The Wii U is out, though it has already had complaints about its GPGPU before many have learned how it functions. Zelda Informer gives us an in depth look at how the new technology works and it's place in the console market.
It's really not just next gen, it is a next gen console with slightly above par current gen tech
Which I think for Nintendo will suit them just fine. I agree that this is what the Wii should have been in the first place, but I am sure the Wii U will still be successful and still have it's place. Nintendo offers such a unique experiece with their consoles. I purchase a Nintendo console because I know I am getting amazing 1st and 2nd party games that will be released on the system. Couple that with finally getting to see a Legend of Zelda or Metroid in HD and you have lots of people excited. Most gamers nowadays are open to the idea of multiple consoles in the house. This isn't the 80's or 90's where you only had one system and that was it. I have a Wii U, and I have a 360. I will more than likely purchase either the 720 or PS4, depending on which one interests me more. So I have the Wii U for all the amazing 1st/2nd party games, and I'll have another console for some of those amazing 3rd party games that perhaps don't get released for the Wii U. I still don't think the difference between the systems is going to be as big as it was before. The difference between HD and SD was too great of a margin. Now you are comparing hypothetically native 720p vs native 1080p. Not as wide a margin.
Well Nintendo's main focus it seems is 3rd part for this gen and with out up to date hardware its gonna be like last gen all over again... you may think graphics dont effect you,but it will effect what games will come out on it in the near future... YOU HAVE BEEN WARNED.I said the same thing last gen and the same idiotic gamers like somehow thought that it would have 3rd part support
So mario won't look like this? http://www.youtube.com/watc... :( /s I can see the unique experience that the wiiU can offer. But seeing how they want to compete in hardcore gaming they may have made a mistake. I am more interested in the wiiU tablet for internet and watching movies under the covers than games. But that just me maybe. One of two things will happen. WiiU will not be enough compared to the next 720/ps4 systems & devs will complain and ignore wiiU and opt to make higher end games for ps4 & 720 like last time. OR wiiU will be enough but hold back the other guys since devs like to start at the weakest hardware(for some reason). In a perfect would they would start on pc(which seems to work out 90% of the time). In the end wiiU will be the weakest. 1) PS4 & 720 won't have a cpu slower than ps3 & xbox 360(I would bet money on it). 2) they are coming out 1-2 years later and will most likely have later hardware. 3)nintendo is profitable after one game sale so it can't that much for the hardware(around $370-$390?) this is what happen when companies won't really take a loss. lol disagrees? prove me wrong then.
I was also one of the people who was bashing the Wii U so I decided to see what this article said. Then I went to wikipedia and read about GPGPU. Honestly, I wasnt aware how much different a GPGPU is from a regular GPU. Even its programming language is different (OpenCL). No wonder the ports did not transition well to the Wii U. I think I see that Wii U is not as much underpowered as we thought it to be. We will probably see its power in some AAA first party exclusive. Third party developers will have to change their programming ways a lot if they want to use the Wii U to its full extent. I still beleive that teh next PS360 will be more powerful but now I also know that Wii U is not as pathetic as I thought it to be. Sadly, I am not interested in Marios and Zelda so I wont be getting it. Gave up Marios after the NES. Still it is good for the Wii U owners and Nintendo fans that they can look forward to great looking game when the developers finally get the hang of GPGPU.
"thanks to even more eDRAM, the Wii U version of the Radeon HD 5670 that has been custom built is actually more powerful than the original PC version of the card. This is extremely vital, because the HD 5670 is in fact a GPGPU." Is this why the wii version of call of duty is missing certain shadow effects and all normal maps? These are tasks that run on the GPU, not CPU.
It's having the same issues the PS3 had at launch. Give it some time, let the devs get a hang of it. I just hope Bethesda can figure this one out! :)
If they made a Mario game that looked like the vid I'm about to post, then people would shut up. http://www.youtube.com/watc...
