i have heard many different things about the wii u specs. I have mostly bee hearing " wii u will have 1.5gbs ram" I hear its 512xdr2 and 1gb video memory. Why does everyone keep saying it has 1.5?
wii u specs wrong?
This topic is locked from further discussion.
oh and teh wii cant do teh dx 11
i always lol that that as its not a microsoft system
i have heard many different things about the wii u specs. I have mostly bee hearing " wii u will have 1.5gbs ram" I hear its 512xdr2 and 1gb video memory. Why does everyone keep saying it has 1.5?
dontshackzmii
There are different rumours on different sites, and some don't coincide with each other. Since that's the situation, i would assume that at least a couple of them are false. What we do know, as of recently, is what Critek commented:
"The specs are very good. It's a challenge for designers, but once thought through it can add value, and that's what ultimately important. Our guys in Nottingham, they are very happy with their tests on the dev kits and they're excited about it."
I know they haven't ben exactly honest in the past, but that was in regards if they had something to gain, like hyping their own products. So i would, at least, put Critek's word that had some experience with the development kits, above a poster on these forums. And those development kits are not final anyway.
Most of the rumors are wrong. Infact, all of the rumors could be wrong. All we know for sure is what Nintendo has told us. But even after the Wii U launches, they still wont tell us. So we will have to wait until someone voids their warrenty just to see whats inside the console, before we can know the specs.
Rumors shouldn't be taken seriously. Especially for a system that doesn't even have finalized dev kits distributed.
"Official" specs as of now are: "IBM PowerPC multi-core CPU based on POWER7 architecture", "AMD Radeon HD GPU based on R700 chip", "internal flash memory expendable by SD cards and USB hard drives" and "optical disc drive with 25 gigs space". No info on RAM whatsoever as of yet (appart from the dev kit rumorus).
oh and teh wii cant do teh dx 11
i always lol that that as its not a microsoft system
dontshackzmii
The R700 chip supports what would translate into "DX10.1"
However it's gonna be a modified version and may have better support for tesselation and other features that DX11 has.
[QUOTE="dontshackzmii"]
oh and teh wii cant do teh dx 11
i always lol that that as its not a microsoft system
nameless12345
The R700 chip supports what would translate into "DX10.1"
However it's gonna be a modified version and may have better support for tesselation and other features that DX11 has.
Yup, it'll definitely support tesselation as that's been a part of OpenGL since Shader Model 4.0, and being a modern Radeon HD GPU (and we have no idea what chipset it's going to be but an r700 is unlikely imo) we know it'll have Shader Model 4.1 support. There's always an overlap of features between the latest versions of DirectX and OpenGL. One thing we can definitely say is that however much system RAM they decide on it won't be XDR2.[QUOTE="nameless12345"][QUOTE="dontshackzmii"]
oh and teh wii cant do teh dx 11
i always lol that that as its not a microsoft system
thesnowdog2005
The R700 chip supports what would translate into "DX10.1"
However it's gonna be a modified version and may have better support for tesselation and other features that DX11 has.
Yup, it'll definitely support tesselation as that's been a part of OpenGL since Shader Model 4.0, and being a modern Radeon HD GPU (and we have no idea what chipset it's going to be but an r700 is unlikely imo) we know it'll have Shader Model 4.1 support. There's always an overlap of features between the latest versions of DirectX and OpenGL. One thing we can definitely say is that however much system RAM they decide on it won't be XDR2.it does not use dx at all. Tho tesselation has been on open gl longer then on dx 11.
Yup, it'll definitely support tesselation as that's been a part of OpenGL since Shader Model 4.0, and being a modern Radeon HD GPU (and we have no idea what chipset it's going to be but an r700 is unlikely imo) we know it'll have Shader Model 4.1 support. There's always an overlap of features between the latest versions of DirectX and OpenGL. One thing we can definitely say is that however much system RAM they decide on it won't be XDR2.[QUOTE="thesnowdog2005"][QUOTE="nameless12345"]
The R700 chip supports what would translate into "DX10.1"
However it's gonna be a modified version and may have better support for tesselation and other features that DX11 has.
dontshackzmii
it does not use dx at all. Tho tesselation has been on open gl longer then on dx 11.
Yes, I know...that's what I've just said. Tesselation has been a part of OpenGL since Shader Model 4.0.I wonder how fast the load times would be like.
