Try our new beta! Click here
Submitted by yavorsv 1102d ago | opinion piece

Developers Have it Wrong: The Wii U is Powerful, It’s Just Next Generation Powerful

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. (Wii U)

« 1 2 3 »
TheLyonKing  +   1103d ago
It's really not just next gen, it is a next gen console with slightly above par current gen tech
Neonridr  +   1103d ago | Well said
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.
Muffins1223  +   1103d ago
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
shutUpAndTakeMyMoney  +   1102d ago
So mario won't look like this?


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.


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.
#1.1.2 (Edited 1102d ago ) | Agree(27) | Disagree(24) | Report
AsimLeonheart  +   1102d ago
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.
fr0sty  +   1102d ago
"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.
XB1_PS4  +   1102d ago
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! :)
DragonKnight  +   1102d ago
If they made a Mario game that looked like the vid I'm about to post, then people would shut up.
SilentNegotiator   1102d ago | Trolling | show
vulcanproject  +   1102d ago | Intelligent
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.
#1.1.8 (Edited 1102d ago ) | Agree(40) | Disagree(13) | Report
Akuma-  +   1102d ago
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.
pixelsword  +   1102d ago
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.
BrianC6234  +   1102d ago
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?
ChickeyCantor  +   1102d ago

"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?
vulcanproject  +   1102d ago
@ sidar, no, they are not.

This is Wii U's SEPARATE dies. 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 (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

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)

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: (a CELL processor no less)

....and these are MCMs with multiple dies on them

Just like Wii U.

Ta Daaaaaaa!!!!
#1.1.13 (Edited 1102d ago ) | Agree(10) | Disagree(2) | Report
BattleAxe  +   1102d ago
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.
DeadlyFire  +   1102d ago
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.
vulcanproject  +   1102d ago
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.

#1.1.16 (Edited 1102d ago ) | Agree(1) | Disagree(1) | Report
Sarcasm  +   1102d ago
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!
AsimLeonheart  +   1102d ago
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.
SilentNegotiator  +   1102d ago
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
#1.1.19 (Edited 1102d ago ) | Agree(7) | Disagree(2) | Report
MaxXAttaxX  +   1102d ago
Wii U is a little late to the party.
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.
Knushwood Butt  +   1102d ago
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.
Perjoss  +   1102d ago
@ 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.
NCAzrael  +   1101d ago
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.
ritsuka666  +   1103d ago
So much negativity for Wii U.
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..
#1.2 (Edited 1103d ago ) | Agree(15) | Disagree(35) | Report | Reply
dboyc310  +   1102d ago
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.
joeorc  +   1102d ago
the real problem is not what you are saying, the real problem is this
"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.
#1.2.2 (Edited 1102d ago ) | Agree(12) | Disagree(4) | Report
meetajhu  +   1102d ago
- zeldainformer

AKS  +   1101d ago
If we can't trust Zelda Informer, who can we trust?
360ICE  +   1102d ago
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
Knight_Crawler  +   1102d ago
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.
MegaLagann  +   1102d ago
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.
jbgamer  +   1102d ago
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?
360ICE  +   1102d ago
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.

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.
#1.4.4 (Edited 1102d ago ) | Agree(10) | Disagree(3) | Report
BrianC6234  +   1102d ago
"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.
Mounce  +   1102d ago
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.

megamanX2  +   1102d ago
These idiots in here are too stupid to understand a simple thing.
MarkusMcNugen  +   1102d ago

"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...
Mounce  +   1102d ago

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.
Mounce  +   1102d ago
----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
jessupj  +   1102d ago
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'.
ChickeyCantor  +   1102d ago
This....This gave me a boner...bubble up.
Donnieboi  +   1102d ago
The "U" in Wii U stands for "underwhelming"
jbgamer  +   1102d ago
And the p in ps4 is for P U! Right? Give me a break. Only your opinion.
megamanX2  +   1102d ago
yeah just like your poor excuse for a joke.
neogeo  +   1102d ago
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
Computersaysno  +   1102d ago
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.
#1.7.1 (Edited 1102d ago ) | Agree(16) | Disagree(2) | Report
ado908  +   1102d ago

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
girevik  +   1102d ago
@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.
Steadyhndz  +   1102d ago
It's not next gen at all. It's just a product with a step further into interactive gaming.
jrbeerman11  +   1101d ago
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
killerhog  +   1102d ago
Tittle should be "this journalist has it wrong; the wiiU is powerful, just current gen powerful.
MoveTheGlow  +   1102d ago
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.
#1.10 (Edited 1102d ago ) | Agree(1) | Disagree(0) | Report | Reply
Shnazzyone  +   1102d ago
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.
stragomccloud  +   1102d ago
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.
showtimefolks  +   1102d ago
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
live2play  +   1102d ago
the wiiu is not next gen IT IS CURRENCT GEN
the ps360 are LAST GEN
MoveTheGlow  +   1102d ago
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.
mrbojingles  +   1102d ago
1.5GB more RAM is "slightly above"?