Junk article. Should never have been approved not least for the poor title, grammar and spelling here. Besides the actual content of the article itself which is nothing but full of inaccuracies and assumptions. "However, the CPU uses a significant amount of eDRAM" The eDRAM is on the GPU's die and for the GPU's use. Not the CPU. "You can store more data in the eDRAM and as such, move more at once as well." Compared to what? Wii's CPU? See my previous point above. "performance increase does fundamentally make it have a higher efficiency than whats in the current gaming consoles" Arguable, and unlikely considering now multiple developers experienced with said alternative platforms claim it is inferior and weak compared to PS3/360 central processors. (i.e DICE, 4A, Koei Tecmo) "The GPU is based on a Radeon HD 5670" Unsubstantiated. Most reports either claim it is based on a Radeon R700 or is E6760 based. Not 5670. "Wii U version of the Radeon HD 5670 that has been custom built is actually more powerful than the original PC version of the card" See above, but also impossible even IF 5670 is the GPU inside Wii U. Typical 5670 GDDR5 has 64Gb/s of memory bandwidth and 1Gb of dedicated just as video memory. Wii U's main memory bandwidth is considerably slower and has 1gb total usable for games (1gb reserved for OS). IF it is a 5670, it MUST be heavily downclocked from the desktop part and thus 5670 would have better fillrates (faster) than whatever is in Wii U. This would be indicated by 5670 having a TDP of 61 watts by itself. Wii U's TOTAL system power is barely over half that.... So this is unknown, but the author presents these statements as facts. Lets not even go to the fact 5670 is a rubbish GPGPU, because it does not support double precision floating point... "Essentially, with everything customly aimed towards gaming, the Wii U is like a middle of the road gaming PC. A middle of the row gaming rig absolutely destroys the PS3 and Xbox 360." Wii U is a low end gaming PC, best case scenario. Radeon 5670 is the card he uses as an example, which is simply not a midrange card anyway. Something like a Radeon 7850 is a midrange card, and it is ridiculously faster than 5670. I could go on and on here........But it is obvious this article is extremely poor.
i should have worn my proper shoes and trousers for the cinderella ball. theres a lot of spinning going on in here. im sat here up on the balcony just watching all the sheeps spin and twirl trying to lie to people about something that isnt. the wii u is weak! you either accept it or you dont. true fans dont mind and that is great for them. then you have the nes fanatics that wont accept the truth and they feel the need to spin facts about the wii u that they deemed as a negative, to seem better or more powerful than it is. they know that the truth about the console being weaker than xbox and ps3 is ridiculous and they cant accept it. where are the fanatics that use to disagree and bubble me down for saying nintendo wont make a powerful console in the wii u and it wont be 6 times more powerful than the xbox 360. i remember these fanatics use to spam that disagree button then try to tell me how itll be quite easy for nintendo to destroy xbox 360 specs. they touted rubbish fanatical specs about how the wii u is using a supercomputer cpu thats in the fastest computer in the world. listen, the wii u is weak and thats fine for the true fans and knowing it doesn't bother them. the ones it bothers but spin the facts are fanatics that feel like they need to spread lies. the wii u doesn't interest me one bit so im waiting for next gen consoles.
GPGPU is programming technique as much as it it hardware, not hardware alone. GPGPU been around for a long time, the PS3 ideally uses a reverse on the GPGPU in that everything is brought to the cell processor, not the GPU.
Nintendo bores me. All they do is make the same few games over and over and over and over and over. What's so great about that?
@vulcan "The eDRAM is on the GPU's die and for the GPU's use." Actually both CPU and GPU are on the same die...Care to elaborate?
@ sidar, no, they are not. This is Wii U's SEPARATE dies. http://images.anandtech.com... the top left smaller die is the CPU. Clearly the CPU aint on the same die as the largest chip there the GPU lol. Plus the CPU die is far too small to have much eDRAM on it next to the CPU logic itself. The majority of the eDRAM is certainly on the same die as the GPU, fairly easily ascertained by the size of the thing and the fact we know it has 32mb of eDRAM. This will take up a fair bit of space on the GPU die, chances are it takes up as much space as the size of the entire CPU there! The whole thing is technically an MCM http://en.wikipedia.org/wik... (multi chip module) where the SEPARATE dies are affixed on the same substrate. Just like the GPU was split over two chips dumped on an MCM in all earlier Xbox 360 models http://www.llamma.com/xbox3... However later Xbox 360 models shrink all the separate chips, (CPU, GPU, daughter die with the extra NEC logic and eDRAM PLUS the front side bus) onto one single die, one single chip to simplify production, cut costs, etc etc. This makes that now an SoC (system on a chip) http://www.cdrinfo.com/imag... Maybe you just got confused over the difference between what a die is, and what an MCM is. Wiki there might help you out. This is one die: http://upload.wikimedia.org... (a CELL processor no less) ....and these are MCMs with multiple dies on them http://www.traquair.com/new... Just like Wii U. Ta Daaaaaaa!!!!
