Its going to be almost impossible to discuss the visual performance of the WiiU with out comparing it to other systems, because without comparing it to other games how are people going to have an idea of its visual performance?.
-
Hey, guest user. Hope you're enjoying NeoGAF! Have you considered registering for an account? Come join us and add your take to the daily discourse.
WiiU technical discussion (serious discussions welcome)
- Thread starter blu
- Start date
Its going to be almost impossible to discuss the visual performance of the WiiU with out comparing it to other systems, because without comparing it to other games how are people going to have an idea of its visual performance?.
I'd say probably 256MB at most, 512MB if they allow devs to disable the internet browser while the game is running. Several tabs open and ability to watch streaming video doesn't come for free, just check the memory footprint for the browser you're using right now on your computer in the task panel.
I don't see why a platform dedicated OS should need that amount. If i remember correctly, the rumor has it that PS4 only has 512 MB for its OS.
Depends on what you intend to do with it. Maybe they wanted to be on the safe side at the beginning just like the 3DS, but a web browser nowadays eats RAM like a champ as soon as you design it to be multi-tab no matter how good optimized it is. We'll just have to wait and see what does the PS4 web browser do to make a sensible comparison.
Carpe Diem
Banned
Brilliant article. The last paragraph especially resounds in truth and is applicable to any video game console. People need to realize that the Wii U like Ninteodo is different destined to always offer a "different" gaming experience .
About your browser argument. I just saw Firefox needed about 350 MB with 6 tabs of my regular websites open. The exact same websites/pages almost needed Chrome to use up double. Who's to say that amount can't further be trimmed? Personally, i'd have no issues with Nintendo limiting tabs to say 5, if that meant freeing up 512 MB in games. If you know what Criterion did with the extra 512MB (compared to PS360), i'd say it's worth it.
frankie_baby
Member
the wii u uses some sort of netfront browser design for very very low memory usage, doubt even 6 tabs uses more than a couple of hundred megabytes (though i did pull that guess out of my ass) personally i'd be happy with just 3 or 4 tabs
The PS4 uses super fast GDDR5 ram compared to the Wii U. Maybe that has something to do with it.
frankie_baby
Member
i'm inclined to think the 2 gig ram could've been a later addition to the console, we heard several times numbers such as 1.5gb and even 768mb popped up, possibly could it originally have been planned at 1.5gb overall (768 for games and 768 for os) with the increase nintento just put an extra 256 to games with the with the next 256 in limbo as a wait and see til nintendo add features and/or shrink the os footprint?
blu
Wants the largest console games publisher to avoid Nintendo's platforms.
The 1.5GB config could have been a mere conjecture from the info that the devkit contains 3GB - people automatically deduced the consumer unit should have 1.5GB, whereas the actual reason for 3GB was 1GB OS-reserved + 2x game mem for debug.
frankie_baby
Member
Since it is using "wiiu" mode, i would say earlier games could benefit from it potentially. It's not like in BC mode, so i would think, yes.
That's how i always perceived it. Devkit was 1GB OS, 1 GB games, 1 GB debug. Leave out the OS (which devs have nothing to do with) and you get the usual "double" amount for debug.
frankie_baby
Member
i guess they'd need to be patched though?
That's what I wanted to hearThanks for answering my questions.
Wait, this is just my simple logic. You might want to wait for confirmation by someone like Blu, Wsippel or other before running with it.
I don't know. I was thinking about that as a "worst case scenario"... but how is memory managed by games (on a console)? Is it not automatically "available" for games, so that it can influence loading times etc? Or are games programmed to not use more than 1GB, even if no more were available? I would think on PC this might be different from a console. But still, games that struggle from not enough memory could be patched, and that would be a small price to pay
Refreshment.01
Member
Do you think that, 2 years from now, the Wii U hardware entirely (console + Upad) could be put in one package the same size and form factor as the Upad within the same price range?
