Is the Wii U system more powerful than a 360 and PS3 or just on par?

#21MyDogSkipPosted 11/25/2012 11:56:53 AM
The CPU is a tad weaker. The GPU is a bit more powerful. There is more RAM but less bandwidth. The weaknesses can be overcome with clever programming. I can't remember the source, but the way the CPU architecture and eDRAM works, if the developers learn to take advantage of it, they can get it to easily outperform the current consoles. It's a matter of how much time developers put into learning the system. Hopefully it doesn't end up like the PS3, where many teams either can't work with it or are too lazy.
---
Don't trust the smiling penguin!
http://backloggery.com/mydogskip93
#22CranberryPSOPosted 11/25/2012 12:00:31 PM
If the NES is 8 bits, and the SNES is 16 bits, and the N64 is 64 bits, does that mean Xbox 360 is 360 bits?

What ever happened to the bits thing anyways... did they just stop counting after N64?
---
Best quest to fight tons of Canadians really fast? ~HaienLai
Topics won: 2
#23ZodrynPosted 11/25/2012 12:03:56 PM
alamazing1234 posted...
Less. Haven't seen anything that indicated otherwise.


Except for screenshots of Arkham City that clearly show more detail than on the PS3. Overall though, the ports aren't going to tell the whole story. We'll have to wait for some major third party endeavor targeted specifically at next gen consoles, or for something like Metroid or Zelda, to see its real potential.

Some devs have said that the CPU is less powerful, but the GPU is much better. That basically means less AI and on screen enemies at once etc., but what is there will look much better. Games like Metroid with its room structure should be absolutely gorgeous.
---
Negatory morning glory
#24ymmac1707Posted 11/25/2012 12:05:56 PM
common sense people, the Wii U streams to two screens, one to the HDTV, the other to Gamepad, thats it requires more power ,let see PS/360 run a game on two displays while keeping a steady frame rate. All these comparison are unfair, the GPU/CPU has two screen to RUN.

I have both the PS3 and Xbox, Call of Duty on Wii U just looks and plays better.

Over time Nintendo Wii U, architecture will prove more efficient when optimized.
#25game freakozoidPosted 11/25/2012 12:12:39 PM
It's more powerful but not all that much more powerful. Anyone who tells you otherwise is deluding themselves. The WiiU is the same as the Wii was to the Xbox. It is definitely more powerful and once a lot of work is done with it that power difference will be slightly noticeable but it won't be anywhere near the difference of say the Xbox360 was to the Xbox.
#26Golden MavenPosted 11/25/2012 12:14:35 PM
CPU is weaker, GPU is stronger, and there's more RAM available to the games.
#27PikachuMittinsPosted 11/25/2012 12:14:55 PM
LurkerLord posted...
More, if developers code for it efficiently, and properly make use of GPGPU and the extra avialble RAM.


QFT.
---
Official Light Director of the NDF/KDF/PDF/IDF
#28knightimexPosted 11/25/2012 12:28:44 PM(edited)
The floor alone on Rayman legends demo is proof enough that Wii U is stronger.

You won't find a floor that smooth and clean on an Xbox 360 or ps3 game.
---
Knightime X was a cool guy until he was exposed to GameFAQS radiation. He'll never be the same again!
#29SolisPosted 11/25/2012 12:31:15 PM
JonnyBigBoss posted...
More powerful. The GPGPU has way more potential and there's more memory.

The Xbox 360 has a GPGPU too.

Regardless of that though, the Wii U is probably more powerful/capable overall, but it sounds like its bottlenecks will hold it back in certain ways compared to other current consoles. Not to mention if developers actually end up using that "GPGPU" for general purpose calculations, graphical quality will actually need to be downgraded.
---
"Walking tanks must exist somewhere for there to be such attention to detail like this in mech sim." - IGN Steel Battalion review
#30jmichaelbpPosted 11/25/2012 12:33:05 PM(edited)
Well the cpu seems to be weaker, how much is uncertain.
Tecmo said it's a little bit weaker, the Metro dev flat out said it was horrible.
But because of GPGPU, you could take tasks from the cpu to the gpu.
Clock speed is lower, how much we do not know, I'm guessing 2.0 to 3.0 GHz.
We don't have other details on the cpu.
This all could be because of lazy devs trying to get the code on it without changing anything.

There is 4 times more RAM in total,but only half of it is used for the games.
It's 2 times the RAM of the 360 for games, and 4 times the RAM of the PS3 for games.
The memory bandwith is lower, but the PS3 had the highest memory bandwith and how many multiplat games were better on it?

It has 32MB of EDRAM, that's 3.2 times the EDRAM of the 360, and the PS3 had no EDRAM at all.
Acording to DF it's really fast and could make up for other things such as the memory bandwith.

The gpu we don't know anything other than it's stronger.
Unity Technology's CEO said it squashes the PS3's and 360's gpus and that it is capable of DX11 like graphics.
---
"Ask not for whom the bell tolls... it tolls for thee." - In memory of Chuck, the wisest boxcar hobo of all time from Telltale's The Walking Dead.