Wow, just wow. A headline article on this site that was NOT a review of the Wii U hardware was perhaps the single biggest joke in the sites history. Its no secret gamespot dislikes Nintendo, but this kind of bias makes them look stupid. I mean really, a whole headline article about how a system sucks, its a shame. Not even a week into a consoles lifespan and good old gamespot makes sure we know it sucks in every way, im sure we will get good software reviews from a site that has practically labeled the console a failure. Ive seen gamespot go out of their way to trash Nintendo before, but nothing like this. Yes i do own a Wii U, but i also got a 360 and PS3 and the handhelds and i would be shocked if ANY of the big 3 got this kind of treatment from any site or publication, but Nintendo on gamespot, not so much. Talk about media bias. This is piss poor journalism at its best.
The Shortcomings of the Wii U Hardware
This topic is locked from further discussion.
That artilce pissed me off. This is the officially the crapiest gaming site on the internet if it wasn't for the forums I don't think I would even vist this joke of a gaming "news" website.
I don't see the problem. Gamespot is only pointing out some very serious issues with the capability and design of the Wii U. 15 seconds between menus, hardware that is already a generation behind, resistive touch screens? I have plenty of Nintendo hardware, but even Nintendo are taking a big risk with this console and they can't rely on their first party software IP forever.
i think that had some pretty good points. i notice how long the menus take and while i dont think the ps4 and 720 will be as far ahead of the wii u as everone else thinks the fact that some games like batman dont look as good as the ps360 leave me kinda nervous. this is the 1st next gen system we should expect a little more.
I think the article was written on the assumption that somehow the next Xbox or PS is going to be perfect themselves and vastly more powerful. Yes the Wii U isn't perfect but neither will the other consoles be and it's likely the next consoles released aren't going to be that powerful. Xbox and Sony will learn from the high priced PS3 launch debacle.
I don't see the problem. Gamespot is only pointing out some very serious issues with the capability and design of the Wii U. 15 seconds between menus, hardware that is already a generation behind, resistive touch screens? I have plenty of Nintendo hardware, but even Nintendo are taking a big risk with this console and they can't rely on their first party software IP forever.
andmcq
All of those negatives were blown way out of proportion in the article, it doesn't take 15 seconds for everything on the OS to load and its not a generation behind and the resitive touchscreen aren't even that bad. Hell its better for drawing and you can see the crazy art people make on miiverse.
however whatever they have done to the CPU they seem to have really hacked it up. it looks like the design philosophy of the wiiu will be "do it on the GPU". not necessarily a bad thing but it will lead to some games having PS3 type multiplats as devs get their head around that. but did they really have to cut down on the CPU as much as they have?osan0
We don't even know anything about the CPU all we know is its clocked speed is lower than the 360's and PS3. Which are both pretty high by the way.
[QUOTE="osan0"]however whatever they have done to the CPU they seem to have really hacked it up. it looks like the design philosophy of the wiiu will be "do it on the GPU". not necessarily a bad thing but it will lead to some games having PS3 type multiplats as devs get their head around that. but did they really have to cut down on the CPU as much as they have?Vickman178
We don't even know anything about the CPU all we know is its clocked speed is lower than the 360's and PS3. Which are both pretty high by the way.
Clock speed doesn't really say a lot, you can have lower clocked CPU's that are more powerful than higher clocked ones.[QUOTE="andmcq"]
I don't see the problem. Gamespot is only pointing out some very serious issues with the capability and design of the Wii U. 15 seconds between menus, hardware that is already a generation behind, resistive touch screens? I have plenty of Nintendo hardware, but even Nintendo are taking a big risk with this console and they can't rely on their first party software IP forever.
Vickman178
All of those negatives were blown way out of proportion in the article, it doesn't take 15 seconds for everything on the OS to load and its not a generation behind and the resitive touchscreen aren't even that bad. Hell its better for drawing and you can see the crazy art people make on miiverse.
He never said everything takes 15 seconds to load, he said the "Settings App" takes 12-14 seconds to load. Anyway, he does have some valid points and I don't see how this should offend anyone. EVERY console gets criticized, and let's face it nintendo did mess up with some things especially with the internal memory which is an insult by todays standards (even more at that price!)... Hell my phone has twice as much memory!..
I have no problem pointing out flaws in all systems I own. No console is and will ever be perfect, people need to stop getting offended if someone is pointing out flaws about their new gadgets. Nothing is perfect, just deal with it! I will have alot of fun with the WiiU when Mario and Zelda games will come out and untill then I'm sure they ironed out most of the problems.
[QUOTE="andmcq"]
I don't see the problem. Gamespot is only pointing out some very serious issues with the capability and design of the Wii U. 15 seconds between menus, hardware that is already a generation behind, resistive touch screens? I have plenty of Nintendo hardware, but even Nintendo are taking a big risk with this console and they can't rely on their first party software IP forever.
Vickman178
All of those negatives were blown way out of proportion in the article, it doesn't take 15 seconds for everything on the OS to load and its not a generation behind and the resitive touchscreen aren't even that bad. Hell its better for drawing and you can see the crazy art people make on miiverse.
I agree with this. Those negatives were made to seem a lot worse than they actually are. I'd like to know where these 15 second load times are coming from myself. The longest loading screen Ive seen is maybe 10 seconds at the most. The primary update took me about 45-60 minutes on my wifi that is connected to 12Mbps cable, which is on the lower speed end these days.
I also disagree the hardware is behind as much as people say it is. Even if the CPU is an overclocked three-core Wii CPU (as people are believing though it is unconfirmed) it's GPU spanks both the PS3 and 360. R700 is the Radeon 4000 series, compared to the GeForce 7600 in the PS3 and R520 (Radeon X1800) in the 360. It also has 2GB DDR3 RAM, compared to only 512MB in both the 'HD twins'.
But hardware specs themselves dont mean anything. It is the games that matter. And Wii U is already looking very good.
People are forgetting some things though. Right now most of the games are ports from the other consoles, so they won't look much different from those versions. Also, Nintendo set the price point going forward for the next gen. Anything more than $400 probably won't sell. When you average consumer sees a Wii U for $300, they'll choose it over a $600 dollar PS4, for example. Just like they did with the Wii. So I don't think the next Xbox or PS3 will be that much more powerful or expensive than the Wii U. It'll be an Xbox 1 to PS2 kind of deal.