[QUOTE="bonesawisready5"]Crytek is happy with it, Bethesda seems to have no problem with it, and the creator of Braid has said he's been told it has "Much more RAM" than current consoles. I would be fine with 1GB system, and 512MB VRAM. Although 2GB/512MB would be pretty good.thesnowdog2005We're more likely to see that being the other way around mate. I can't see AMD and Nintendo going for less than 1Gb of VRAM and having as much as 1Gb of system RAM is overkill as well as expensive. Console operating systems have a very small footprint. What's going to be interesting is the choice of what type of memory they're going to use. It's definitely not going to be XDR2 because despite it being designed by Rambus for years none of the manufacturers have gone near it. Nintendo have tended to use 1T-SRAM for their consoles recently (with the Gamecube and Wii system RAM) which is comparable to eDRAM in terms of speed but I think it's more likely that we'll see 512Mb of XDR and 1Gb of GDDR3 for the system RAM and VRAM respectively.
I imagine that depending on the type of RAM Nintendo goes with will see 1.5GB of unified system memory with 1T-SRAM for the GPU(at least 24Mb hopefully more), or 1GB of unified system memory and .5GB of VRAM along with the 1T-SRAM more or less like you stated. I don't expect Nintendo to gimp its system, so I'm not sure about GDDR3. Something interesting is if Wii U does have a Radeon HD 4850 or 4870 equivalent Nintendo could meet or exceed the standard bandwidth of the commerically available cards with DDR3 using IBM's memory controllers. I simply don't know how much these memory controllers would cost. I suspect because of Wii backwards compatibility that Wii U's memory set up will superficially resemble Wii's and Gamecube's. I don't think 2GB of system ram (main system and video combined) is completely out of the question depending on specifics, but it isn't likely.
[QUOTE="thesnowdog2005"][QUOTE="bonesawisready5"]Crytek is happy with it, Bethesda seems to have no problem with it, and the creator of Braid has said he's been told it has "Much more RAM" than current consoles. I would be fine with 1GB system, and 512MB VRAM. Although 2GB/512MB would be pretty good.osan0We're more likely to see that being the other way around mate. I can't see AMD and Nintendo going for less than 1Gb of VRAM and having as much as 1Gb of system RAM is overkill as well as expensive. Console operating systems have a very small footprint. What's going to be interesting is the choice of what type of memory they're going to use. It's definitely not going to be XDR2 because despite it being designed by Rambus for years none of the manufacturers have gone near it. Nintendo have tended to use 1T-SRAM for their consoles recently (with the Gamecube and Wii system RAM) which is comparable to eDRAM in terms of speed but I think it's more likely that we'll see 512Mb of XDR and 1Gb of GDDR3 for the system RAM and VRAM respectively. it may be better if ninty take a leaf out of MSs book and just have 1 pool of ram shared by the CPu and GPU. it makes the system more flexible and devs seem to like that. 1-2GB (hopefully closer to 2 :) ) of the latest GDDr shared between the CPU and GPU could be more beneficial. it wouldnt offer the best out and out performance but devs have more wiggle room. or maybe 1-2GB of the type of ram we see in the 3DS and mobile phones (FCRam i think its called). its still pretty fast and doesnt generate much heat. in something as small as a wiiu that could be more beneficial. if it is split though then having most of it as Vram certainly makes the most sense.
shared ram can be slower
We're more likely to see that being the other way around mate. I can't see AMD and Nintendo going for less than 1Gb of VRAM and having as much as 1Gb of system RAM is overkill as well as expensive. Console operating systems have a very small footprint. What's going to be interesting is the choice of what type of memory they're going to use. It's definitely not going to be XDR2 because despite it being designed by Rambus for years none of the manufacturers have gone near it. Nintendo have tended to use 1T-SRAM for their consoles recently (with the Gamecube and Wii system RAM) which is comparable to eDRAM in terms of speed but I think it's more likely that we'll see 512Mb of XDR and 1Gb of GDDR3 for the system RAM and VRAM respectively.[QUOTE="thesnowdog2005"][QUOTE="bonesawisready5"]Crytek is happy with it, Bethesda seems to have no problem with it, and the creator of Braid has said he's been told it has "Much more RAM" than current consoles. I would be fine with 1GB system, and 512MB VRAM. Although 2GB/512MB would be pretty good.Jikayaki
I imagine that depending on the type of RAM Nintendo goes with will see 1.5GB of unified system memory with 1T-SRAM for the GPU(at least 24Mb hopefully more), or 1GB of unified system memory and .5GB of VRAM along with the 1T-SRAM more or less like you stated. I don't expect Nintendo to gimp its system, so I'm not sure about GDDR3. Something interesting is if Wii U does have a Radeon HD 4850 or 4870 equivalent Nintendo could meet or exceed the standard bandwidth of the commerically available cards with DDR3 using IBM's memory controllers. I simply don't know how much these memory controllers would cost. I suspect because of Wii backwards compatibility that Wii U's memory set up will superficially resemble Wii's and Gamecube's. I don't think 2GB of system ram (main system and video combined) is completely out of the question depending on specifics, but it isn't likely.