I think that people should have to pass an English proficiency exam before they are allowed to post articles on here. The headline doesn't make any sense.
As far as the GPU goes I am betting its between A custom AMD Mobile 7770M GPU or AMD 7850M GPU. It fits all the speculation. Fits the R700 aim. Any GPU can be built into GPGPU mode for awhile now AMD has said this awhile ago. Nothing is confirmed, but I am 99% certain of AMD 7850M variant or upgrade being the GPGPU for WiiU. It fits the AMD R700 4800 series with performance. Has the low wattage, as well as a few other things that match it up very well.
If I had to estimate the GPU, I would say it is a custom part (obviously) with features and specs taken from a variety of existing AMD GPUs. I would say it is quite like the E6760 embedded GPU, but with much lower clockspeeds, and the 32mb eDRAM on die that we know of. It is gonna be some odd hybrid with bits n pieces chucked on/removed from the mainstream Radeon series. Wii U's power consumption under load in game is less than 35 watts total, EVERYTHING, while the E6760's is 35w alone. This heavily limits how fast the GPU can really be. There is no magic you can do that can reduce the performance per watt massively of current GPU technology on a current production process like 40nm. That is the definition of state of the art, how much performance per watt you can get with existing technology determines that Wii U cannot be as powerful as most desktop GPUs out there. So we know E6760 is 35w @ 600mhz. Power doesn't scale perfectly downwards with clocks because transistor leakage doesn't work that way. E6760 @ 600mhz is 576 gigaflops. Xenos is 240. So maybe it is a bit like an undervolted E6760 running @ 450-500mhz. Or maybe it is like an E6760 with shaders disabled, other sections disabled, whichever is better for performance/yields in this case. Maybe its both of these things. Who knows. Either way its not THAT fast. Faster than Xenos and RSX for sure, but I would estimate 1.5x to twice as fast as Xenos, absolute top end of the possible scale. Tops.
This is one of those lame articles that attempt to appear smart using terms that float around the internet based on rumors and NOT FACTS. And come on, it's Jargon not Jargin!
Man, this Wii U debate is really heating up. Nintendo fans just need to accept that it is a little more powerful than the current gen console and is not as big of a leap like the previous generations. We will probably see the console's full use when Legend of Zelda is released but I doubt any other third party developer will bother to learn GPGPU programming unless the next PS360 also have GPGPUs. Similar thing happened with PS2 when it had two cores and nobody bothered to use the second core and the games looked really poor until the later years when developers finally decides to get off their lazy asses. This debate is going nowhere so let us forget about it and let time decide conclusively.
Oh, so I guess no-name journalists know better than DICE, 4A, etc? 1) Google "GPGPU" 2) Click Wikipedia 3) Throw out technical jargon 4) Pretend to be an expert 5) Hits 6) Ad revenue
That's why so far it has nothing but ports that don't look much better than they do on current gen systems. I had hoped that Zombie U would justify the use of the GamePad, but it did just the opposite. It is next-gen, chronologically, as it is the Wii's successor, but its online is completely sub-par to that of current-gen consoles. It's just not doing anything new.
Yes, of course it will suit them fine: selling cheap, outdated tech at a premium price. That's what they do every time. I'm not convinced the new pad is going to make millions of casuals splash out again though.
@ Neonridr I'm a bit baffled as to why you have so many disagrees for saying something that makes so much sense. There seems to be a hell of a lot of hate on this site for anything that isn't Sony related.
I think you're missing a huge factor when it comes to quality in games. Yes, they can make stuff run in native 720p on the Wii U, but the graphics quality will still be marginalized by the lack of processing and graphical processing power. Showing something with low polygon count and low resolution textures in 720p doesn't change the fact that it's low polygon count and low rez textures. Lighting and shadows also play a huge role in how a game looks, and that requires better hardware as well. Yes, I'm sure Nintendo will still do a fantastic job with their 1st and 2nd party support, but they want a piece of the 3rd party developers, they want the GTAs and CoDs and ACs and all the other big franchise acronyms, but since they decided to forgo the next gen hardware for stuff that the other current gen consoles already run, they aren't going to get the big 3rd party franchises.