In other words, just relax guys, wait and see what happens. The reality will be much more mundane than fanboys on the internet are dreaming up.
I laughed out loud when i read that absurd article. I know nothing is perfect and nothing can satisfy everyone.
Right now, just a few days after the launch, i have all the video apps up and running. I am able to invite and accept friends invites easily. My online experiences have been smooth as butter, i have bought a few e-store games from the nice E-Shop, I manage my playtime very successfully with the gamepad so the battery life is just fine with me, my hard drive space is around 23 gig, and should be more than enough for some time to come. USB 2.0...who cares? I am sure it will work just fine...i think i can handle waiting a few extra seconds over a usb 3 connection, i just dont understand all the big deal about that. The touch screen works well for what it was designed to do. It does not feel cheap to me. It is not a $500 Ipad.
The Wii U is a nice bit of kit for $300.
I think a lot of it's issues are more software related than hardware related.
The long loading, big updates and massive OS memory footprint are all software issues.
And the low CPU clock speed could theoretically be increased by a update (i.e. overclocking the hardware via specific drivers - altho that would negatively impact the stability of the system).
The problem might also be the quality of the console build.
Reportedly, the systems are put together by Chinese youth and inexpensive materials so it may not be the best build quality.
The WiiU doesn't need to be a super powerfull console IMO. If it can run games with the graphical quality of the Zelda demo, then I'm more than happy for the next few years.. Nintendo titles usually don't need photorealistic graphics so I really don't care much about the WiiU's hardware. We will see whats gunna happen with the mutiplatform games, personally I'm only interested in Nintendos IPs anyway and without a doubt these games WILL look great.
What I do find very disapponting is that the WiiU cannot upscale Wii games. Honestly that was something I was looking forward too and I got very upset when they announced it won't be able to do that. Also what I mentioned before 32 GB with 23 GB free space is a bad joke.. Memory is very cheap nowadays and they have absolutely NO excuse for that cut. The guy who said it'll be enough for a while should know that WiiU games can be up to 25 GB meaning that you might not even fit a single game onto your HDD, I don't see how this'll be enough for a while. Not to mention DLC and patches etc. let's face it the memory is the worst thing they did..
The gamepad is interesting and I really like it, though I wish the resolution was a little higher 480p is less than what most smartphones have. With 6" they really shoul've aimed for 544p or even 720p.
The absolut worst thing about this launch though are the games, there isn't a single game that interests me. No Zelda (hell it's not even close) no 3D Mario (same) and barely any exclusives worth buying. Most games are rather mediocre ports of games I already played. I really was looking forward to get a WiiU close to launch but not with a selction of games like this.
The WiiU doesn't need to be a super powerfull console IMO. If it can run games with the graphical quality of the Zelda demo, then I'm more than happy for the next few years.. Nintendo titles usually don't need photorealistic graphics so I really don't care much about the WiiU's hardware. We will see whats gunna happen with the mutiplatform games, personally I'm only interested in Nintendos IPs anyway and without a doubt these games WILL look great.
What I do find very disapponting is that the WiiU cannot upscale Wii games. Honestly that was something I was looking forward too and I got very upset when they announced it won't be able to do that. Also what I mentioned before 32 GB with 23 GB free space is a bad joke.. Memory is very cheap nowadays and they have absolutely NO excuse for that cut. The guy who said it'll be enough for a while should know that WiiU games can be up to 25 GB meaning that you might not even fit a single game onto your HDD, I don't see how this'll be enough for a while. Not to mention DLC and patches etc. let's face it the memory is the worst thing they did..
The gamepad is interesting and I really like it, though I wish the resolution was a little higher 480p is less than what most smartphones have. With 6" they really shoul've aimed for 544p or even 720p.
The absolut worst thing about this launch though are the games, there isn't a single game that interests me. No Zelda (hell it's not even close) no 3D Mario (same) and barely any exclusives worth buying. Most games are rather mediocre ports of games I already played. I really was looking forward to get a WiiU close to launch but not with a selction of games like this.
xath2305
I think they skimped on the HDD and gamepad screen res because of costs.
You can connect an external HDD to it at least.
Zelda and 3D Mario are probably already deep in development (hopefully).
but did they really have to cut down on the CPU as much as they have?osan0
I would say it was because of consumption and heating issues and to keep backward support with Wii.
It was said it will sport a Power7 chip but that might have required better cooling system.
From what I've seen of it's internals, the Wii U's cooling system is not much different to Wii's which may explain the lower clock speeds.
I agree with the price point theory of yours. Also, the article felt like it was written by a PC die hard (and there is nothing wrong with being one), so it takes the point of view that all hardware is upgradable and top of the line which the Wii U was never going to be. In this poor economy, I am willing to bet dollars to donuts that neither the PS4 or Xbox3 are going to push ahead anywhere near as much as the current ones did. Hell, the PS3 almost killed Sony for a long while a few years back.People are forgetting some things though. Right now most of the games are ports from the other consoles, so they won't look much different from those versions. Also, Nintendo set the price point going forward for the next gen. Anything more than $400 probably won't sell. When you average consumer sees a Wii U for $300, they'll choose it over a $600 dollar PS4, for example. Just like they did with the Wii. So I don't think the next Xbox or PS3 will be that much more powerful or expensive than the Wii U. It'll be an Xbox 1 to PS2 kind of deal.
In other words, just relax guys, wait and see what happens. The reality will be much more mundane than fanboys on the internet are dreaming up.
zyphyr2k12
As for the games no looking better than they do on the other consoles, just give it time.If you really think that whatever Retro is working on is going to look bad, you need to go back and play any early Gamecube game and then boot up Metroid Prime. Or even, go find a copy of King Kong on the Xbox 360 and then on the Xbox.