So the Dreamcast's 16MB RAM was slightly above the PS1's 2MB?
Orionsangel  +   1101d ago
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.

Guwapo77  +   1101d ago
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.
geddesmond  +   1101d ago
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.
The_Infected  +   1103d ago
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.
#2 (Edited 1103d ago ) | Agree(27) | Disagree(13) | Report | Reply
PopRocks359  +   1103d ago
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?
yavorsv  +   1103d ago
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. :)
animegamingnerd  +   1102d ago
@yavorsv people will complain just cause it is nintendo even though the PS3 still receives lazy ports just look at treyarch and bethseda
Knushwood Butt  +   1102d ago
'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??!!
PopRocks359  +   1102d ago
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.
Thepcz  +   1102d ago
so why does zombiu look like a hi-res wii game?

was zombiu built from the ground up on wiiu or was it developed on wii first? because there is no reason why tech that is supposed to be next gen looks so shit, even on platform exclusive games.

and look at mario wiiu or even pikmin 3. nothing truly next gen from a visual standpoint. in fact, they are very mediocre looking
joeorc  +   1102d ago
the answer is very simple, and i think you already know the Answer!
for people that may be wondering, see my Post above.

and as i stated before this is exactly the point being made:

"When the new Zelda game comes out that will be an indication to just how powerful the Wii U really is."

the real Question is it will show some parts of how powerful the new system is, which it already is very robust hardware and quite powerful, based on what hardware breakdown that has been shown in my experience in system designs, it should net quite a level above what the PS3 and xbox360 are able to obtain. that is if Nintendo invest their resources like that into their platform, the point being this is the very first time that Nintendo has such a platform where the cost in development can in a single game far out weigh multiple times over the cost in past investment per single Game both Sony and Microsoft have been spending that kind of money for the past 6 + years for development projects Now this is Nintendo's turn. Does Nintendo see that as a priority in game development that is the question, and in my opinion I do not think Nintendo see that as very viable in investment's exception being very few of their iP's due to the resources and time involved and man power it would take to make such projects.

Not to say Nintendo will not do any, im just pointing out that there is a very good chance it will be few and far between the number for such projects over at Nintendo

you brought up a very great point how many of those 1st party efforts of that level of AAA investment has Nintendo shown off for the WiiU, the Question is How many are Nintendo going to make in house?
#2.2.1 (Edited 1102d ago ) | Agree(2) | Disagree(3) | Report
MegaLagann  +   1102d ago
ZombiU was originally a 360 game, then it was Killer Freaks on the Wii U, which was shown at last years E3. The devs said the scrapped it all and made ZombiU and pretty much had one year to develop it. So it seems to me like they were rushed to reach launch. NSMB have never been graphically intense games, sure it looks great, but it's no showcase. Pikmin 3 is a Wii game that got brought over to the Wii U.
MasterCornholio  +   1102d ago
I remember that the same thing happened to the PS3 until God of War 3 came out. The same will happen with the Wii U however i still believe that it will be the weaker than the 720 and PS4.

The Wii U is another Wii just a more powerful one with a different controller.

Motorola razr i
#2.3 (Edited 1102d ago ) | Agree(3) | Disagree(7) | Report | Reply
cee773  +   1102d ago
Uncharted , resistance , heavenly sword are all early ps3 games that showed power early on we ps3 owners knew at we were getting into.
DragonKnight  +   1102d ago
"Wii U has a GPGPU which takes CPU task and performs it on the GPU."

Kinda like the PS3 and the Cell right? And yet it was ok to bash Sony though.
Nerdmaster  +   1102d ago
Ask any PC gamer what's more important to invest on: the graphics card or the processor. They will tell you what everybody should know: for games, the graphics card is way more important. I never understood why Sony decided to use a weaker GPU on PS3 and try to make up with that Cell processor.

Remember that Folding@home thing? People said how Cell processors helped the project and such. But did you know that the version that ran on nVidia GPGPUs was way faster than the Cell one?
DragonKnight  +   1102d ago
That isn't my point. My point is that there are huge double standards. The Cell was able to take on the tasks of the GPU as required and the result were games like Uncharted but Sony received nothing but flak for it. The Wii took the opposite approach, made the CPU weaker and makes the GPU take on the CPU's tasks and people are giving Nintendo a free pass for it. The FACT remains that both components should handle their own respective tasks and should be able to do so well enough on their own. This idea of having one compensate for the other is bad on all sides, one shouldn't be praised for it and the other blasted for it.
Nerdmaster  +   1102d ago
No, you are wrong. What I said is that GPGPUs are much powerful than processors. They're cheaper and more efficient. The tradeoff is that developers have to learn to use its power.

Of course, there are some things that only a processor can do, but most of its tasks can be made to run on a GPGPU, and it will do them much faster. If this is accomplished, the CPU won't have to be so powerful.