For me that would be the ultimate redesign of the console and something that really extracts the full potential of the concept.
For me that would be the ultimate redesign of the console and something that really extracts the full potential of the concept.
Not to answer your question, but when we didn't know what the Wii was yet 7-8 years ago, except the name "revolution" and it being completely different hardware, i had a theory about it being some form of super Gameboy, with a docking station at home. You play on the go as a regular gameboy, get home, put it on the docking station (which has the cables plugged into the tv and wall socket, maybe extra RAM etc to be able to get higher res textures on tv...). Yup, crazy idea
No. The power consumption won't come down to that level in just two years. Pretty sure not even a shrink to 22nm would do the trick.
frankie_baby
Member
2 years no, 4 years maybe
Refreshment.01
Member
Ok thanks a lot people for answering my question. Bare with me a lil extra here. And that's because of the components used in the device? So in 2 years a device with similar capabilites but using other components could be fitted in such form factor close to the price range we are talking about?
Don't know if i was clear enough with the latest question.
Like Intel, ARM, PowerVR, and Nvidia (and whoever else in the space)? I wouldn't be too surprised, perhaps a bit longer though. There's a lot of companies with a lot of resources targeting that space, and they've been making big strides. The question is whether they can sustain that progress as they mature and run into more hurdles managing execution power vs power consumption. PowerVR Series 6 (GPU) should be interesting whenever it comes out in the next year or two, I think the target was 1TF but I imagine that's with a much higher power envelope than what will be used in most shipping devices (like the current gen products were mentioned with 16 core versions but most devices use 4 or less). On the CPU front I think they might already be in the ballpark actually (low end old computer basically).
For the form factor and price I think it'd just depend on the company and part cost/availability. I figure the latter would eventually scale enough to be fine for cheapo tablets...but there'd likely be weaker and cheaper options available that would work fine for most people.
You were, and I heavily doubt it. Wii U is already impressively efficient, yet its power consumption is measured in Watts, not Milliwatts.
It was a good question though.
bgassassin
Member
Thanks. I clicked on that article, started doing something else, and then forgot to read it.
I was thinking the other day that I wonder what Nintendo would do with a 100W budget for games.
100 watts would still be considered reasonable and efficient. Power draw for anything other than CPU/RAM/GPU would remain static so you could raise them up substantially. What if this Latte were a 60W part?
It would be two to three times as fast on paper but less efficient and very unbalanced.
As far as I'm concerned you can look at the wiiu two ways:
If you ignore the release date/360/ps3 (ie nintendo fans coming from the wii), its a very very impressive GPU for the power it uses
If you take into account the above (ie multi plat owners), the power the machine has is rather pathetic and outdated
If you ignore the release date/360/ps3 (ie nintendo fans coming from the wii), its a very very impressive GPU for the power it uses
If you take into account the above (ie multi plat owners), the power the machine has is rather pathetic and outdated
Smoothice65
Member
The problem/diffrence is the Wii U doesn't really relies on the CPU. Its that GPGPU architecture story that third party devs need to get custom to, to really bring out its full power and alsoo the updated SDK tools from Nintendo's side. There still updating the SDK's so things are looking better. So saying the CPU is weaker is JUST by design or am i missing something ?
Not sure what you're saying, but the problems so far have nothing to do with GPGPU features or not. The CPU is not a powerhouse but is very lean and efficient for game related stuff. The GPU seems to be "exotic" and not well documented (yet).
Smoothice65
Member
What are the GPGPU features in your understanding ? I am saying that ps3/360 relies heavenly on the CPU because of the architecture of the console. The Wii U does that with the GPU thats the struggle that Criterion had getting it to work with the GPU, so how does that have nothing to do with GPGPU ?
lightchris
Member
That's pure speculation. At least I don't see anything in the interview stating that they use GPGPU.