I agree with the price point theory of yours. Also, the article felt like it was written by a PC die hard (and there is nothing wrong with being one), so it takes the point of view that all hardware is upgradable and top of the line which the Wii U was never going to be. In this poor economy, I am willing to bet dollars to donuts that neither the PS4 or Xbox3 are going to push ahead anywhere near as much as the current ones did. Hell, the PS3 almost killed Sony for a long while a few years back.[QUOTE="zyphyr2k12"]
People are forgetting some things though. Right now most of the games are ports from the other consoles, so they won't look much different from those versions. Also, Nintendo set the price point going forward for the next gen. Anything more than $400 probably won't sell. When you average consumer sees a Wii U for $300, they'll choose it over a $600 dollar PS4, for example. Just like they did with the Wii. So I don't think the next Xbox or PS3 will be that much more powerful or expensive than the Wii U. It'll be an Xbox 1 to PS2 kind of deal.
In other words, just relax guys, wait and see what happens. The reality will be much more mundane than fanboys on the internet are dreaming up.
ekalbtwin
As for the games no looking better than they do on the other consoles, just give it time.If you really think that whatever Retro is working on is going to look bad, you need to go back and play any early Gamecube game and then boot up Metroid Prime. Or even, go find a copy of King Kong on the Xbox 360 and then on the Xbox.
I agree with this whole post, it is win :) . I think if people are finding the Wii U disappointing, they are in for a big surprise when the other guys finally show their stuff. People have been spoiled by the long console cycle and all the years that have went into perfecting the 360 and PS3. Man, fun times are ahead lol. The good thing is the Wii U should be hitting it's stride right when the other guys release their consoles.
[QUOTE="ekalbtwin"]I agree with the price point theory of yours. Also, the article felt like it was written by a PC die hard (and there is nothing wrong with being one), so it takes the point of view that all hardware is upgradable and top of the line which the Wii U was never going to be. In this poor economy, I am willing to bet dollars to donuts that neither the PS4 or Xbox3 are going to push ahead anywhere near as much as the current ones did. Hell, the PS3 almost killed Sony for a long while a few years back.[QUOTE="zyphyr2k12"]
People are forgetting some things though. Right now most of the games are ports from the other consoles, so they won't look much different from those versions. Also, Nintendo set the price point going forward for the next gen. Anything more than $400 probably won't sell. When you average consumer sees a Wii U for $300, they'll choose it over a $600 dollar PS4, for example. Just like they did with the Wii. So I don't think the next Xbox or PS3 will be that much more powerful or expensive than the Wii U. It'll be an Xbox 1 to PS2 kind of deal.
In other words, just relax guys, wait and see what happens. The reality will be much more mundane than fanboys on the internet are dreaming up.
zyphyr2k12
As for the games no looking better than they do on the other consoles, just give it time.If you really think that whatever Retro is working on is going to look bad, you need to go back and play any early Gamecube game and then boot up Metroid Prime. Or even, go find a copy of King Kong on the Xbox 360 and then on the Xbox.
I agree with this whole post, it is win :) . I think if people are finding the Wii U disappointing, they are in for a big surprise when the other guys finally show their stuff. People have been spoiled by the long console cycle and all the years that have went into perfecting the 360 and PS3. Man, fun times are ahead lol. The good thing is the Wii U should be hitting it's stride right when the other guys release their consoles.I am very interested in what the competition will bring up in a year or two. WiiU deluxe is a slightly more powerful system with a complex controller and only 32gigs of memory and all this costs $350 (note also that it is selling at a loss at this price). If Microsoft or Sony dare to make a signicant leap like with this generation, I can only imagine what the price will be like. If it's as high $450 or above, I fear they will stumble like the Ps3. I think Nintendo has found the sweet spot: Innovative technology at an affortable price. If the next generation consoles catches on and boasting much more power, then the WiiU will follow the same fate as the Wii but without the successful sales.
[QUOTE="Vickman178"]
[QUOTE="andmcq"]
I don't see the problem. Gamespot is only pointing out some very serious issues with the capability and design of the Wii U. 15 seconds between menus, hardware that is already a generation behind, resistive touch screens? I have plenty of Nintendo hardware, but even Nintendo are taking a big risk with this console and they can't rely on their first party software IP forever.
All of those negatives were blown way out of proportion in the article, it doesn't take 15 seconds for everything on the OS to load and its not a generation behind and the resitive touchscreen aren't even that bad. Hell its better for drawing and you can see the crazy art people make on miiverse.
I agree with this. Those negatives were made to seem a lot worse than they actually are. I'd like to know where these 15 second load times are coming from myself. The longest loading screen Ive seen is maybe 10 seconds at the most. The primary update took me about 45-60 minutes on my wifi that is connected to 12Mbps cable, which is on the lower speed end these days.
I also disagree the hardware is behind as much as people say it is. Even if the CPU is an overclocked three-core Wii CPU (as people are believing though it is unconfirmed) it's GPU spanks both the PS3 and 360. R700 is the Radeon 4000 series, compared to the GeForce 7600 in the PS3 and R520 (Radeon X1800) in the 360. It also has 2GB DDR3 RAM, compared to only 512MB in both the 'HD twins'.
But hardware specs themselves dont mean anything. It is the games that matter. And Wii U is already looking very good.
Depends on R700 e.g. AMD Radeon HD 4570 would lose against AMD Xenos.I agree with the price point theory of yours. Also, the article felt like it was written by a PC die hard (and there is nothing wrong with being one), so it takes the point of view that all hardware is upgradable and top of the line which the Wii U was never going to be. In this poor economy, I am willing to bet dollars to donuts that neither the PS4 or Xbox3 are going to push ahead anywhere near as much as the current ones did. Hell, the PS3 almost killed Sony for a long while a few years back.[QUOTE="zyphyr2k12"]
People are forgetting some things though. Right now most of the games are ports from the other consoles, so they won't look much different from those versions. Also, Nintendo set the price point going forward for the next gen. Anything more than $400 probably won't sell. When you average consumer sees a Wii U for $300, they'll choose it over a $600 dollar PS4, for example. Just like they did with the Wii. So I don't think the next Xbox or PS3 will be that much more powerful or expensive than the Wii U. It'll be an Xbox 1 to PS2 kind of deal.
