Guts of the Wii U: Facts & Rumors

[RD3AV5]

Completely agree on all accounts @Devil_Rising. Beautifully said. I am just so TIRED of LAZY devs not taking the time to understand and engineer properly and accordingly to the Wii U. The easy way out is to say, "Hey! This is only 3 GHz compared to 3.2 GHz, it's too slow and won't work." Right... a 2.2 GHz sandy-bridge i7 is WAY slower than a 3.8 GHz Pentium 4... Sure if a program isn't DESIGNED to utilize the "newer" tech, then yeah a program built for a faster pentium 4 and LAZILY ported to a newer CPU that's clockspeed is "slower" won't perform as well. Give it a year or two and these complaints will be behind us.

Again, an i7 is a 6 core processor, a Pentium 4 is a one core processor, this isn't the same situation. A Wii U has a three core CPU and the 360 has a three core CPU. Yes there is newer architecture in the Wii U, yes, but a 2013 Chevy Volt still won't outperform a 2007 Mustang, the 360 being the Mustang. The 360 is believed to be clocked faster and has more threads, the Wii U is clocked slower with fewer threads and is based off of a low power laptop CPU, while the 360 is based off of a desktop CPU.
Enter the GPGPU, yes it will be able to compensate in some ways but it will need to walk in lock step with the CPU to do what the 360 CPU does on it's own. Maybe it will be able to achieve 120-150% more performance, but will it be worth the trouble? The Wii could run a lap around the PS2 yet the top tear PS2 games look better in most cases then the top tear Wii games because the AAA developers actually cared about PS2 games. What I'm saying is that like the Wii, even if there is more power to squeeze out of the Wii U developers will be reluctant to take the time to tailor games to it, as they were for the Wii, or the PS3 for that matter. When the other guys get their systems out and game development shifts gears the Wii U will be left behind just like the Wii was after it's initial strong PS2/Xbox ports like Scarface, Godfather & Bully 2 leaving only the exclusives (some good, some awful) and watered down ports (mostly garbage).
I'm just trying to counter blind faith with logic here, so don't get up in arms.

I am not doubting your technical prowess, but to start, there are VERY FEW hex-core i7 CPU's (like the 980X and 3930K) most are quad-core. And "Wii U is clocked slower with fewer threads" are still things we don't OFFICIALLY know. As well as the Wii U being a triple-core vs. a quad-core. We really don't know. The 360 has a triple-core with dual threading. If the Wii U has less threads than that, that means it really would be single-threaded. I'M not counting it out, but I SERIOUSLY DOUBT it has single threads. Heck, looking at the POWER7 series of IBM are all QUAD-threaded. Again, we aren't SURE, but from the devs I personally talked to it seems that the CPU could be the quad-core flavor from anywhere from 2.5 GHz to 3.0 GHz CPU. Nintendo has apparently locked one core away for "behind the scenes functions" and let devs have access to only 3 cores dedicated for games. I really feel that when devs get to understand the U's architecture that we will really see a nice jump in game quality.

[wiiarebrothers]

I don't think it's a problem of "devs getting to understand the U's architecture". It's more a question of Nintendo making their documentation and APIs easy to use, but also devs/publishers allocating time/budget for working on WiiU specifications.

I think it's more about "greedy publishers" than "lazy devs" here.

[RD3AV5]

I don't think it's a problem of "devs getting to understand the U's architecture". It's more a question of Nintendo making their documentation and APIs easy to use, but also devs/publishers allocating time/budget for working on WiiU specifications.

I think it's more about "greedy publishers" than "lazy devs" here.

Good point, but it's both really. Devs have said when they took the time to really understand and their game codes for the 360, separate from the Microsoft provided API tools, they had completely different code and it ran much smoother. Nintendo can only do SO much, but yeah, they and devs could do more. If only there was enough time and money...

[Devil_Rising]

Again, it's up to the developers, not the console itself. You talk about these strong ports, but that is the developers fault. Super Mario Galaxy looked great to me.

Developers saw money and got lazy.

Notice how the Wii was about twice as powerful as the GCN but didn't look anywhere as good (or shall I say, it didn't push any hardware).