Smoothice65
Member
Thats just the Wii U's platform, how else are they going to port the game with a CPU a clock speed of 1.3 GHZ. I maybe wrong but that's just my understanding so far.
Nostremitus
Member
I agree that if they had to recode anything they probably had to move normal GPU functions back to the GPU, but that has nothing to do with GPGPU features. PS360 engines moved GPU functions to the CPU due to their lackluster GPUs. If they had to move normal CPU functions to the GPU, that would be considered using GPGPU features... It's possible they changed the physics engine to run on the GPU, but I doubt it. Sorry if that sounds confusing.
Also this, the CPUs are different beasts altogether.
frankie_baby
Member
clockspeed is a pretty irrelevant measure these days
tkscz
Member
If the game is ported correctly, like it was, then they would've programmed around said clock speeds and had the game running at 60 FPS with them. Clock speeds and other numbered specs are really only a PC thing. Talking about closed boxes are a completely different animal. The RAM amount in the PS3 and 360 is a prime example of it.
Smoothice65
Member
No this is very understandable, and this is what I mean. I thought that the GPGPU was the complete platform and not a feature set. But this is where the console are going, look at the specs of the ps4 and durango they have the similar specs only with more cores (a bit higher cpu clock speed) and more ram. Its just a matter of adjusting.
Nostremitus
Member
GPGPU functionality just means the the GPU can run 'General Purpose' processes like physics, things that CPUs normally handle. Don't confuse that with normal GPU functions that PS360 CPUs were forced to handle, though.
No, clock speeds are not just a "PC thing".
They are just not 1:1 comparable between different architecture, you need to take into account avg IPC as well.
No, the PS4 and what the fuck the next xbox will be called are not just like the WiiU with more CPU cores and RAM, they also have much more powerful GPUs and tons more main memory bandwidth (in the PS4's case over an order of magnitude more).
Just found something regarding the power consumption discussion:
According to Chipworks, Latte is manufactured using an "advanced 40nm TSMC process". So I checked TSMCs website, and it turns out there's a process called 40LPG. 40LPG is a "new" process in the sense that while it was scheduled for 2009, it seemingly didn't become available until 2011. It combines two different processes, namely 40LP (low power) and 40G (high performance), on a single die. Essentially, some blocks of the chip are 40G, others are 40LP, depending on their characteristics and requirements, leading to a lower power consumption and potentially higher density. This process was never used in the PC space as far as I know, only in certain SoCs like Tegra 3.
According to Chipworks, Latte is manufactured using an "advanced 40nm TSMC process". So I checked TSMCs website, and it turns out there's a process called 40LPG. 40LPG is a "new" process in the sense that while it was scheduled for 2009, it seemingly didn't become available until 2011. It combines two different processes, namely 40LP (low power) and 40G (high performance), on a single die. Essentially, some blocks of the chip are 40G, others are 40LP, depending on their characteristics and requirements, leading to a lower power consumption and potentially higher density. This process was never used in the PC space as far as I know, only in certain SoCs like Tegra 3.
Sure, if you ignore three out of the four memory pools the Wii U has available...
frankie_baby
Member
ok so things are getting interesting and confusing again
frankie_baby
Member
so this new process, anyone have any idea what sort of density improvements it allowed for tegra?
No idea. I would imagine that LP blocks can be denser as the leakage is lower. Considering Lattes eDRAM density seems very high, that part of the chip could be an LP block for example. Whereas the shader clusters would obviously be G blocks. If that process is used at all, that is. I have no idea if it's even possible to tell by looking at die shots.
Honest question - Where do we stand on the old idea that the Watson twitter leak was actually accurate and hushed by an NDA about a Power7 variant? I know that the Wii U doom and gloomers have already ruled this out for us, but where do the people who know what they are seeing and talking about stand on this old piece of leaked info from IBM? I know Thraktor had brought this up in the past, but Van Owen derailed his thoughts fairly quickly....
<sob>
Similar threads
- Poll
- Poll