In other words, just relax guys, wait and see what happens. The reality will be much more mundane than fanboys on the internet are dreaming up.
ekalbtwin
As for the games no looking better than they do on the other consoles, just give it time.If you really think that whatever Retro is working on is going to look bad, you need to go back and play any early Gamecube game and then boot up Metroid Prime. Or even, go find a copy of King Kong on the Xbox 360 and then on the Xbox.
My 2010 DELL laptop doesn't have USB3.0. Intel didn't include USB3.0 support until Sandy Bridge era chipset.
http://www.dailytech.com/Intel+Delays+USB+30+Support+Until+2011/article16588.htm
i dont necessarily agree with everything in the article (the choice of resistive screen has its advantages in terms of responsiveness. the controller is not a tablet..its a controller built for gaming not browsing dinternet) but nintendo do seem to have made some very odd decisions. also the stuff about extending the wireless range using Wifi is just wishful thinking on the authors part. its certainly technically possible but it would bring in more latency. the only legit complaint on the controller front imho is the poor battery. at least there seems to be plenty of room for a bigger battery...im sure 3rd party addons wont be long in their making. OS responsiveness should be fixable (i think there is a patch due in dec). neither the 360 nor PS3 OSs were ultra slim, responsive and reliable at launch. they have had 5-6 years of work done in them to improve them. however what on earth is in the OS to make it take up 5GB? That is truly massive. also why does it need 1GB of ram? I hope that requirement is also reduced over time. and on that note nintendos decision to stick with flash instead of a HDD that is easy to replace is also very odd and failing to provide enough power through the USB ports for external HDDs is a very poor oversight by nintendo. essentially the wiiu needs 3 wall sockets now. it should only need 1. I know nintendo were focusing on making the wiiu a low power (in terms of electricity usage) device but surely it would have been more efficent to have any external HDD and controller take power from the console rather than from extra plug sockets. from what we know of the internals i was initally critical of the use of DDR3L over GDDR5. however further research has made me rethink that as GDDR5 would have introduced a lot more latency. i also dont ever recall a dev complaining about memory bandwidth on any platform...they complain mainly about the amount. so the lower bandwidth compared to the other consoles may be a non issue. however whatever they have done to the CPU they seem to have really hacked it up. it looks like the design philosophy of the wiiu will be "do it on the GPU". not necessarily a bad thing but it will lead to some games having PS3 type multiplats as devs get their head around that. but did they really have to cut down on the CPU as much as they have?osan0
Overall, GDDR5 is faster e.g. Radeon HD 7730M GDDR3 (e.g. Dell Inspiron 15R) vs 7750M GDDR5 (e.g. HP Envy 15t-3209 TX).
Wii U has eDRAM to mitigate 64bit GDDR3 issue, but Xbox 360 also has eDRAM with faster GDDR3.
From http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zruKwU_OrkE the results of BOps2 running similar spec as my laptop i.e. AMD Radeon HD 5730M/6570M with GDDR3 and 128bit wide VRAM beats both Xbox 360 and Wii U.
I agree with this whole post, it is win :) . I think if people are finding the Wii U disappointing, they are in for a big surprise when the other guys finally show their stuff. People have been spoiled by the long console cycle and all the years that have went into perfecting the 360 and PS3. Man, fun times are ahead lol. The good thing is the Wii U should be hitting it's stride right when the other guys release their consoles.[QUOTE="zyphyr2k12"][QUOTE="ekalbtwin"] I agree with the price point theory of yours. Also, the article felt like it was written by a PC die hard (and there is nothing wrong with being one), so it takes the point of view that all hardware is upgradable and top of the line which the Wii U was never going to be. In this poor economy, I am willing to bet dollars to donuts that neither the PS4 or Xbox3 are going to push ahead anywhere near as much as the current ones did. Hell, the PS3 almost killed Sony for a long while a few years back.
As for the games no looking better than they do on the other consoles, just give it time.If you really think that whatever Retro is working on is going to look bad, you need to go back and play any early Gamecube game and then boot up Metroid Prime. Or even, go find a copy of King Kong on the Xbox 360 and then on the Xbox.
thetravman
I am very interested in what the competition will bring up in a year or two. WiiU deluxe is a slightly more powerful system with a complex controller and only 32gigs of memory and all this costs $350 (note also that it is selling at a loss at this price). If Microsoft or Sony dare to make a signicant leap like with this generation, I can only imagine what the price will be like. If it's as high $450 or above, I fear they will stumble like the Ps3. I think Nintendo has found the sweet spot: Innovative technology at an affortable price. If the next generation consoles catches on and boasting much more power, then the WiiU will follow the same fate as the Wii but without the successful sales.
Nice post! IMO, Sony definitely won't have a console much more powerful than the Wii U. I think they got burned badly on the PS3 at the beginning. In fact I bet PS4 will even still use the same BD-ROM discs as PS3. I heard a rumor that there is a casual focused xbox coming out next year. If that is true, there may be a core xbox that launches later on and it could be a super powerful beast. A $500 to $600 dollar console won't sell though so I kind of don't believe that rumor. Who knows.[QUOTE="thetravman"][QUOTE="zyphyr2k12"] I agree with this whole post, it is win :) . I think if people are finding the Wii U disappointing, they are in for a big surprise when the other guys finally show their stuff. People have been spoiled by the long console cycle and all the years that have went into perfecting the 360 and PS3. Man, fun times are ahead lol. The good thing is the Wii U should be hitting it's stride right when the other guys release their consoles. zyphyr2k12
I am very interested in what the competition will bring up in a year or two. WiiU deluxe is a slightly more powerful system with a complex controller and only 32gigs of memory and all this costs $350 (note also that it is selling at a loss at this price). If Microsoft or Sony dare to make a signicant leap like with this generation, I can only imagine what the price will be like. If it's as high $450 or above, I fear they will stumble like the Ps3. I think Nintendo has found the sweet spot: Innovative technology at an affortable price. If the next generation consoles catches on and boasting much more power, then the WiiU will follow the same fate as the Wii but without the successful sales.
