everything that's been talked about in the NeoGAF Wii U threads as if everyone there has no clue.

They were dismissing shinobi's query about GAF suggestions Wii U is more powerful than PS360.

Within those limits Nintendo seems to have made a machine that's reasonably efficient...

Very efficient, achieving PS360 power with less than half the power.

with "moderate" capabilities. i.e. No where near Orbis/Durango but also a step above 360/PS3 when everything's taken into account (RAM size, GPU features etc)

This is the sort of subjective position that creates these constant circular arguments. What constitutes a 'step'? There are those claiming Wii U is more powerful, which is isn't. More flexible or optimised in some graphics task, probably, but more powerful overall, not really. So saying it's a step better will be interpreted by some unable to accept the truth when presented with good evidence will be cause them to get to excited and imagine a step as being a half-way point. If PS360 to Orb+Dur is ten steps, than perhaps Wii U is one?

Isn't it just great that we'll finally get some solid information on the GPU?

Indeed. Any ideas what they/you all are expecting to discover? We need eDRAM details and operation more than anything.

 

[AlNom]

1tri/clk. Not gonna see uber geometry.

 

[function]

I just see Wii U as a machine optimised for low power consumption and budget prioritised for the GamePad. Within those limits Nintendo seems to have made a machine that's reasonably efficient with "moderate" capabilities. i.e. No where near Orbis/Durango but also a step above 360/PS3 when everything's taken into account (RAM size, GPU features etc)

I think the Wii U does pretty well given its power consumption and mature processes, but overall it's an incredibly weak machine. It straddles the Xbox 360 in terms of capability thanks to its small and slow CPU. And that's pretty nasty for a late 2012 machine.

Who really cares whether it's fanboy this or hater that. Isn't it just great that we'll finally get some solid information on the GPU?

I think it's great that a few of the folks at NeoGaf banded together to get some high quality data on the chips in the WiiU. I can't help thinking that some of them are going to be very disappointed though.

If we know the number of ROPS, TMUs and shader blocks (4 x VLIW5 shader units in R7xx iirc) we'll know pretty much exactly how fast it is.

I'm guessing 320 shaders, with the possibility of less. Any more than 400 and I will eat my hat. I would need to go out and buy one first, but I would, and then I would eat it.

 

[AzaK]

I think the Wii U does pretty well given its power consumption and mature processes, but overall it's an incredibly weak machine. It straddles the Xbox 360 in terms of capability thanks to its small and slow CPU. And that's pretty nasty for a late 2012 machine.

I think it's great that a few of the folks at NeoGaf banded together to get some high quality data on the chips in the WiiU. I can't help thinking that some of them are going to be very disappointed though.

If we know the number of ROPS, TMUs and shader blocks (4 x VLIW5 shader units in R7xx iirc) we'll know pretty much exactly how fast it is.

I'm guessing 320 shaders, with the possibility of less. Any more than 400 and I will eat my hat. I would need to go out and buy one first, but I would, and then I would eat it.

I agree it's weak compared to tech of 2012 in PC's and Orbis/Durango, I don't think there's much argument there from anyone.

I'll keep the salt ready to make that hat more palatable but I imagine you won't need it

Very efficient, achieving PS360 power with less than half the power.
This is the sort of subjective position that creates these constant circular arguments. What constitutes a 'step'? There are those claiming Wii U is more powerful, which is isn't. More flexible or optimised in some graphics task, probably, but more powerful overall, not really. So saying it's a step better will be interpreted by some unable to accept the truth when presented with good evidence will be cause them to get to excited and imagine a step as being a half-way point. If PS360 to Orb+Dur is ten steps, than perhaps Wii U is one?

Sure, terminology plays a big part. What might be a step to me may not be to you.

Indeed. Any ideas what they/you all are expecting to discover? We need eDRAM details and operation more than anything.

Well we're hoping the usual shader counts, ROPS's, TU's etc. I don't know about the eDRAM and whether that sort of thing is easy to spot in a die pic, but I assume it would be.

I'm not the guy who's doing the purchasing and liaising with Chipworks nor breaking down the die shots, but the one who is indicated that Chipworks are pretty excited about us wanting to know the information and are helping us as much as they can. We'll see what that means in the end I guess.