Trading off CPU power for GPGPU power makes sense. Trading GPU power por CPU power does not. That's why people bashed Sony. It made the PS3 more expensive and it doesn't seem to have been worth it.
Ippiki Okami  +   1102d ago
"Trading off CPU power for GPGPU power makes sense. Trading GPU power por CPU power does not. That's why people bashed Sony. It made the PS3 more expensive and it doesn't seem to have been worth it."

LOL @Nerdmaster. Only idiots believe that nonsense. The Blu-ray player was what made the PS3 expensive. SONY themselves even admitted the PS3 was expensive at first because of this.
Nerdmaster  +   1101d ago
@Ippiki Okami

Oh, I'm sorry, I didn't see that I wrote "it's the only thing that made the PS3 more expensive".

PS3 had that high price because of a number of factors. Blu-ray was the main reason, but using Cell was also a factor.

And, you see, I said what I wanted without calling anybody an idiot. You should try that.
#2.4.5 (Edited 1101d ago ) | Agree(0) | Disagree(0) | Report
donman1  +   1102d ago
Well said. I got the same understanding after reading the article. It was only a matter of time we would know the true specs and capabilities of the Wii U. A straight port of a game designed to use 360/PS3 aged architecture should never been seen as the benchmark for a new console. When solid information (video/screen shoots) of the game Retro is working on is shown, only them will we see the first glimpse of the true graphical/gameplay mechanics potential of the Wii U. Games for now will look only slightly better on the Wii U due to direct ports using unmodified engines suited for PS3/360.

Just look at the first set of games release for the Xbox360 during its launch window, they looked poor due to the fact they were created using Xbox/Gamecube/PS2 based engines. As time pass and the engines were overhauled to use the specific capabilities of the console, the games looked and played much better.

Talk a look at Perfect Dark Zero (as you can see the game did not look that much better then the best of showing on the Xbox):

How quickly we forget that with the launch of every new console, 3rd party developers will need time to modify their engines to take advantage of the consoles strengths... in this case the Wii U GPGPU.
younghavok  +   1102d ago
thank god im not the only one who thinks this way. People were really running with the slow ram thing and completely ignored the fact that the edram was included for the pS360 and not for the WiiU. All weve heard is praise from developers for the ram, yet fanboys wanna debate it. The cpu isnt as fast as the 360 and PS3, but then again the GPGPU was designed so that it would put less strain on the thing. As developers start taking advantage of it, we'll see some truly amazing looking games, hell we already are. Assassins Creed 3 is not an ugly game by any means.
neogeo  +   1102d ago
He check it out this is the WiiU's GPU on running crysis2 on a slow pc PC with slow on Max settings Also keep in mind windows is running in the background and this is a stock 5670 with NO Edram like WiiU has

Average 42 FPS on MAX
#2.7 (Edited 1102d ago ) | Agree(2) | Disagree(4) | Report | Reply
Computersaysno  +   1102d ago
Wii U does not have a 5670. Wii U does not have 4Gb of system RAM and 1Gb dedicated video. Wii U definitely does not have a 3.4ghz quad core x86 central processor with over 750 million transistors, 8mb of cache.

Try a slower GPU, 2gb RAM total and miniscule slow triple core with architecture originally used on the processor from the gamecube 10 years ago.

Wii's CPU was 2.9 GFLOPS. Even if Wii U's is 10 times better than that (it isnt) then it is still a lot slower than the processor seen here.

Wii u is not nearly as fast as the hardware used to make this video. End of.
#2.7.1 (Edited 1102d ago ) | Agree(4) | Disagree(1) | Report
fatstarr  +   1102d ago
the Wii U is like a middle of the road gaming PC. A middle of the row gaming rig absolutely destroys
I been saying this all this time,
people just want to hate on Nintendo no matter how much logic is spit out.
Schawk  +   1103d ago
Last Gen ports will look like last gen ports, it dosent take a rocket scientist to figure that out.
MikeMyers  +   1102d ago
When the new Zelda game comes out that will be an indication to just how powerful the Wii U really is. It will be in-house and will also have had more time with the hardware. Until then I will reserve my judgement since launch games don't necessarily exhibit a systems true potential.
1upgamer99  +   1102d ago
I would say we will have to wait for Metroid, as I read Nintendo is going for the Skyward Sword look again. Unless that has changed. I do know for certain that the Next console Zelda game is going to be HUGE. The biggest open worlds, Dungeons, and towns of any Zelda game ever. I just don't think Skyward Sword (very beautiful game) will push the Wii U graphically. I was hoping for a Zelda from E-3 last year.
Neonridr  +   1103d ago
Finally a decent article actually explaining how the system works. Good read.
Norrison  +   1102d ago
A 5670 is a really weak card, even though it supports DX11 it won't run well, even a gts250 runs better; it doesn't matter if the Wii U version is better because a 260 would still destroy it and those are low end cards by today's standards.