Nice post! IMO, Sony definitely won't have a console much more powerful than the Wii U. I think they got burned badly on the PS3 at the beginning. In fact I bet PS4 will even still use the same BD-ROM discs as PS3. I heard a rumor that there is a casual focused xbox coming out next year. If that is true, there may be a core xbox that launches later on and it could be a super powerful beast. A $500 to $600 dollar console won't sell though so I kind of don't believe that rumor. Who knows.I don't see whats the problem with blu ray ? A double layer can hold 50 GB opposed to WiiU's 25GB...
I heared that rumour too, and the real Xbox is said to run Windows 8 which IMO is a very bad idea.. let's just wait and see whats coming though, after all it's a rumour..
About the PS4. Of course the update will not be as big as PS2 -PS3 but I'm pretty sure it'll be way more powerfull than the WiiU. Hardware really isn't that expensive anymore and I can see them sell it for 350 - 400 and easily have hardware twice as good. Remember they won't have to spend as much money on the gamepad so they can use that money for hardware.
[QUOTE="osan0"]i dont necessarily agree with everything in the article (the choice of resistive screen has its advantages in terms of responsiveness. the controller is not a tablet..its a controller built for gaming not browsing dinternet) but nintendo do seem to have made some very odd decisions. also the stuff about extending the wireless range using Wifi is just wishful thinking on the authors part. its certainly technically possible but it would bring in more latency. the only legit complaint on the controller front imho is the poor battery. at least there seems to be plenty of room for a bigger battery...im sure 3rd party addons wont be long in their making. OS responsiveness should be fixable (i think there is a patch due in dec). neither the 360 nor PS3 OSs were ultra slim, responsive and reliable at launch. they have had 5-6 years of work done in them to improve them. however what on earth is in the OS to make it take up 5GB? That is truly massive. also why does it need 1GB of ram? I hope that requirement is also reduced over time. and on that note nintendos decision to stick with flash instead of a HDD that is easy to replace is also very odd and failing to provide enough power through the USB ports for external HDDs is a very poor oversight by nintendo. essentially the wiiu needs 3 wall sockets now. it should only need 1. I know nintendo were focusing on making the wiiu a low power (in terms of electricity usage) device but surely it would have been more efficent to have any external HDD and controller take power from the console rather than from extra plug sockets. from what we know of the internals i was initally critical of the use of DDR3L over GDDR5. however further research has made me rethink that as GDDR5 would have introduced a lot more latency. i also dont ever recall a dev complaining about memory bandwidth on any platform...they complain mainly about the amount. so the lower bandwidth compared to the other consoles may be a non issue. however whatever they have done to the CPU they seem to have really hacked it up. it looks like the design philosophy of the wiiu will be "do it on the GPU". not necessarily a bad thing but it will lead to some games having PS3 type multiplats as devs get their head around that. but did they really have to cut down on the CPU as much as they have?ronvalencia
Overall, GDDR5 is faster e.g. Radeon HD 7730M GDDR3 (e.g. Dell Inspiron 15R) vs 7750M GDDR5 (e.g. HP Envy 15t-3209 TX).
Wii U has eDRAM to mitigate 64bit GDDR3 issue, but Xbox 360 also has eDRAM with faster GDDR3.
From http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zruKwU_OrkE the results of BOps2 running similar spec as my laptop i.e. AMD Radeon HD 5730M/6570M with GDDR3 and 128bit wide VRAM beats both Xbox 360 and Wii U.
ddr3 vs GDDR5, not GDDR3 vs GDDR5. the wiiu uses DDR3. http://vr-zone.com/articles/new-teardown-reveals-more-specs-for-the-nintendo-wii-u/17989.html im guessing that nintendo decided that GDDR5 would have compromised the CPU side of things too much due to latency hence the decision to go with DDR3.[QUOTE="osan0"]i dont necessarily agree with everything in the article (the choice of resistive screen has its advantages in terms of responsiveness. the controller is not a tablet..its a controller built for gaming not browsing dinternet) but nintendo do seem to have made some very odd decisions. also the stuff about extending the wireless range using Wifi is just wishful thinking on the authors part. its certainly technically possible but it would bring in more latency. the only legit complaint on the controller front imho is the poor battery. at least there seems to be plenty of room for a bigger battery...im sure 3rd party addons wont be long in their making. OS responsiveness should be fixable (i think there is a patch due in dec). neither the 360 nor PS3 OSs were ultra slim, responsive and reliable at launch. they have had 5-6 years of work done in them to improve them. however what on earth is in the OS to make it take up 5GB? That is truly massive. also why does it need 1GB of ram? I hope that requirement is also reduced over time. and on that note nintendos decision to stick with flash instead of a HDD that is easy to replace is also very odd and failing to provide enough power through the USB ports for external HDDs is a very poor oversight by nintendo. essentially the wiiu needs 3 wall sockets now. it should only need 1. I know nintendo were focusing on making the wiiu a low power (in terms of electricity usage) device but surely it would have been more efficent to have any external HDD and controller take power from the console rather than from extra plug sockets. from what we know of the internals i was initally critical of the use of DDR3L over GDDR5. however further research has made me rethink that as GDDR5 would have introduced a lot more latency. i also dont ever recall a dev complaining about memory bandwidth on any platform...they complain mainly about the amount. so the lower bandwidth compared to the other consoles may be a non issue. however whatever they have done to the CPU they seem to have really hacked it up. it looks like the design philosophy of the wiiu will be "do it on the GPU". not necessarily a bad thing but it will lead to some games having PS3 type multiplats as devs get their head around that. but did they really have to cut down on the CPU as much as they have?ronvalencia
Overall, GDDR5 is faster e.g. Radeon HD 7730M GDDR3 (e.g. Dell Inspiron 15R) vs 7750M GDDR5 (e.g. HP Envy 15t-3209 TX).
Wii U has eDRAM to mitigate 64bit GDDR3 issue, but Xbox 360 also has eDRAM with faster GDDR3.
From http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zruKwU_OrkE the results of BOps2 running similar spec as my laptop i.e. AMD Radeon HD 5730M/6570M with GDDR3 and 128bit wide VRAM beats both Xbox 360 and Wii U.
Wii U has only 64-bit memory interface?
If so, that may be the reason why it's underperforming in the multiplats (besides the slow CPU, of course).