Even if the Wii U is all most powerful than PS3 and has everything it needs and more to succeed next generation, people will still bash it. Awn..
When it starts shelling out games like Uncharted or the last of us then it will get the praise it deserves. Look how hard sony had to prove themselves in the beginning of this Gen. Nintendo should learn from them and showcase the systems power with exclusives.
"In the future, developers would be wise to truly take hold of the beefy GPGPU in the Wii U and push it as hard as they can. With all the extra eDRAM running around, and all the processing power the GPU has to handle such aspects like Physics, it’s no wonder current generation games are struggling. Current generation (or last generation for us Wii U owners) are extremely CPU based games. Heavily reliant on the CPU pushing through. In the next generation, this is going to change significantly. The Wii U is already there. It’s just going to take time for console developers to get into the mindset to take advantage of the GPGPU featured in the Wii U, just like what will happen in the other next generation consoles." Asking 3rd party development studios to do this when their Game engines are pretty much designed for multiplatform use to maximuize profit across multiple system's, is asking those very same 3rd party development studios to make an exclusive! Just ask Sony or Microsoft how that goes in today's day and age, you have pretty much a very few choices for an exclusive to be done for your platform in today's market, all of which cost you a lot of money. Or you ask for a timed exclusive or exclusive DLC and even than that may not pull in the strengths of your Hardware system chipset. thus brings me to my next point. Now ask Nintendo to do exactly what this talking point by this story, and ask them to spend more money on their development Assets, take longer for a game to release because of such exspense and investment, but cost more manpower for each and every project and thus lower the number of in house development projects at the same time, once again all you have to do is look at microsoft and Sony to see these results first hand. Nintendo has never been known to expend those very high end $$$ to make a single game and i doubt very much they are going to start now with the WiiU, that does not take away the fact the games are fantastic, its just being unrealistic of Nintendo to change a winning formula over the years just for a lil bragging rights, when people tend to look at the game not just in terms of graphic's but how fun it is with Nintendo's platforms people give Nintendo props for their 1st party efforts anyway as they already do right now remember that is one of Nintendo's strong points. not trying to discourage about Nintendo not investing into their platform on a game by game basis as the way Microsoft and Sony do, im just going by Nintendo's winning policy from the past and saying its very unlikely they would change that. Nintendo cannot perform a development miracle just like any other company. when you expend those resources you only have so many that you can put toward each and every project, and something always has to give, time, money, or just plain constraint, you only have so much time in the day and only so much time before the product has to ship, because that its on a time line for completion and time is money.
- zeldainformer hmm
If we can't trust Zelda Informer, who can we trust?
It seems to me that it's very similar to the "leap" between Wii and PS2. It's better all right, but it's not PS4, X720 better
Can I borrow your time machine? So your saying Sony is going to release another $600 console because it was great move this gen. Think about it this way...Nintendo has the number one selling console this gen which is the Wii and was far less superior than the 360 and PS3 - now why on earth would MS or Sony release a console that is 10 times more powerful than the Wii U when Nintendo has proven that its no the power that matters but the games. I do not give a rats a$$ about overpowerd specs as long as I keep getting fun games. Rage, Too Human, Haze have proven that no matter how much power you put in a game, if it is not fun and enjoyable then gamers do not want it. You can spray a turd gold but in the end its still a turd.
See, this is what I don't get. We're comparing Wii U's specs to the PS4 and 720. How? We don't know ANYTHING about them. Hell until they're officially announced they don't technically exist. We are literally comparing something to nothing. And yes there's rumored specs, but that's why they call it a rumor. Hell we barely know anything about the Wii U's specs to make an legitimate comparison. Also, with all the money Sony has been losing on the PS3 and Vita, couple that with the fact that their financial status is officially "junk" you really think they're going to make a system that was a big of a leap as the PS3? Since they're junk status now anything they do is high risk, but if they do that investors will be trying to sell their stock like it was Black Tuesday.