But I'm expecting consoles to use low end cards because of price restrictions, unless they release them in 2014, but by that time PC's will already have Maxwell GPUs which pretty much destroy any current GPU on the market judging by the road map.
ThaBlackBaron  +   1103d ago
Bout time somebody speaks the TRUTH!
TruthbeTold  +   1103d ago
'In layman’s terms: The Wii U is a sexy, misunderstood, true next generation gaming system that requires developers to change the way in which they program their games in order to get significantly better looking, and better performing, games than what are currently out there. Any concerns over a slow processor are completely negated by the fact the Graphics Card on the Wii U can actually handle some of the larger processes, like physics, usually reserved for the processor.'

This is what I and others have been saying for quite a while now. I really don't see how/why it's so hard for people to understand this. People just love to hate, and think the worst of Nintendo, when they've once again gone back to putting out a console that's very capable.
sjaakiejj  +   1102d ago
It's not about understanding - A good GPU does not make up for a slow CPU. Sure some of the tasks can be delegated to the graphics card, but at some point everything goes through the CPU, and the more load you put on the GPU, the more task delegation the CPU has to perform, the less time it has for performing its own tasks.

On top of that, GPU's are naturally worse than CPUs at performing certain tasks, in particular if they aren't easy to perform in parallel.
TruthbeTold  +   1102d ago
When you say slow you are talking about a 'low' amount of cycles per second. But since you aren't taking into account how many things the CPU can do during each cycle, (which is a lot when dealing with the latest Power tech) the point is moot.

The 2.5-3 Ghz of the 2012 almost 2013 Wii U is far more efficient than the 3.2 or so Ghz of 2006. That is all before even taking the GPGPU-like graphics card into account.

Hence competent developers being able to easily port PS360 games to the Wii U without even using it the way it was designed to be used. Hence Nintendo's comments that the Wii U will not fall too far behind the capability of the other Next Gen machines once they are released.
sjaakiejj  +   1102d ago
When I say slow I'm not talking about clock speed. I'm talking slow as in Pentium 4 compared to a Dual Core. Your incorrect assumption means the rest of your argument is already invalid, as you misunderstood what I said and took it in terms of a buzz word, rather than its actual meaning.

When I say slow, I mean the CPU can perform fewer tasks per clock cycle.
TruthbeTold  +   1102d ago
You know little to nothing about what you are commenting on. You cling to this disproven train of thought and even ignore the realities of the games and ports we're seeing at launch. And why? Because you don't want people to like the Wii U? You're upset that people think it's more than you think it is? You want people to only want your next-gen console of choice? You hate Nintendo? What? You have no answer that can make any sort of sense, or can be respected on this topic. As it shows.
sjaakiejj  +   1101d ago

I don't give a damn about the WiiU or its reputation, I don't really care what people think of it. And whilst I'm not getting a WiiU, I'm a big fan of Nintendo, having spend most of my youth years on their consoles. On the other hand, I have a Masters degree in Computer Science. I know how hardware works, and I know that a GPU can't replace a CPU, nor can a CPU replace a GPU.

Do you even know what makes a gpu powerful? Please tell me you don't believe that a single GPU core is as powerful as a CPU.

Do you have any idea how difficult, or sometimes impossible, it is to go from sequential code to parallel code? Do you understand the purpose of Cache Memory? What about the instruction pipeline? What's an instruction set? What's an ALU? What's the purpose of a fetch-execute cycle? Processor Architecture? What's the difference between ARM processors and x86?
#6.1.4 (Edited 1101d ago ) | Agree(0) | Disagree(1) | Report
millzy102  +   1101d ago
and it has a seprate sound processor and a seprate CPU to run os any one who watch the ottical break down knows this so if dev splits all of the tasked between the sound processor, GPGPU and CPU instead of chucking everything at the cpu the Wii u should have some very decent games.
#6.2 (Edited 1101d ago ) | Agree(2) | Disagree(0) | Report | Reply
phantomexe  +   1102d ago
That was a really good read and should help some of you guys that get ur rocks off talking about things you know nothing about. The wii u will be just fine,but im still going hold out for the playstation which i think wont be much different then the wii u only ill get another uncharted.
dboyc310  +   1102d ago
Believe me the next sony and Microsoft system WILL be more powerful than the wii u. If they dont make a noticeable improvement then why would they bother jumping into next gen hardware. Wii u will be the weakest again once the competition releases their systems
jmc8888  +   1102d ago
Because they want to make money. Because they are in business. This the reason. It's not about 'being the most powerful', it's about being in business. If you're not making and selling consoles, you're not in business.

It will be the weakest, but not by much. Think high or very high pc settings versus ultra. Of course none will really be ultra, as the PC will be on another level by then.

The thing is PS4/720 won't be creating new tech. They'll be using tech created by ATI (unless they go Nvidia route) for years earlier PC parts. These won't be top end parts, because top end parts would consume far too much to put into a tiny box.

Remember all the xbox360 heating problems? Well a good reason for that was the chip ran hot, and it ran hot because it took a lot of power to run. The first 360's used over 300 watts. Which is chump change for PC's that use 700-1500 watts usually.

