Wii U hardware discussion and investigation *rename

Doesn't mean it can't be a spoof of his/her sig.

And the Wii 2.0 comment doesn't even work considering its issue was outdated hardware.

 

Wiiu it outdated also, its using a 2008 gpu core. Opengl and dx are out dated. But that wasn't the point I was making.

All the talk about power, small size, game demo, early dev kits... etc. It just reminds of the threads we had about the wii.

The big difference we don't know what ms/Sony are doing.

 

Dude, there's nothing "outdated" about Wii U. Power has nothing to do with that. And I have no idea why you'd even mention DirectX and OpenGL, considering those APIs are neither "outdated" nor used by Nintendo to begin with.

 

You said Wii 2.0 and I responded to that. And just because the discussion makes you think back to that doesn't guarantee the same outcome.

We have a pretty decent idea of what MS and Sony are doing. And all three consoles are pointing to a similar direction with MS and Sony having more raw power.

And I'm not even understanding the "OpenGL and DX are outdated" comment. That makes no sense.

 

We had this dx talk back in march.

DirectX versions indicate a certain level hardware features. NO console game runs on top of direct x

Never said anything about any outcome. Rumors saying ps4 is targeting 8-10x and Xbox 720 targeting 6-8x. Nice jump to next Gen. That a lot more power...

 

Of course not since Nintendo doesn't use DX. But if ports from DX9-level hardware is your evidence, then it's not very good support. Isn't the hardware of PS360 why people make the claim that PCs are held back by them? *Rhetorical*

Then if you aren't talking about the outcome then why even bother making the comparison to where you said "Wii 2.0"? And forget the multiplier rumors. We've been talking about real target specs for months now.

 

"real target specs" yeah those have been all over the place.

I was talking about this discussion thread. Not any outcome. Thought the wii was a huge success. Not sure why you getting upset about wii 2.0.

 

I gotcha. There has been much worse said than that the past year and I didn't get upset over it. I definitely won't get upset over this. I just like discussion and debating.

The real target specs haven't been all over the place. We've been talking about them in the Prediction thread for awhile now.

 

The Wii's dimensions were dictated by the size of its optical drive, not its TDP.

 

You still don't know what GPU core is being used, and how much it's customized.

 

Would "The real target specs" please raise their hand?
They seem to have eluded me in the morass of claims and mudslinging.


Discussing various possible paths a platform creator can take, and possible hardware implementations that could follow can be interesting and even educational. But if we never get the actual real life answer to all those economic/technical/marketing questions, the crucial feedback is missing. Example, over a year after its introduction, can anyone tell me what width the PICA2000 in the 3DS has and at what clocks it runs? Was it a good choice given performance/power/size/cost/time to market constraints? We know too little to even have reasonable opinions, much less answers.
I have a feeling the situation will be the same with WiiU.

 

Noob speculation: Could the 2MB L2 cache of the C1 core be shared with the GPU (unified address space) for GPGPU purposes?
I see no other reason for it being so big.

 

I have a feeling that forumaccount is right and this thread will still be raging on two years after November.

 

Pica 200 was a woefull choice, no matter what clocks, it's a bit better than the original psp...enough said.

 

And 3DS is related to Wii U... how exactly? Same company doesn't mean squat.

 

It does mean squat because it gives us an insight to the likely power requirements nintendo looks for in its gpus...as we are just talking about scraps and guessing I think it's a valid relevant talking point.

 

You're really, really wrong there. Not that it really matters, as Nintendo handhelds and consoles are developed by two distinct teams as far as I'm aware. Consoles are designed by NTD (Nintendo Technology Development) in Redmond, handhelds by RED (Research & Engineering Department) in Kyoto.

 

PS4 or Xbox 3? Because those are the consoles I'm talking about when it comes to target specs.

 

Can you please explain why a gpu demoed in 2006, which as far as I'm aware is only open gl es 1.1 with a few extras(I could be wrong here as nintendo may have optimised for open gl es 2.0)
Is a good gpu for 2011??

Its not as if it is power efficient either as the device sucks juice at a phenomenal rate, and it's only very low resolution.
The pica 200 has only a small advantage of raw processing power over psp, even if other does push out a healthy texture fill rate.

Nintendo could have gone with a single sgx 543 at 200Hz and walked all over it...its relevant because nintendo has a very very low priority over all internal working especially its gpus, they prioritise one feature at the expense of graphics.don't forget the nintendo 3ds is not exactly cheap either.

I'm afraid this will play out once again with wuu, I'm betting the gpu will be horribly under powered just like the 3ds, with he controller once again being the feature it has undercut all the other components for.

 

Yes, obviously handheld, battery powered devices power requirements are related to home console, powered by powerplug in your wall