It's better all right, but it's not PS4, X720 better We have yet to see any 720/ps4 games so how do you know? If final fantasy 15 is any indication then the 720 and ps4 are not gonna look hardly any better then the last generation. Funny how microsoft, and sony fans always go without really powerful graphics the wii u is in trouble, but yet when the ps1 was underpowered against the n64, what was it? Who cares about power it is games that matter just gotta love fanboys right?
The fact that they'll be released later, that there's something called "moore's law", and that there's a market for hardcore gamers on console heavily suggests that PS4 and 720 will be more powerful. Every specs rumor so far agrees. Also, take a look at some of the game engines that are aiming for PS4, 720. Wii U isn't all that much more powerful because of the control system. Are you guys really expecting three consoles relying on a new control system? It makes sense for Nintedo to go low-end, it doesn't make sense for all of them. We don't know anything yet, but there is something called common sense. If (when) MS and Sony release their new consoles, I'll eat my hat if they (or at the very least one of them) don't beat Wii U graphically. @jbgamer Boy, that was dumb. Don't turn this into a general conversation about fanboys, when A) I'm just saying what I think (and actually basing it on something) and B) I'm not a fanboy.
"So your saying Sony is going to release another $600 console because it was great move this gen. " No, but you can be sure Sony and Microsoft will have consoles way more powerful than the PS3 and 360. The Wii U is just about as powerful as the PS3 and 360. A little more powerful in some areas. That won't compete in the next generation.
People confuse 'Next gen' and 'Next gen' too often... Next gen doesn't imply leap in visuals at ALL but that is becoming the common mistake and of stupidity amongst graphic-whores. Does every new release of GPU's make a GIANT leap from the last model, or a mini-leap? A mini-leap. When a Next-gen console happens, it's the New Hardware, it is just a newer iteration of the hardware-series. Power means nothing, power in hardware is just a Bonus that can help become a feature to make it sell, as such, it's Optional, but usually most sought.... I personally care though about graphics to a good degree only for the sake of my own financial conditions, I want to buy an omgwtfbbq computer rig to build up, but I cannot, to compensate I'd like an efficient, powerful yet cheap console to enjoy what may be 'Next-gen' visuals, but calling something 'NOT Next-gen' simply because it doesn't have a giant leap in graphics is what I find idiotic of the 'Current-gen' fanboys. The 'Current-gen' fanboys are one of the most ignorant, truly, a generation where most just hopped into the Gaming scene only to proclaim themselves as Gamers when they're infact, hectic, dimwitted and eccentric tools to both business and the Gaming-scene. This is my rant. tl;dr
These idiots in here are too stupid to understand a simple thing.
@Mounce "People confuse 'Next gen' and 'Next gen' too often..." With computer hardware, they mean the same thing ;) "Next gen doesn't imply leap in visuals at ALL but that is becoming the common mistake and of stupidity amongst graphic-whores. " It kinda does actually. As with any good product, the next generation is suppose to be better than the last. Better hardware is suppose to translate to better visuals, as well as physics, AI, etc. Every new console generation has done this. Why should this change all of a sudden? Even games using an artsy style of graphics such as Cel shading could benefit from higher res textures, anti-aliasing, etc... I know you would agree with me Mounce that graphics can help provide immersion. A lot of people go on the attack and say story and gameplay are more important, but I would argue they are all needed to make a good game. I dont think an atari looking side scroller would cut it these days, even with a good story or gameplay. "Does every new release of GPU's make a GIANT leap from the last model, or a mini-leap? A mini-leap." True, but GPUs evolve more rapidly. There isnt just one new GPU release every 5-10 years like consoles. With that much time between them, a significant upgrade is imperative. "When a Next-gen console happens, it's the New Hardware, it is just a newer iteration of the hardware-series. Power means nothing, power in hardware is just a Bonus that can help become a feature to make it sell, as such, it's Optional, but usually most sought.... " New hardware = more power = better graphics and games. That has always been the formula, and always will be. Otherwise what is the incentive to buying a new console or for companies to manufacture one? Who would buy a next gen console thats the same thing as what they already own? Even if power consumption is a priority, its always accompanied by better performance as well. Usually because of a smaller nm fabrication...