So no, the PS4/720 can't put 700-1500 watts into a small box. If they could, which they can't, have you noticed that even midrange cards about $400. So most powerful goes for about $1000 or more which is a dual gpu. A single gpu top end goes for $500-600. The 2nd best single gpu (3rd best card) goes for $350-450. Even the 3rd best GPU will suck up about as much power as the original 360 launch console did.

Even then, you have a situation where there aren't multiple graphics leaps available. The Wii U will soak up most of the difference between 360 and top end PC rig. What's left is the last 20-30 percent of visual gains, that cost all that power and money to attain, but don't add too much. The processing power needed starts going exponential, while the gains in fidelity is merely linear. So you have to pay alot more for not much.

Look I have a GTX 670, can play and do play on ultra settings. They look great. But even if I went down a notch or two on the settings, the games still look GOOD.

If they DON'T make a system, they'll be ceding to Nintendo, yet when they DO make a system, it cannot possibly be far ahead of it, because the tech, the power/heat, and the cost limitations are extreme.

Add in that they DON'T want them to be unreliable with RROD, and that they DON'T want to lose $270 per console, and probably wouldn't even tolerate more than $100 per console, means this time around things will be different.

Add to that they want to throw add-ins that increase cost into the system, and you have the same factors the Wii U has. Because some people seem to think that because the Wii U made the gamepad suddenly everyone else will have a cost advantage. Well, they're wrong. Because the 720 will have the Kinect 2 + hand manipulator. There's your 'gamepad' cost right there. Now if MS wants to add in a gamepad to compete with Nintendo, then you'll have even HIGHER costs with add-ins.

Think of it this way. You know in sports when a defender edges up to the guy with the basketball along the sidelines and allows no room that's basically what the Wii U has done. Found a spot which nudges up against what the PS4/720 could possibly do forcing Sony and MS to either do a small upgrade versus the Wii U and make money, or lose more money than the PS3 lost, and only have a medium upgrade.

That's what they face. The Wii U soaks up the majority of the leap. The tech limits mean you need exponential power growth for linear fidelity gains. The add-ins. The amount of power used limit. The reliability issues. The desire not to lose money per console (or not much).

These are all realities, and ones that are easily knowable.
hivycox  +   1101d ago

Very well said! I agree 100%.
Its all about the money and if fanboys want to imagine this super high tech illusion in the next systems of sony and microsoft then let them dream ;)

All I can say is that: Nintendo made a very good decision with the tech inside the Wii U. It won't get got and can still produce even better graphics than the ps360 (wait until you see the next Zelda and mind's gonna explode xD)
dboyc310  +   1101d ago
I understand that but if people believe that they're trying to get profit by not making it strong then they should stop claiming that it will be stronger than the competition.
coolmaster   1102d ago | Offensive
-IronMan-  +   1102d ago
Warrior Orochi 3 game says hello there.
#9 (Edited 1102d ago ) | Agree(4) | Disagree(5) | Report | Reply
Lf_sIcKmAn  +   1102d ago
CPU intensive game… your argument is invalid… Let's see what happens when developers start tapping the gpgpu…
DarkHeroZX  +   1102d ago
Lol they can start tapping the gpu but they're still going to need the CPU to handle advanced physics and AI which the gpu can't do and give you beautiful graphics and a steady framerate with only 17 gigs of bandwidth.
Sanquine90  +   1102d ago
Please stop talking bullshit because your some stupid fanboy. First we will see what happens. You conclude before anything is proven. And i think developers who learned to develop games have more understanding of specs than some ignorant fanboy
Norrison  +   1102d ago
Don't be ignorant, advanced physics, like Nvidia Physx are handled by the GPU, if you run physx on high with your CPU your FPS will crawl.
#9.1.3 (Edited 1102d ago ) | Agree(5) | Disagree(0) | Report
MsmackyM  +   1102d ago
Warrior Orochi 3 validates the author's statement, by that game being designed using last gen methods.
MegaLagann  +   1102d ago
Okay, so games like Warriors Orochi and Batman run like shit. But games like Assassin's Creed III and Tekken Tag Tournament 2 run just as good as the 360/PS3 versions. If all the Wii U ports ran like shit, then you'd have a case. But I just gave you two examples plus there's more. So it's obvious it's just incompetent devs and/or devs rushed to get their game out at launch. What I want to know is why do you and so many other people cherry pick? You bash the Wii U by bringing up ports that run like shit yet ignore ports that run fine.
Erudito87  +   1102d ago
this guy is really going against the grain with this. So many key components have been called out to be slow
pennywhyz  +   1102d ago
At least its good to know the wii u can hold its own even if its not going to be as powerful as ps4 and 720.Good read.
#11 (Edited 1102d ago ) | Agree(5) | Disagree(3) | Report | Reply
bumnut  +   1102d ago
Don't you guys realise that Nintendo has always aimed for casual gamers and children? It doesn't need to be the most powerful console to be good fun.
wishingW3L  +   1102d ago
Man, this article is sad. The author doesn't has the slightest idea about what is he talking about. The guy doesn't realize that GPGPU is an implementation. He actually thinks the Wii U has something similar to Intel's Larrabee which was a complete failure. =/