I'm not liking what I'm hearing.
I thought Wii U will be a balanced and efficient system but it now seems it's full of bottlenecks.
Could be the N64 all over again...
[QUOTE="ronvalencia"]
[QUOTE="osan0"]i dont necessarily agree with everything in the article (the choice of resistive screen has its advantages in terms of responsiveness. the controller is not a tablet..its a controller built for gaming not browsing dinternet) but nintendo do seem to have made some very odd decisions. also the stuff about extending the wireless range using Wifi is just wishful thinking on the authors part. its certainly technically possible but it would bring in more latency. the only legit complaint on the controller front imho is the poor battery. at least there seems to be plenty of room for a bigger battery...im sure 3rd party addons wont be long in their making. OS responsiveness should be fixable (i think there is a patch due in dec). neither the 360 nor PS3 OSs were ultra slim, responsive and reliable at launch. they have had 5-6 years of work done in them to improve them. however what on earth is in the OS to make it take up 5GB? That is truly massive. also why does it need 1GB of ram? I hope that requirement is also reduced over time. and on that note nintendos decision to stick with flash instead of a HDD that is easy to replace is also very odd and failing to provide enough power through the USB ports for external HDDs is a very poor oversight by nintendo. essentially the wiiu needs 3 wall sockets now. it should only need 1. I know nintendo were focusing on making the wiiu a low power (in terms of electricity usage) device but surely it would have been more efficent to have any external HDD and controller take power from the console rather than from extra plug sockets. from what we know of the internals i was initally critical of the use of DDR3L over GDDR5. however further research has made me rethink that as GDDR5 would have introduced a lot more latency. i also dont ever recall a dev complaining about memory bandwidth on any platform...they complain mainly about the amount. so the lower bandwidth compared to the other consoles may be a non issue. however whatever they have done to the CPU they seem to have really hacked it up. it looks like the design philosophy of the wiiu will be "do it on the GPU". not necessarily a bad thing but it will lead to some games having PS3 type multiplats as devs get their head around that. but did they really have to cut down on the CPU as much as they have?nameless12345
Overall, GDDR5 is faster e.g. Radeon HD 7730M GDDR3 (e.g. Dell Inspiron 15R) vs 7750M GDDR5 (e.g. HP Envy 15t-3209 TX).
Wii U has eDRAM to mitigate 64bit GDDR3 issue, but Xbox 360 also has eDRAM with faster GDDR3.
From http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zruKwU_OrkE the results of BOps2 running similar spec as my laptop i.e. AMD Radeon HD 5730M/6570M with GDDR3 and 128bit wide VRAM beats both Xbox 360 and Wii U.
Wii U has only 64-bit memory interface?
If so, that may be the reason why it's underperforming in the multiplats (besides the slow CPU, of course).
I'm not liking what I'm hearing.
I thought Wii U will be a balanced and efficient system but it now seems it's full of bottlenecks.
Could be the N64 all over again...
With the exception the N64 made a huge jump against competition, unlike the WiiU.:P[QUOTE="ronvalencia"]
[QUOTE="osan0"]i dont necessarily agree with everything in the article (the choice of resistive screen has its advantages in terms of responsiveness. the controller is not a tablet..its a controller built for gaming not browsing dinternet) but nintendo do seem to have made some very odd decisions. also the stuff about extending the wireless range using Wifi is just wishful thinking on the authors part. its certainly technically possible but it would bring in more latency. the only legit complaint on the controller front imho is the poor battery. at least there seems to be plenty of room for a bigger battery...im sure 3rd party addons wont be long in their making. OS responsiveness should be fixable (i think there is a patch due in dec). neither the 360 nor PS3 OSs were ultra slim, responsive and reliable at launch. they have had 5-6 years of work done in them to improve them. however what on earth is in the OS to make it take up 5GB? That is truly massive. also why does it need 1GB of ram? I hope that requirement is also reduced over time. and on that note nintendos decision to stick with flash instead of a HDD that is easy to replace is also very odd and failing to provide enough power through the USB ports for external HDDs is a very poor oversight by nintendo. essentially the wiiu needs 3 wall sockets now. it should only need 1. I know nintendo were focusing on making the wiiu a low power (in terms of electricity usage) device but surely it would have been more efficent to have any external HDD and controller take power from the console rather than from extra plug sockets. from what we know of the internals i was initally critical of the use of DDR3L over GDDR5. however further research has made me rethink that as GDDR5 would have introduced a lot more latency. i also dont ever recall a dev complaining about memory bandwidth on any platform...they complain mainly about the amount. so the lower bandwidth compared to the other consoles may be a non issue. however whatever they have done to the CPU they seem to have really hacked it up. it looks like the design philosophy of the wiiu will be "do it on the GPU". not necessarily a bad thing but it will lead to some games having PS3 type multiplats as devs get their head around that. but did they really have to cut down on the CPU as much as they have?nameless12345
Overall, GDDR5 is faster e.g. Radeon HD 7730M GDDR3 (e.g. Dell Inspiron 15R) vs 7750M GDDR5 (e.g. HP Envy 15t-3209 TX).
Wii U has eDRAM to mitigate 64bit GDDR3 issue, but Xbox 360 also has eDRAM with faster GDDR3.
From http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zruKwU_OrkE the results of BOps2 running similar spec as my laptop i.e. AMD Radeon HD 5730M/6570M with GDDR3 and 128bit wide VRAM beats both Xbox 360 and Wii U.
Wii U has only 64-bit memory interface?
If so, that may be the reason why it's underperforming in the multiplats (besides the slow CPU, of course).
I'm not liking what I'm hearing.
I thought Wii U will be a balanced and efficient system but it now seems it's full of bottlenecks.
Could be the N64 all over again...
From PC tech sites, Wii U looks to have 64bit GDDR3 i.e. four 16bit Samsung/Hynix DDR3 SDRAM modules, but there are other issues e.g. IBM's multi-core PowerPCs. http://www.anandtech.com/show/6465/nintendo-wii-u-teardown
To workout the CPU vs GPU VRAM issue, I plan to test CoD BOps2 with half of video memory bandwidth i.e. downclock GDDR3 to 400Mhz/800Mhz which simulates Wii U's primary VRAM bandwidth.