@Markus I don't know where you found the definition of what Next-gen means....but I think you're mistaking Opinion for facts. Next gen is 'Supposed to be better than the last'? And GRAPHICS/Power = Better? That is not a valid argument.. It's subjective opinion, not fact. Hence why Wii was Gamecube 1.5 in a nutshell, yet still was bloody successful, because it DOESN'T MATTER. Lol. I don't agree with you on your charade of this Next-gen thing, and using different shading or art style doesn't mean it needs power, that's the joy of consoles. Developers find loopholes and rendering techniques to make things better, Borderlands at first was gritty and more realistic then it turned Cell-shaded and had Nothing to do with visual demands in the slightest. Just is a Choice. Graphics do not provide immersion, you know how many people were immersed in Silent Hill 1 rather than Silent Hill Downpour? Doom 2 rather than Doom 3? Clocktower? Immersion comes from technique and goals intertwining with the skill of the team of developers rather than visuals. That's because Atari sucked, and was a company that couldn't follow the trend properly and they basically turned into Sega in a different approach. Nintendo's 2D/Sidescrolling games contradict your logic with sales of Metroid and Mario sidescrolling games, which can sell Millllionnns. That and it has minimal story, default visuals, default audio-expected-quality....Noth ing but milking nostalgia in this situation, yet still successful. Consoles could easily evolves rapidly as GPU's do....Just that'd fuck over the investment entirely. That's what PC's remain as, a pricier investment, N64 expansion pack anyone? It caused discrepancies in some game compatibilities in order to boost its power a bit. And again, "New hardware = MORE Power" is just a cliche of the market and your expectations...It's not fact, and it goes down to subjective opinion on what one person sees as what should be new hardware. What was new hardware, in my argument, is just it's the NEXT generation of consoles, the term originates from THAT and that alone. Confusing Graphic-power for Next-gen was entirely my focus and it's not really arguable :/ Next-gen was, historically legitimately made for the sake of naming off the next line of hardware that only had to do with it not being a similar model and has enough change to merit it to be 'new'. Unlike say, PSP and PSP Go, Go wasn't coined as Next-gen, but not due to graphics not changing, but because it was still 'PSP'. What is the incentive? Well, that's why I said its a Feature, but surely more features or -coughs- GIMMICKS....Are what make something seem refreshing, new or eye-candy. It's to me why I'd not see the Wii U doing well because of all the soccer moms out there who bought a Wii for their child or such, they'd go "Why would I need to buy a Wii U if I have a Wii?" They shouldn't need one, meaning sales shouldn't be as huge, and is why most gamers want to define it as 'Not next gen', features beyond graphics can include new controller layout and improved feedback or innovative designs like SNES to N64 with a joystick and a Trigger-button, Disc format, games exclusive to it, what people expect for future-games, nostalgia again usually is milked for sales as well as "My friend has it and I want to play with him so I bought it blindly" scenarios aka which is familiar to 360.
----Certainly a good comparison is to why PS2 still did awesomely last-gen even though Gamecube and Xbox were stronger than them. Sure, there were ports on PS2 that were on Xbox and Gamecube, and PS2's visuals sucked the most! . . . It still sold more on PS2. Visuals mean nothing, it's a minority concern, it only feels like a Majority-concern due to 'Us' being around the hardware audience WAYYYY more often, giving us a false image of the industry and what it demands. Like, if people were to riot at Sony saying "WE WANT A STRONGER CONSOLE" on a website or they make a petition in rage! . . . Only a few thousand would sign it, while the countless millions of present and future wouldn't give a rats ass. Again though, I do love my visuals, but I don't let it get a hold of my senses. It's eye-candy. I could play MGS1 quality visuals on MGS5 and not give a shit :/ However, playing MGS Ground Zeroes with 'Current gen' or even 'Next' gen consoles, would be just a bonus :P
I think their concerns are perfectly reasonable. The Wii U may technically be 'next gen', but when we hear the words 'next gen' we expect a certain level of advancement in the hardware. From what we've seen and heard, it's only marginally better than the PS3/360. You can keep calling it next gen if it makes you feel better, but the reality is it does not live up to the term 'next gen'.
This....This gave me a boner...bubble up.