Example of GPGPU implementations on the PC is Just Cause. This implementation is to make up for the weak CPUs on the PC environment because PC gamers tend to build PC's with powerful GPUs but weak CPUs. But at the same time this is a drawback because they are putting the GPU to do stuff that it shouldn't instead of pushing more graphical effects on it.
#13 (Edited 1102d ago ) | Agree(5) | Disagree(11) | Report | Reply
Schawk  +   1102d ago
Has a CPU and a GPU ever been combined in a home console before?
#13.1 (Edited 1102d ago ) | Agree(2) | Disagree(3) | Report | Reply
wishingW3L  +   1102d ago
on newer models of the Xbox the GPU and CPU were combined on a single chip called SOC (system on a chip). But this is not a GPGPU. This is just a method to reduce hardware size and to increase efficiency of the power consummation.

A GPGPU is a GPU that is just as fast as a CPU while having specialized cores like Cuda, or the Stream Processors of AMD. By this definition you would think that the PS3 CPU is a GPGPU because the SPE's are specialized cores that can render graphics too but it isn't. The Cell's SPE's are few and they alone can't process the workload of a GPU. The initial idea behind the PS3 was to let the Cell do all the work by itself but then Kutaragi realized that the CPU wasn't as powerful as he believed and was forced to put a GPU in the PS3 at the last minute.

Then again, GPGPU is an implementation that can be achieved on any type of GPU with modern architecture and the necessary core count to handle both stuff. But the modern GPU is still not as fast as a real CPU so the implementation introduces its fair share of drawbacks. Like for example: the reduction of graphical effects that can be rendered on the GPU.
Cueil  +   1102d ago
@wishingW3L it's actually the very first APU... this was part of Microsoft's and ATI's plans from the very start and if you look on the model SN of the first gen APUs you'll see XBOX as part of it's SN. It's not a SOC by definition because it's completely separate GPU and CPUs that simply are cast on the same die and nothing else.
Tzuno  +   1102d ago
imagine when the 720 and ps4 comes out nintendo specs will be surpassed at least by 30%
Cueil  +   1102d ago
It wouldn't surprise me if it's a little more then that. Graphics will probably be on the low end of that 30... it's going to be other things that will increase realism like increased physics and better post process rendering
joeorc  +   1102d ago
"Don't you guys realise that Nintendo has always aimed for casual gamers and children? It doesn't need to be the most powerful console to be good fun."

Its really more than that and its not just Nintendo that strive for that they all do.

they target the gamer its not about being casual, or hardcore they target anyone who likes to plays games in a regular basis, or who rarely plays games. its like the old saying once a game always a gamer, people change their habits but it still remains they are a gamer at heart, they would not be a gamer if they did not play any games at all. think of it like this the world poker champions are in fact gamer's, they play Card wait for it "Game's" just because its not a shooter or an RPG doe not mean the gamer playing them is any less hard core gamer for playing the poker game

remember what Nintendo started out in? that's right playing cards! for people who seem to think that Microsoft or Sony are not true gaming companies unlike Nintendo, that is a load of Hog wash, if they make games for people to play they are just as much a game company as anyother company dedicated to bring enjoyment for people.

that is I think what many are overlooking , the specs this and that are nice, and its neat reading and understanding and learning something about how or why it works this way. but i think Many gamer's to day are so caught up in the sales vs this or this game is more popular than that game contest, than to just look at what really matter's is these companies are providing systems for people to enjoy all people not just a select few, everyone can take time out and play a game if they want too, and all gamer's have opinion on what they find is enjoyable, that should not effect them as being a gamer because being a gamer is more than just about how much time you put toward Game's its about enjoying the lil thing's in life like that bring's you as a person enjoyment, some may disagree with your opinion but every Gamer has one.

notice every Gamer! if you as a person plays any game at all be that be just one game you are still a gamer, who is to tell you otherwise. you find enjoyment in a game your a gamer.

that is what i think people are in fact missing. will it provide fun? that is what matter's or it should be in my opinion.
#15 (Edited 1102d ago ) | Agree(3) | Disagree(5) | Report | Reply
Thepcz  +   1102d ago
it is true what you said on another comment and something i have also thought- will nintendo use the resources needed to make such a graphically 'high-end' game?

i dont think so. since the wii, it seems nintendo is perfectly happy to put out games that look like tech demos (ie wii sports, wiiu music, new super mario bros) and not push graphic design forward in any way... like they did with mario world, mario 64 and wind waker etc.

i imagine the massive cost of producing games is partly their motivation for the visually banal games they have been putting out.