If you consider the vastly different CPU and GPU compared to the Gamecube and Wii I think we can safely say that the backwards compatibility will be software based, not hardware based...which actually tells us a little how powerful the hardware is going to be. It shouldn't affect the memory setup at all. If they can pull off full backwards compatibility with no latency at all then that'll be very impressive indeed. I can't wait for the iFixit fellahs to get hold of one tbh just to see exactly what we're going to have inside.[QUOTE="Jikayaki"][QUOTE="thesnowdog2005"] We're more likely to see that being the other way around mate. I can't see AMD and Nintendo going for less than 1Gb of VRAM and having as much as 1Gb of system RAM is overkill as well as expensive. Console operating systems have a very small footprint. What's going to be interesting is the choice of what type of memory they're going to use. It's definitely not going to be XDR2 because despite it being designed by Rambus for years none of the manufacturers have gone near it. Nintendo have tended to use 1T-SRAM for their consoles recently (with the Gamecube and Wii system RAM) which is comparable to eDRAM in terms of speed but I think it's more likely that we'll see 512Mb of XDR and 1Gb of GDDR3 for the system RAM and VRAM respectively.thesnowdog2005
I imagine that depending on the type of RAM Nintendo goes with will see 1.5GB of unified system memory with 1T-SRAM for the GPU(at least 24Mb hopefully more), or 1GB of unified system memory and .5GB of VRAM along with the 1T-SRAM more or less like you stated. I don't expect Nintendo to gimp its system, so I'm not sure about GDDR3. Something interesting is if Wii U does have a Radeon HD 4850 or 4870 equivalent Nintendo could meet or exceed the standard bandwidth of the commerically available cards with DDR3 using IBM's memory controllers. I simply don't know how much these memory controllers would cost. I suspect because of Wii backwards compatibility that Wii U's memory set up will superficially resemble Wii's and Gamecube's. I don't think 2GB of system ram (main system and video combined) is completely out of the question depending on specifics, but it isn't likely.
If you consider the vastly different CPU and GPU compared to the Gamecube and Wii I think we can safely say that the backwards compatibility will be software based, not hardware based...which actually tells us a little how powerful the hardware is going to be. It shouldn't affect the memory setup at all. If they can pull off full backwards compatibility with no latency at all then that'll be very impressive indeed. I can't wait for the iFixit fellahs to get hold of one tbh just to see exactly what we're going to have inside. I love iFixit and look forward to them analyzing the Wii U too People here, and even gaming journalists still think IGN's leaked 3DS specs last year are right, they still say the 3DS has 64MB RAM and 256MB flash storage when iFixit tore it down and discovered a faster multi-core CPU and 128MB RAM, along with 2GB flash storage But people will probably think the Wii U is one and a half 360's duct taped together even if Nintendo put 8GBs of RAM in it.it may be better if ninty take a leaf out of MSs book and just have 1 pool of ram shared by the CPu and GPU. it makes the system more flexible and devs seem to like that. 1-2GB (hopefully closer to 2 :) ) of the latest GDDr shared between the CPU and GPU could be more beneficial. it wouldnt offer the best out and out performance but devs have more wiggle room. or maybe 1-2GB of the type of ram we see in the 3DS and mobile phones (FCRam i think its called). its still pretty fast and doesnt generate much heat. in something as small as a wiiu that could be more beneficial. if it is split though then having most of it as Vram certainly makes the most sense.[QUOTE="osan0"][QUOTE="thesnowdog2005"] We're more likely to see that being the other way around mate. I can't see AMD and Nintendo going for less than 1Gb of VRAM and having as much as 1Gb of system RAM is overkill as well as expensive. Console operating systems have a very small footprint. What's going to be interesting is the choice of what type of memory they're going to use. It's definitely not going to be XDR2 because despite it being designed by Rambus for years none of the manufacturers have gone near it. Nintendo have tended to use 1T-SRAM for their consoles recently (with the Gamecube and Wii system RAM) which is comparable to eDRAM in terms of speed but I think it's more likely that we'll see 512Mb of XDR and 1Gb of GDDR3 for the system RAM and VRAM respectively.dontshackzmii
shared ram can be slower
true..it can. but it doesnt really matter. ram speed (within reason of course) doesnt have a huge effect on performance. having 1 shared pool also makes the system more flexible which makes life easier for devs.Please Log In to post.
Log in to comment