The "U" in Wii U stands for "underwhelming"
And the p in ps4 is for P U! Right? Give me a break. Only your opinion.
yeah just like your poor excuse for a joke.
WiiU's GPU specs offical 627 million 40nm transistors TeraScale 2 Unified Processing Architecture 400 Stream Processing Units 20 Texture Units 32 Z/Stencil ROP Units 8 Color ROP Units GDDR5 memory interface PCI Express 2.1 x16 bus interface DirectX® 11 support Shader Model 5.0 DirectCompute 11 Programmable hardware tessellation unit Accelerated multi-threading HDR texture compression Order-independent transparency OpenGL 3.2 support16 Image quality enhancement technology Up to 24x multi-sample and super-sample anti-aliasing modes Adaptive anti-aliasing 16x angle independent anisotropic texture filtering 128-bit floating point HDR rendering ATI Eyefinity multi-display technology17,18 Three independent display controllers Drive three displays simultaneously with independent resolutions, refresh rates, color controls, and video overlays
That is the spec for a Radeon 5670 taken from AMD's website. Wii U does not have a Radeon 5670. So these specs are not relevant. GDDR5 memory interface. How much GDDR5 does Wii U have? PCI Express 2.1 x16 bus interface. Wii U uses PCIe slots????? ATI Eyefinity multi-display technology, Drive three displays simultaneously with independent resolutions, refresh rates, color controls, and video overlays. Wii u supports eyefinity??????????????????!!! !!!!!!! None, No and for sure no. Why post this here. Its pointless and has nothing to do with Wii U.
@Computersayno Fanboys will post anything to have their special console be promoted... Do yourselves all a favor and buy a high end gaming PC. You can even buy one for under 500
@ado- Doesn't the Wii U display on the tv and the pad? almost sounds like an adaptation of eyefinity. Thing is until Ninty/developers gives us specifics, speculating is pointless.
It's not next gen at all. It's just a product with a step further into interactive gaming.
its nintendo next gen, which is unfortunatley a generation behind playstation, xbox, and a gen and a half behind PC. Nintendo uses controllers to sell system instead of specs in order to build a cheaper machine. I think nintendo would benefit more from coming out at the halfway point of playstation and xbox lifecycles in order to take advantage of cheaper tech to build. Like WiiU would have been awesome 5 years ago
Tittle should be "this journalist has it wrong; the wiiU is powerful, just current gen powerful.
Exactly, Lyon. This author is arguing using the WiiU apologist angle : "Of course the WiiU is powerful! It's much better than current-gen consoles!" Publishers might be having small gripes regarding putting current games on there, but that really isn't important. Those companies will figure it out eventually. The big problem is that this thing is current-gen, not next-gen. We don't know what Sony and MS have for next year just yet, but we know it'll be able to do a lot more than what this thing does. An argument for WiiU focused on third-party angst, based on the PS3 and 360 in late 2012, is just plain stupid. Look forward, man! WiiU people should focus on the real strength here: Nintendo's software arm. While the big third-parties were cranking out brown shooters this gen, N was making the best aesthetic use of what they had. And they will do it again! When the real games come out for this thing, I'll probably have one alongside my PC and next gen console for that reason alone.
Which compared to currently existing gaming consoles is in fact, next gen. Of course as said a million times. Now that the wii U is out we are currently in the next gen so it's actually current gen tech afterall.
As a console it's next gen. Consoles are just 2 gens behind PC. 360 and PS3 are directx 9.0c equivalent. Wii U is Directx 11 equivalent. That makes it a next gen console.
So when is this story gonna die? One day a developer says its not as powerful next day a Nintendo fanboy writes an article to prove its next gen Wiiu is what wii should have been, but that's not to say ts not an improvement over current systems in some aspects. So whether we like it or not wiiu is the start of next gen, and I do believe ps4 and next Xbox will be much more powerful than the wiiu while staying in a good price point. People say all the time if ps4 is more powerful it will cost $500 well the other side of that is I doubt Sony or ms will invest in a $150 controller so that price can go towards making improvements to the specs of the actual system 4GB RAM is something I think both ms and Sony will invest into and maybe as much as 6-8 if they are preparing for next 5-8 years console cycle again. Could wiiu have been more powerful for $349 no doubt but it is what it is and I also do believe Nintendo will have big troubles with 3rd party support again
the wiiu is not next gen IT IS CURRENCT GEN the ps360 are LAST GEN
We're saying the *tech* is basically current-gen. Not the timeframe in which the system was released. This thing will play wonderful Nintendo games and good versions of current-gen games. When third parties move to the new Sony/MS consoles, they'll look at WiiU's power as past-gen. Not the end of the world, live2play! in the next few years, It'll be cheaper to make games for last-gen and WiiU for companies that don't have such a crazy production budget. Look at Atlus with Persona 4! Anyone pissed that it came out on PS2 when the PS2 was last-gen? I sure wasn't. Maybe WiiU will be the home of what we used to consider "mid-tier" games - ones that can take some risks without all the flashy details.