i dont see them changing their trend with wiiu. proof of that is seen in nintendo land, also new super mario bros wiiu. both have that distinct by-the-numbers look. as if all the models were taken straight from some model library and absolutely no creative design was used to give them a special style or look.
scissor_runner  +   1102d ago
Just ignore the Zelda demo, last story, them paying for bayonnetta. They even paid to fix ninja gaiden. I got my box and I'll get the others if they got good games.
So far I got 10 wiiu games in a launch. I'm enjoying them all it seems every one on the plaza is enjoying it too.
younghavok  +   1102d ago
Are you kidding? Did you see how good Mario Galaxy looked? Had that game been in HD it wouldve looked better than other platform games on the HD twins. Galaxy was a visually intense game that pushed a ton of effects and maintained a fluid framerate the entire time. They pulled that off on the Wii, imagine what theyre gonna do with the WiiU. I mean hell, the zelda tech demo was gorgeous and Nintendo always out does the Zelda tech demos when the actual games release.
atreyu_-  +   1102d ago
Sounds just like the Ps3 arguments people had when it first launched. Lol and we are still waiting for the "lazy devs " to get on board with " the superior tech" . Specs do not matter, the games that come out do, and so far ......... Meh. Weak system has weak games.
kopicha  +   1102d ago
this article is funny. obviously written by a fanboy trying to do some damage control over the recent controversy. over half of those technical writing are wrong. cant believe he actually dare to put that on the web for public reading. the writer needs to attend more technical lesson before writing similar article ever again.
#17 (Edited 1102d ago ) | Agree(4) | Disagree(9) | Report | Reply
Nodoze  +   1102d ago
I picked one up for under the tree this year. We have a 6 and 7 year old that I am sure will get a real kick out of it. I like the fact that the Wii accessories can be reused on the U, and the fact that it is HD. Super Mario Galaxy was amazing, I can only imagine a Super Mario Galaxy 3 in HD!!

Nintendo is and has always been about fun. They deliver this in spades with their software. All of their first party titles are AAA.

Some people just don't get that about them. Is it the most powerful system built, no. BUT it will deliver some new and amazing experiences not available anywhere else.
josephayal  +   1102d ago
PS4/XBOX 720 wont be much more powerful
GraveLord  +   1102d ago
I feel sorry if you really do think that.
Norrison  +   1102d ago
They won't, if you don't want them to be 500$+ then they will be a slight improvement, you probably don't know anything about Computer parts. And if they're released in 2014, they will be a great improvement over the Wii U, but PCs will be "gens" ahead with the next gen GPUs and CPUs that will come out that year.
StraightedgeSES  +   1102d ago
The ps4 and xbox 720 will be more powerful then the Wii U but not fanboy powerful.
jmc8888  +   1102d ago

You can't put 700-1500 watts of $1500-3000 tech in a small box and charge $400-500.

If they do, and somehow don't have RROD part 2 or a similar problem, the actual advantages are equivalent to a notch or two of PC settings.

High to Ultra.

But people can keep dreaming though, it is free. When reality hits, no one will see it coming...except those with common sense.
kB0  +   1102d ago
I'm so sick of these articles springing up every 5 seconds...oh its not powerful...oh but it is...Oh my god this tech is soo next gen dated.

Shut up and buy the console that has the games that suit you.

You like halo and gears buy Microsoft
You like uncharted killzone and Ratchet get Sony
You like the Mario franchise and zelda buy Nintendo

I'd buy a single core 300 mhz and 16 MB video card system if it had better games...

Back to Dreamcast!
momthemeatloaf  +   1102d ago
This is why black ops 2 runs and looks better on Wii u than any other version because cod is a heavily based GPU game. In contrast why the ps3 versions of cod are always the most underperforming because of its weaker GPU in comparison to Xbox and espescially Wii u
vandal GAB  +   1102d ago
Oh dear, you might wanna read the digital foundry verdict before making statements like that! Here's a link for you..

P.s Image quality equal with the 360, performance worst of the three consoles.
#21.1 (Edited 1102d ago ) | Agree(6) | Disagree(4) | Report | Reply
younghavok  +   1102d ago
I dont need to read the DF verdict, because Ive played the 360 version and WiiU version extensively, hell I own them both, or rather did, and WiiU version looks and plays better. This is from my own hands on with both games. 16 hours with the 360 version, and about 11 hours with the WiiU. Clear difference in motion
-chaz-  +   1102d ago
Reading this article won't help dissuade anyone with phrases like:

"The the CPU is more than just the Wii’s version times three. For starters, it uses a newer technology from IBM called 45nm SOI process"