Not many Wii games looked as good as the image above.

No offense, but outside of Fox's model itself, those graphics don't look all that fantastic. I can think of several Gamecube games alone that looked better than Star Fox Adventures (Which should have just remained "Dinosaur Planet" if you ask me). Pikmin 1 & 2. Metroid Prime 1 & 2. Resident Evil 4. Both Star Wars Rogue Squadron games. Twilight Princess. Just to name a few.

Also, I would contend that there were many Wii games that also looked better, and besides the fact, pushed the hardware pretty well. Mario Galaxy 1 & 2. Smash Bros. Brawl (at least the character models). Metroid Prime 3. Red Steel 2. Monster Hunter 3. DKCR. NSMB Wii (at least in my opinion). The RE Chronicles games. Kirby Return to Dreamland. Zelda: Skyward Sword.

But otherwise, I agree with what you're saying though. It always blows me away how every time we get a console launch, people seem to magically forget that NOT A SINGLE console launch in the history of video games has ever actually come with a game that totally pushed the hardware, nor presented the most impressive graphics. Those ALWAYS come later in the console's life, no matter WHICH console it is you care to bring up. So while I honestly think many of the Wii U's launch lineup games look gorgeous (I absolutely cannot wait to FINALLY play Pikmin 3), it's the biggest no-brainer on earth that YEAH, better looking games that actually push the hardware will be coming within the next few years, not RIGHT NOW.

But you know, people love to argue over nonsense and scream the sky is falling anyway, because apparently they have absolutely nothing better to do with their time.

[jlatimer11]

So today it has been noted by someone that the CPU is based off of the PowerPC 750 and runs at 1.24 Ghz, and the GPU is running at 550 Mhz.

[THEWORD777]

1.24 GHZ :-{,the way we all should look at this is not spec but price its piontless moaning about spec.

[ddddd]

Everyone should start praising to all third party devs right now, its a miracle we are getting those games at all

[gtt]

Everyone should start praising to all third party devs right now, its a miracle we are getting those games at all

seriously, these weren't quick and dirty ports, they are goddamn miracles of software. Zero hope of ps4 era 3rd party support ever though.

Designing around a 30W draw and super low heat was a mistake that will come back to bite them.

I wonder how much IBM charged them for powerpc 750 parts. Nintendo needs to fire whomever is in charge of sourcing parts, because if this machine isn't profitable out of the gate, they are skimming off the top.

They could have just slapped 3 476fp cores on a die and probably gotten away with a cheaper cost. and better performance.

[jlatimer11]

Everyone should start praising to all third party devs right now, its a miracle we are getting those games at all

seriously, these weren't quick and dirty ports, they are goddamn miracles of software. Zero hope of ps4 era 3rd party support ever though.

Designing around a 30W draw and super low heat was a mistake that will come back to bite them.

I wonder how much IBM charged them for powerpc 750 parts. Nintendo needs to fire whomever is in charge of sourcing parts, because if this machine isn't profitable out of the gate, they are skimming off the top.

They could have just slapped 3 476fp cores on a die and probably gotten away with a cheaper cost. and better performance.

Read the Twitter posts.

If at nothing else it's on par with the 360's CPU with a better GPU.

[bomblord]

Im calling bs on the 1.2 ghz if it was legitimate all the major gaming sites would have picked it up by now. If it is actually 1.2ghz then its a miracle of modern architecture.

[linkgx1]

Everyone should start praising to all third party devs right now, its a miracle we are getting those games at all

seriously, these weren't quick and dirty ports, they are goddamn miracles of software. Zero hope of ps4 era 3rd party support ever though.

Designing around a 30W draw and super low heat was a mistake that will come back to bite them.

I wonder how much IBM charged them for powerpc 750 parts. Nintendo needs to fire whomever is in charge of sourcing parts, because if this machine isn't profitable out of the gate, they are skimming off the top.

They could have just slapped 3 476fp cores on a die and probably gotten away with a cheaper cost. and better performance.

Didn't know you owned a business.

Any who, I don't think therer will be a huge jump next gen......all things considered.