1.5GB more RAM is "slightly above"? So the Dreamcast's 16MB RAM was slightly above the PS1's 2MB?
It's Nintendo finally catching up to Xbox360 and PS3 after 6 years. Too bad MS and Sony are about to take it to the next level. Nintendo is always behind. People buy Nintendo systems mostly for Mario and Zelda. Sales don't mean shit. You can sell a million piles of shit. It's still shit. Wii's still collected dust across America in the last 2 to 3 years. While everyone else played games on the 360 and PS3. People got tired of generic third party mini-games and most people have any wii game they want for free, since the homebrew channel made it beyond easy to softmod. Skyward Sword arrived with a thud. Trolololo!!!
Nothing in this article was out of the ordinary. Devs know exactly what they are getting into when it comes to this system because everything he stated is basic hardware terminology. It's still slow with speed 3 times the Wii... With that said - I'm still buying one. The Wii U is what I wanted the Wii to be.
In my book a next gen consol is something thats future proof. The way technology is evolving if a consol releases and doesn't have at least 4 years of improving on it then its not next gen. The Wii was never next gen to me. It was just a consol that released with current day hardware with no room to improve. PS3 and Xbox 360, now they were next gen and the graphical leaps from release titles to current day titles proofs that to me. The way games release now on PS360 show that age has caught up to them. If the next gen of consols release and we don't see games improve year after year for 4 or 5 years then I'd be inclined to agree with this article but after official specs for the WII U got released I find it very hard believing the Wii U will be future proof. We don't know anything about the specs for PS4 or Xbox 720 yet and they could release with crappy specs too but right now its just speculation and articles like this have no factual evidence to back up their claims.
I wonder how many people will read yhe article before spouting crap out? Also don't bring the slow memory bandwidth up either because the eDRAM wasn't incuded in that equation. It's said to truly be around 30+Gbps. To put it simple Wii U has a GPGPU which takes CPU task and performs it on the GPU. The reason 4A games complained is they use a CPU heavy game directly on the CPU. It needs to be programmed to take advantage of the GPGPU since it does offloads some of what the CPU does. This is why some current gen games are struggling on Wii U. Games need to be programmed to utilize the GPGPU more than the CPU. Current gen hardware doesn't use GPGPU and games were made for them which is old tech. Wii U games when developers take advantage of the newer tech will destroy Xbox 360 and PS3 just like Naughty Dog does with the PS3 they programmed the games to take advantage of the way the hardware was set up. When Xbox 720 and PS4 come out then we will see if it can hold its own.
I've been really confused by people criticizing the Wii U so harshly as of late. Some of the components are a little weaker while others (such as the GPGPU and system memory) are greater than other consoles. Everyone completely focuses on the negative, but not the positive. Also, does no one remember Iwata's statement that not a single Wii U game in the launch window uses more than 50% of the console's power?
Negativity will go on, as long as Wii U gets lazy current gen ports made for the PS3 and Xbox360. Thing will be better when all the next gen consoles have GPGPU. I doubt the Wii U will take the back seat like the PS3 when nex gen games are developed for similar architectures. :)
@yavorsv people will complain just cause it is nintendo even though the PS3 still receives lazy ports just look at treyarch and bethseda
'Also, does no one remember Iwata's statement that not a single Wii U game in the launch window uses more than 50% of the console's power?'. So consumers are supposed to be happy about that??!!
No... it means that the Wii U's true power and full potential have yet to be shown. Meaning it's not as weak as everyone seems to make it out to be.