Really? Can't someone just talk about the consoles' strengths instead of trying to disprove all the negatives with this crap?
cleft5  +   1102d ago
This article does help me understand a lot of what is going on with the WiiU and why some developers are complaining about the cpu speed. I thought it seemed wrong to think that the WiiU isn't better than the current gen, now I know what is going on. Very good article.
Ck1x  +   1102d ago
The simple fact is, the only reason that the 360&PS3 even received decent CPU's is because HD GPU's were still pretty expensive at the time of those consoles release. Everyone likes to make it seem as if they know what the WiiU is really capable of by spouting off only partial system components. The only quote that has ever been said about the CPU is that it's clocked slower than the 360&PS3 in speed... But what does that have to do with power though? For all we know the CPU probably does way more instructions per clock cycle than the other two. There are many more factors into making a great efficient console than having fast parts!
iliimaster  +   1102d ago
i dont understand all the hate nintendo is getting,..
hell im not expecting hologram 10090 P super ultra plasma powered by a damn berrillium sphere here folks...
give me a 720p nintendo and they will have what every NEXT gen console is crying they can't do...
make LONG games because the graphics take up too much...
. hell if i were Final Fantasy i would make games only for the WII and wII U because lesser HD graphics makes a FF7 remake possible
if they knew how to run their business..
oh yeah give me a regular controller too :D
Stana  +   1102d ago
It's Ps3 story all over again. You have to decide which games are you going to play.
No one is really buying WiiU to play Cod like games. The ones that are will be disappointed.

With Ps3 every one was saying: it's different and just wait and see the true power off the cell.

Well that never happened.

I wasn't into JRPG's so i bought Xbox360 and guess what...Skyrim works

You have to decide which console is going to have more dev support for those types of games that you like and play.
jmc8888  +   1102d ago
Not really. This is the problem with projecting history as future.

It's important to KNOW history so you DON'T repeat it. But it's also not the case that what happened in the past, happens in the future.

You see the difference is the PS3 was designed with the notion that the cell processor was going to be far better than what it turned out to really be. It was a drastic 'off in the wilderness' design that also used a tough dev kit software to use. Thus early on you had many problems tapping what was there, but also you had another factor. The games were built around the 360, which at it's core, is PC based.

Thus you had one thing that was ultra difficult to code for and something just as effective powerful that was easy to code for. That's why you have games being made for the 360 over PS3.

It's also why when a PS3 game is made from the ground up it looks great for the tech.

But to get back to my main point, is that the GPGPU is where the entire industry is going. Thus it's not Nintendo going to something no one else will use, but rather being forward thinking and actually going embracing that next industry step forward.

Besides that, the devs say (the ones that actually have worked on it, as opposed to those that HAVEN'T) it's quite easy to code for.

Now getting all the tricks out are another thing, but to use it is quite easy. So with sony you had difficult software utilizing an off the pasture model.

Whereas you have the Wii U using easy software utilizing the next industry standard model.

So it's really not the same thing as the PS3 headaches.

This is what coders are going to have to do going forward. Whereas they could bypass the PS3 way, it's not going to be really possible to bypass the Wii U way. Thus even if they 'code for' the 720, the ports will still be very similar in structure and style negating the whole...'we saw this with the PS3' angle.

So you'll have similar tech to what the next consoles will have, and also the dev software is said to be much closer to the standard 360/PC model than the PS3's was. So on both counts it's highly unlikely it will suffer from quite the same fate the PS3 had to deal with for many 3rd party games.
MsmackyM  +   1102d ago
Finally someone who understands the business and tech end, and not just some rabid fanboy. +bubs for you.

Nintendo aparently to many here dismay has survived and contributed to the industry for quite awhile. I believe they've made a very savvy business move with the Wii U and understanding the market.
Deku-Johnny   1102d ago | Trolling | show | Replies(2)
TotalHitman  +   1102d ago
The Wii U is a next gen console, but only because of it's release date. It's tech is current gen.
Cueil  +   1102d ago
I wouldn't say that. It's certainly seems to be "next-gen" to me. All the components and the way it's building a couple of generations ahead of both Microsoft and Sony. I think we'll see a better representation of what it can do as some of the first part titles start coming out.
Kyur4ThePain  +   1102d ago
Written by a seven year old.
louish1982  +   1102d ago
So basically the wii u is indeed more powerful than current gen but due to hardware differences multiplatform games struggle on it. Indeed the other next gen will use gpgpu but will be more powerful so wii u version will look worse. So everybody who wants to play nintendo games will buy one and have one of the 2 others for multiplatform titles...Just like every previous gen since the 32/64bit era....
« 1 2 3 »

Add comment

You need to be registered to add comments. Register here or login
New stories

Pocket MapleStory: Complete Demon Slayer class guide for levels 1 - 10

3h ago - Pocket MapleStory hit our mobile devices like a whirlwind recently, bringing the popular MMO IP t... | iPhone

Dreamfall Chapters Book Four Out December 3, Teaser Trailer Released

3h ago - Red Thread Games have today announced the forth chapter in their Dreamfall series, will release o... | PC

See what games are coming out in 2016

Now - Visit our release calendar to see what games are coming out in 2016. | Promoted post

Zelda: Twilight Princess HD up for pre-order on Amazon UK

3h ago - Amazon UK has now opened up pre-orders for The Legend of Zelda: Twilight Princess HD. | Wii U

Spatium New Planetary Crafting MMO Hits Kickstarter

3h ago - A new and interesting MMO appeared on Kickstarter today as new development studio Naxcore reveale... | PC

Wayward Sky Confirmed for PlayStation Experience

3h ago - VRFocus reports on the official confirmation that Wayward Sky will be playable on PlayStation VR... | PS4