128bit GDDR3 @ 400Mhz/800Mhz ~= 64bit DDR3 @ 800Mhz/1600Mhz.
Also, Radeon HD 7570M (rename 5730M/6570M, 400 stream processors) has 64bit GDDR5/GDDR3/DDR3 memory. Treat Nintendo as any other PC OEM vendor.
Radeon HD 5730M = Radeon HD 6570M ~= Geforce GT540M = Geforce GT 630M
Remember, we haven't factored in Wii U's eDRAM.
[QUOTE="nameless12345"]
[QUOTE="ronvalencia"]
Overall, GDDR5 is faster e.g. Radeon HD 7730M GDDR3 (e.g. Dell Inspiron 15R) vs 7750M GDDR5 (e.g. HP Envy 15t-3209 TX).
Wii U has eDRAM to mitigate 64bit GDDR3 issue, but Xbox 360 also has eDRAM with faster GDDR3.
From http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zruKwU_OrkE the results of BOps2 running similar spec as my laptop i.e. AMD Radeon HD 5730M/6570M with GDDR3 and 128bit wide VRAM beats both Xbox 360 and Wii U.
Stefan91x
Wii U has only 64-bit memory interface?
If so, that may be the reason why it's underperforming in the multiplats (besides the slow CPU, of course).
I'm not liking what I'm hearing.
I thought Wii U will be a balanced and efficient system but it now seems it's full of bottlenecks.
Could be the N64 all over again...
With the exception the N64 made a huge jump against competition, unlike the WiiU.:P The competition now uses similar SGI team i.e. SGI->ArtX->ATI->AMD.[QUOTE="ronvalencia"][QUOTE="osan0"]i dont necessarily agree with everything in the article (the choice of resistive screen has its advantages in terms of responsiveness. the controller is not a tablet..its a controller built for gaming not browsing dinternet) but nintendo do seem to have made some very odd decisions. also the stuff about extending the wireless range using Wifi is just wishful thinking on the authors part. its certainly technically possible but it would bring in more latency. the only legit complaint on the controller front imho is the poor battery. at least there seems to be plenty of room for a bigger battery...im sure 3rd party addons wont be long in their making. OS responsiveness should be fixable (i think there is a patch due in dec). neither the 360 nor PS3 OSs were ultra slim, responsive and reliable at launch. they have had 5-6 years of work done in them to improve them. however what on earth is in the OS to make it take up 5GB? That is truly massive. also why does it need 1GB of ram? I hope that requirement is also reduced over time. and on that note nintendos decision to stick with flash instead of a HDD that is easy to replace is also very odd and failing to provide enough power through the USB ports for external HDDs is a very poor oversight by nintendo. essentially the wiiu needs 3 wall sockets now. it should only need 1. I know nintendo were focusing on making the wiiu a low power (in terms of electricity usage) device but surely it would have been more efficent to have any external HDD and controller take power from the console rather than from extra plug sockets. from what we know of the internals i was initally critical of the use of DDR3L over GDDR5. however further research has made me rethink that as GDDR5 would have introduced a lot more latency. i also dont ever recall a dev complaining about memory bandwidth on any platform...they complain mainly about the amount. so the lower bandwidth compared to the other consoles may be a non issue. however whatever they have done to the CPU they seem to have really hacked it up. it looks like the design philosophy of the wiiu will be "do it on the GPU". not necessarily a bad thing but it will lead to some games having PS3 type multiplats as devs get their head around that. but did they really have to cut down on the CPU as much as they have?osan0
Overall, GDDR5 is faster e.g. Radeon HD 7730M GDDR3 (e.g. Dell Inspiron 15R) vs 7750M GDDR5 (e.g. HP Envy 15t-3209 TX).
Wii U has eDRAM to mitigate 64bit GDDR3 issue, but Xbox 360 also has eDRAM with faster GDDR3.
From http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zruKwU_OrkE the results of BOps2 running similar spec as my laptop i.e. AMD Radeon HD 5730M/6570M with GDDR3 and 128bit wide VRAM beats both Xbox 360 and Wii U.
ddr3 vs GDDR5, not GDDR3 vs GDDR5. the wiiu uses DDR3. http://vr-zone.com/articles/new-teardown-reveals-more-specs-for-the-nintendo-wii-u/17989.html im guessing that nintendo decided that GDDR5 would have compromised the CPU side of things too much due to latency hence the decision to go with DDR3.GDDR5 *is* based on DDR3 SDRAM http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/GDDR5
GDDR3 has faster read/write operations compared to DDR2 SDRAM.
[QUOTE="ronvalencia"]
[QUOTE="osan0"]i dont necessarily agree with everything in the article (the choice of resistive screen has its advantages in terms of responsiveness. the controller is not a tablet..its a controller built for gaming not browsing dinternet) but nintendo do seem to have made some very odd decisions. also the stuff about extending the wireless range using Wifi is just wishful thinking on the authors part. its certainly technically possible but it would bring in more latency. the only legit complaint on the controller front imho is the poor battery. at least there seems to be plenty of room for a bigger battery...im sure 3rd party addons wont be long in their making. OS responsiveness should be fixable (i think there is a patch due in dec). neither the 360 nor PS3 OSs were ultra slim, responsive and reliable at launch. they have had 5-6 years of work done in them to improve them. however what on earth is in the OS to make it take up 5GB? That is truly massive. also why does it need 1GB of ram? I hope that requirement is also reduced over time. and on that note nintendos decision to stick with flash instead of a HDD that is easy to replace is also very odd and failing to provide enough power through the USB ports for external HDDs is a very poor oversight by nintendo. essentially the wiiu needs 3 wall sockets now. it should only need 1. I know nintendo were focusing on making the wiiu a low power (in terms of electricity usage) device but surely it would have been more efficent to have any external HDD and controller take power from the console rather than from extra plug sockets. from what we know of the internals i was initally critical of the use of DDR3L over GDDR5. however further research has made me rethink that as GDDR5 would have introduced a lot more latency. i also dont ever recall a dev complaining about memory bandwidth on any platform...they complain mainly about the amount. so the lower bandwidth compared to the other consoles may be a non issue. however whatever they have done to the CPU they seem to have really hacked it up. it looks like the design philosophy of the wiiu will be "do it on the GPU". not necessarily a bad thing but it will lead to some games having PS3 type multiplats as devs get their head around that. but did they really have to cut down on the CPU as much as they have?nameless12345
Overall, GDDR5 is faster e.g. Radeon HD 7730M GDDR3 (e.g. Dell Inspiron 15R) vs 7750M GDDR5 (e.g. HP Envy 15t-3209 TX).
