Well it is less than a month till we get news.
http://www.thewiire.com/news/385/1/Nintendo_to_Deliver_Games_Convention_Keynote
http://www.thewiire.com/news/385/1/Nintendo_to_Deliver_Games_Convention_Keynote
WiiGeePeeYou (Hollywood) what IS it ?
- Thread starter Megadrive1988
- Start date
- Status
Ooh-videogames
Regular
So the guys from Retro are wrong about Broadway/Hollywood being a new architecture?
How is Hollywood a upgraded Flipper with nothing new, so is an increase in MHZ a nice upgrade after 5 years on the market. Also why would Nintendo release first dev kits without Hollywood if it had no architectural changes.
How is Hollywood a upgraded Flipper with nothing new, so is an increase in MHZ a nice upgrade after 5 years on the market. Also why would Nintendo release first dev kits without Hollywood if it had no architectural changes.
Last edited by a moderator:
Hey, I'm a game developer too. I'd just like to confirm that Wii will in fact be a bowl of Froot Loops sealed inside a box.
Come on! The DS is more like a bike. Where's your sense of proportions?inefficient said:
No, Wii's more like a compact scooter with a nice, modern design to it but underneath it's still an aircooled 2-stroke engine just like all other scooters.
Guden Oden said:Come on! The DS is more like a bike. Where's your sense of proportions?
No, Wii's more like a compact scooter with a nice, modern design to it but underneath it's still an aircooled 2-stroke engine just like all other scooters.
More like a compact scooter that can be driven using nothing but the power of your mind
Don't be ridiculous Fearsome. You just told us you created the Wii's hardware while on your Math's Masters. When did you get time to become a software developer too?! I'm afraid that little inconsistency just cost you all creditability and I no longer believe you created the Wii's components, nor that it's a bowl of fruit loops.fearsomepirate said:
Those specs look legit to me. I mean if you look at Nintendo's form factor for Wii, and guess it's power and thermal envelope, you know it's not going to contain massive amounts of silicon. It handles backwards compatibility in convenient way, and allows them to continue to leverage their existing toolsets, etc. And since XBox 360 is only a XBox 1.5, then a GC 1.5 puts them right in the running. I don't understand the thinking behind Nintendo being able to pack a ton of transistors into that tiny box. The PS3 is approx. 5KG and has larger dimensions than the original XBox. I mean I know Nintendo is an amazing place, much like Willy Wonka's Chocolate factory, but in the end, the same laws of physics must still be applied.
Megadrive1988
Veteran
the oddest thing to me is, what was external main system memory in Gamecube
(24 MB 1T-SRAM) has supposedly become embedded memory in Hollywood.
3 MB of embedded 1T-SRAM took up roughly 26 million transistors in Flipper -- slightly over half of Flipper's transistor count.
how many transistors is the 24 MB 1T-STAM in Hollywood going to take up - 208M ?
correct me if mistaken, but even assuming its a newer generation of 1T-SRAM, the amount of transistors that 24 MB would take up if embedded onto a chip, would not go down.
plus then there's the 3 MB of 1T-SRAM that was in flipper ~26M transistors + ~208M transistors ???? before we even get to the logic--which might very well be well under 100M transistors.
I just don't buy it.
(24 MB 1T-SRAM) has supposedly become embedded memory in Hollywood.
3 MB of embedded 1T-SRAM took up roughly 26 million transistors in Flipper -- slightly over half of Flipper's transistor count.
how many transistors is the 24 MB 1T-STAM in Hollywood going to take up - 208M ?
correct me if mistaken, but even assuming its a newer generation of 1T-SRAM, the amount of transistors that 24 MB would take up if embedded onto a chip, would not go down.
plus then there's the 3 MB of 1T-SRAM that was in flipper ~26M transistors + ~208M transistors ???? before we even get to the logic--which might very well be well under 100M transistors.
I just don't buy it.
Rockster, XBox 360 isn't an XBox 1.5 and PS3's size and weight isn't really relivant either. The gap between these supposed Wii specs and PS3 is bigger then the grand canyon, so its not as if Nintendo need to match the PS3 just to make there console more then a 50% overclocked GC. Also remember that GC was in a tiny box compared to XBox and PS2, but it was up there with both machines technologically. Case size just does not limit technology as much as you think.
Last edited by a moderator:
Fox5 said:
No idea.
I found this interesting little tid-bit....
http://www.maxconsole.net/?mode=news&newsid=8802
Wasn't there a thread around here about certain types of lighting causing interference with the Wii controller? This seems to indicate that might actually be true.
I don't think the 24MB 1T-SRAM is embedded. I should think the layout looks the same as the current gamecube with the 64MB GDDR3 (now directly accessible by both CPU and GPU) replacing the 16MB Dram and the clocks 1.5x higher with slight microarchitectural tweaks to the chips. http://www.segatech.com/gamecube/overview/motherboard datapath.gif
The R&D that went into Cell, Xenos, current GeForce, etc. are all well documented as companies tend to disclose things which costs hundreds of millions of dollars. Nintendo has never stated that they are implementing some radical hardware architecture to remain competitive. Only that hardware specs don't a good game experience make. If they switched to some new architecture, then to maintain backwards compatibility they would either have to also include the existing GC hardware components or spend who knows how much in software emulation. The Wii is much smaller than the GC and includes much more memory (esp. considering the flash mem), wireless controller and network support, larger optical media, etc., etc. The PS3 and XBox360 are spending a considerable amount of resources to paint more pixels to fill HD displays. The Wii might be able to do a similar amount of work per pixel considering it needs to draw far fewer. Case size doesn't limit technology in terms of extracting performance per transistor, but does limit the total number of them.
The R&D that went into Cell, Xenos, current GeForce, etc. are all well documented as companies tend to disclose things which costs hundreds of millions of dollars. Nintendo has never stated that they are implementing some radical hardware architecture to remain competitive. Only that hardware specs don't a good game experience make. If they switched to some new architecture, then to maintain backwards compatibility they would either have to also include the existing GC hardware components or spend who knows how much in software emulation. The Wii is much smaller than the GC and includes much more memory (esp. considering the flash mem), wireless controller and network support, larger optical media, etc., etc. The PS3 and XBox360 are spending a considerable amount of resources to paint more pixels to fill HD displays. The Wii might be able to do a similar amount of work per pixel considering it needs to draw far fewer. Case size doesn't limit technology in terms of extracting performance per transistor, but does limit the total number of them.
Rockster said:
Actually wii does use more power than GC (info from Nintendo itself) (and if this is true much less silicon than GC (equal chips at 90nm) strange no?
), so they should be able to get much more performance if they use the silicon properly.There is other way of getting cheap (cost/power) performance too, eg using special purpose HW.
Anyway like said before there is too many things that just dont add up.
- Status