I mean, come on. This was "HD generation" for a reason Ever play a 360 game on an SDTV? There really isn't that much of an improvement over regular Xbox games. HDTV makes all the difference.

We're really at a plateau right now when it comes to games looking better. Heck, graphics in general. CG movie, while looking better than Toy Story have kind of stagnated since then. Avatar, while it looks good...you can still tell it's cg.

Many game companies are going bankrupt next gen (I'm seeing THQ as one) because of the cost. Nobody is going to push the graphics if it's gonna cost over $50 million with a user base of less than 20 million in the first year. MAKES.NO.DAMN.SENSE TO.

And what's the point of even debating gaming consoles when they don't compare to PCs?! Shouldn't PCs be #1 gaming platform? Oh, wait...

[TopCat]

1.24 GHZ?!? That's LAUGHABLE, LAUGHABLE. That should have been the Wii's CPU from the get go, not the Wii U's. It should have been at least 1.7 - 2.0 GHZ per core. My excitement completely vanished. Yes, the Wii U has a better GPU than the 360, but so what? The next XBOX is gonna have a better CPU and a better GPU than the Wii U and we're gonna be screwed AGAIN!

After all the money they made from the Wii and the DS, that's what they do with it?

[RD3AV5]

1.24 GHZ?!? That's LAUGHABLE, LAUGHABLE. That should have been the Wii's CPU from the get go, not the Wii U's. It should have been at least 1.7 - 2.0 GHZ per core. My excitement completely vanished. Yes, the Wii U has a better GPU than the 360, but so what? The next XBOX is gonna have a better CPU and a better GPU than the Wii U and we're gonna be screwed AGAIN!

After all the money they made from the Wii and the DS, that's what they do with it?

Easy. I wouldn't get too worked up yet. I did go and read some of Hector's tweets and it still seems fishy to me. Although he claims newer architecture and not to compare the Wii U CPU per GHz with a 360 for example, it still doesn't make sense to me how developers were able to "port" games like Black Ops 2 or even Assassin's Creed 3 in just a few months. By port standards, a few months on a brand-new infrastructure is incredibly fast. That would be a lot of work to figure out the new CPU set up and port it over that fast. I feel that the 1.24 GHz could be the "idle" speed of the CPU to save energy when not in a game. (And YES, I know he said he doesn't think that it isn't idle speeds, but it just doesn't add up.)

[KingBroly]

...while idle on the Wii U menu.

[RD3AV5]

...while idle on the Wii U menu.

https://twitter.com/marcan42/status/274181497370591233

"Hector Martin Hector Martin ‏@marcan42

And I'm sure it's not an "idle" clock speed. 1.24G is exactly in line with what we expected for a 750-based design."

Honestly you both make good points.... But I am wary since he found this while in "Wii" mode. I'll wait for a seasoned developer to confirm/deny this. Would be cool to hear what Randy Pitchford has to say about this.

[LegendofZelda1996]

Honestly you both make good points.... But I am wary since he found this while in "Wii" mode. I'll wait for a seasoned developer to confirm/deny this. Would be cool to hear what Randy Pitchford has to say about this.

Well, there was a rumour before Marcan gutted the Wii U that the CPU may be clocked at 1.22 GHz since 1226LP734 written on the CPU may refer to how much the CPU is clocked.

http://gimmegimmegames.com/2012/11/rumo ... t-1-22ghz/

But remember, this is a rumour, not a fact. So, it could be totally wrong.

[bomblord]

Clock speeds mean nothing unless your comparing it directly to the same chip set (which is impossible for a custom one) I'm waiting for some actual benchmarks if he really got that far into it I'm sure he can run some. Benchmarks are what you use to compare power.

[RD3AV5]

Honestly you both make good points.... But I am wary since he found this while in "Wii" mode. I'll wait for a seasoned developer to confirm/deny this. Would be cool to hear what Randy Pitchford has to say about this.

Well, there was a rumour before Marcan gutted the Wii U that the CPU may be clocked at 1.22 GHz since 1226LP734 written on the CPU may refer to how much the CPU is clocked.

http://gimmegimmegames.com/2012/11/rumo ... t-1-22ghz/

But remember, this is a rumour, not a fact. So, it could be totally wrong.