Wii U has eDRAM to mitigate 64bit GDDR3 issue, but Xbox 360 also has eDRAM with faster GDDR3.
From http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zruKwU_OrkE the results of BOps2 running similar spec as my laptop i.e. AMD Radeon HD 5730M/6570M with GDDR3 and 128bit wide VRAM beats both Xbox 360 and Wii U.
Wii U has only 64-bit memory interface?
If so, that may be the reason why it's underperforming in the multiplats (besides the slow CPU, of course).
I'm not liking what I'm hearing.
I thought Wii U will be a balanced and efficient system but it now seems it's full of bottlenecks.
Could be the N64 all over again...
It looks like Wii U has Radeon HD 7570M type solution with eDRAM.
AMD Radeon HD 7570M +Intel Core i5 2450M running Need For Speed The RUN @ 1366x768 and ULTRA details https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xR4pyigdDpg
The problem with the Wii U is with it's CPU.
[QUOTE="nameless12345"]
[QUOTE="ronvalencia"]
Overall, GDDR5 is faster e.g. Radeon HD 7730M GDDR3 (e.g. Dell Inspiron 15R) vs 7750M GDDR5 (e.g. HP Envy 15t-3209 TX).
Wii U has eDRAM to mitigate 64bit GDDR3 issue, but Xbox 360 also has eDRAM with faster GDDR3.
From http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zruKwU_OrkE the results of BOps2 running similar spec as my laptop i.e. AMD Radeon HD 5730M/6570M with GDDR3 and 128bit wide VRAM beats both Xbox 360 and Wii U.
ronvalencia
Wii U has only 64-bit memory interface?
If so, that may be the reason why it's underperforming in the multiplats (besides the slow CPU, of course).
I'm not liking what I'm hearing.
I thought Wii U will be a balanced and efficient system but it now seems it's full of bottlenecks.
Could be the N64 all over again...
It looks like Wii U has Radeon HD 7570M type solution with eDRAM.
AMD Radeon HD 7570M +Intel Core i5 2450M running Need For Speed The RUN @ 1366x768 and ULTRA details https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xR4pyigdDpg
The problem with the Wii U is with it's CPU.
Wasn't it speculated to have E6760?
But some other rumours are saying 4860M which makes me wonder if the E6760 is just a rebranded 4860M...
All we know about CPU is that it's lower clocked than the ones in PS3 and 360 and PowerPC type.
[QUOTE="nameless12345"]
[QUOTE="ronvalencia"]
Overall, GDDR5 is faster e.g. Radeon HD 7730M GDDR3 (e.g. Dell Inspiron 15R) vs 7750M GDDR5 (e.g. HP Envy 15t-3209 TX).
Wii U has eDRAM to mitigate 64bit GDDR3 issue, but Xbox 360 also has eDRAM with faster GDDR3.
From http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=zruKwU_OrkE the results of BOps2 running similar spec as my laptop i.e. AMD Radeon HD 5730M/6570M with GDDR3 and 128bit wide VRAM beats both Xbox 360 and Wii U.
Stefan91x
Wii U has only 64-bit memory interface?
If so, that may be the reason why it's underperforming in the multiplats (besides the slow CPU, of course).
I'm not liking what I'm hearing.
I thought Wii U will be a balanced and efficient system but it now seems it's full of bottlenecks.
Could be the N64 all over again...
With the exception the N64 made a huge jump against competition, unlike the WiiU.:PWell, N64 was "cutting edge" when it came out (64-bit CPU, graphics chip capable of advanced effects like bilinear filtering and anti-aliasing, RD-RAM, instant loading times thanks to cartridges, analog stick).
Wii U would have to have a fast IMB Power7 chip, AMD graphics with GCN architecture (Radeon 7 series), XDR2 RAM, bigger HDD drive and a gamepad screen capable of HD if they wanted it to be modern, technically speaking.
But that would probably add to the expenses and the system would either be more expensive or bring them more loss...
The Wii U is junk just like the Wii. Why can't Nintendo fanboys admit it? Look I am a fan of Zelda, Metroid, Donkey Kong and Star Fox,but Nintendo has been making disappointed hardware since the N64. The 3DS is also junk. Success does not equal a good product.BlueVigorHow on earth waste GameCube disappointing hardware? Sure the 3rd party support was pretty poor but the GameCube trounced the PS2 in terms of power. Plus the thing was practically indestructible.
I own a PS3, 360, Wii, and now Wii U and like the Wii U...not sure how you can call me a fanboy
we are looking at rushed ports built for other systems and launch games right now, I think its pretty early for anyone to make assumptions. Besides when I'm deep in a game the last think I'm thinking about is the speed of the USB ports or type of ram.
For how weak the Wii hardware is Metroid and the Galaxy games looked great...lets wait for a big name first party title here
The Wii U is junk just like the Wii. Why can't Nintendo fanboys admit it? Look I am a fan of Zelda, Metroid, Donkey Kong and Star Fox,but Nintendo has been making disappointed hardware since the N64. The 3DS is also junk. Success does not equal a good product.BlueVigor
You are dumb if you think NGC was weak...
Can anyone explain why the PS2 outsold the Gamcube on such a large scale?BolshevikParty
the ps2 doubling as a dvd player when dvd caught on fire and sold like crazy is why imo..
same with the ps1 doubling as a cd player.... it was something totally new..
the casuals ate it up like candy...andf had a lot of games for gamers too...best of both worlds.
unfortuntaely for sony...blu-ray didn't innovate or blow up in the same manner as cd and dvd.
Please Log In to post.
Log in to comment