Very observant and nice guess, but those numbers wouldn't reflect that on the MCM. So were is the GPU info if that's the case?

[ddddd]

...while idle on the Wii U menu.

https://twitter.com/marcan42/status/274181497370591233

"Hector Martin Hector Martin ‏@marcan42

And I'm sure it's not an "idle" clock speed. 1.24G is exactly in line with what we expected for a 750-based design."

Honestly you both make good points.... But I am wary since he found this while in "Wii" mode. I'll wait for a seasoned developer to confirm/deny this. Would be cool to hear what Randy Pitchford has to say about this.

We probably wont get a confirmation from a named developer on this, they wouldnt want to speak against the console they are working on nor can give specifics due to the NDA.

[linkgx1]

1.2 ghz seems a bit low...but ironically the system can do things like go on the web browser, miiverse, or shop while the gaming is running the background.

Still not sure about architecture. We're still not sure of 1.2ghz equivalency though.

[gtt]

1.2 ghz seems a bit low...but ironically the system can do things like go on the web browser, miiverse, or shop while the gaming is running the background.

Still not sure about architecture. We're still not sure of 1.2ghz equivalency though.

the game isn't running. it's put into suspend. that's why they only allow Games to access 1 out of 2GB of ram. so the entire game data can go into suspend when you hit the home button.

[linkgx1]

1.2 ghz seems a bit low...but ironically the system can do things like go on the web browser, miiverse, or shop while the gaming is running the background.

Still not sure about architecture. We're still not sure of 1.2ghz equivalency though.

the game isn't running. it's put into suspend. that's why they only allow Games to access 1 out of 2GB of ram. so the entire game data can go into suspend when you hit the home button.

Still doesn't take away from the fact that my Xbox can't do that. AND THAT still means the Wii U has twice as much memory for games.

[gtt]

1.2 ghz seems a bit low...but ironically the system can do things like go on the web browser, miiverse, or shop while the gaming is running the background.

Still not sure about architecture. We're still not sure of 1.2ghz equivalency though.

the game isn't running. it's put into suspend. that's why they only allow Games to access 1 out of 2GB of ram. so the entire game data can go into suspend when you hit the home button.

Still doesn't take away from the fact that my Xbox can't do that. AND THAT still means the Wii U has twice as much memory for games.

the xbox could do it. if MS wanted to force developers to work with only a certain percentage of the available memory. and patched the OS to suspend the game when you bring up the overlay.

this is not a technical issue, it's a design choice.

[bomblord]

1.2 ghz seems a bit low...but ironically the system can do things like go on the web browser, miiverse, or shop while the gaming is running the background.

Still not sure about architecture. We're still not sure of 1.2ghz equivalency though

the game isn't running. it's put into suspend. that's why they only allow Games to access 1 out of 2GB of ram. so the entire game data can go into suspend when you hit the home button.

Still doesn't take away from the fact that my Xbox can't do that. AND THAT still means the Wii U has twice as much memory for games.

the xbox could do it. if MS wanted to force developers to work with only a certain percentage of the available memory. and patched the OS to suspend the game when you bring up the overlay.

this is not a technical issue, it's a design choice.

It's a design choice made because of a technical issue.

[linkgx1]

.2 ghz seems a bit low...but ironically the system can do things like go on the web browser, miiverse, or shop while the gaming is running the background.

Still not sure about architecture. We're still not sure of 1.2ghz equivalency though

the game isn't running. it's put into suspend. that's why they only allow Games to access 1 out of 2GB of ram. so the entire game data can go into suspend when you hit the home button.

Still doesn't take away from the fact that my Xbox can't do that. AND THAT still means the Wii U has twice as much memory for games.

the xbox could do it. if MS wanted to force developers to work with only a certain percentage of the available memory. and patched the OS to suspend the game when you bring up the overlay.

this is not a technical issue, it's a design choice.[/quote]


It's a design choice made because of a technical issue.[/quote]
Lol!