Were the graphics for this console overstimated?

#91AbysmalTrinityPosted 12/20/2012 9:25:46 AM
FPS_hitman posted...
No its not I posted multiple articles that proved this while no one can post anything claiming opposite. Its weaker then the 360 and based off of 1997 gamecube tech.


Gamecube could do 1080p 60FPS?

Nice.
---
Simply Abysmal
AbysmalTrinity
#92JKatarnPosted 12/20/2012 10:03:12 AM
AbysmalTrinity posted...
FPS_hitman posted...
No its not I posted multiple articles that proved this while no one can post anything claiming opposite. Its weaker then the 360 and based off of 1997 gamecube tech.


Gamecube could do 1080p 60FPS?

Nice.


None of the current titles are running at native 1080p at 60FPS, many third-party parts are even lagging behind the 360/PS3 in performance/visuals. I'm not saying the console isn't capable of 1080p, but based on what we've seen thusfar from first and third-party games, it seems doubtful.
---
Asus P8Z68-V LE | Core i7 2600K | 8GB G.Skill Ripjaws DDR3 | EVGA GeForce GTX 460 Superclocked
PS3 | PS2 | PSP| Wii | 3DS | DS | X-Box 360 | X-Box | NES
#93FayeLadyPosted 12/20/2012 10:06:34 AM
Underestimated if anything, they claim it to be more powerful than the ps3/360 and we haven't even seen those top out yet.
---
If I support the game company, then I won't be supporting the blank DVD business.
#94Simon_IsturizPosted 12/20/2012 10:13:59 AM
There seems to be a lot of misconceptions being thrown around in here. Maybe I can help clarify.

- Wii U RAM is way more abundant, but it's base speed is slower. However, this is mitigated by the fact that there's assloads of eDRAM on the CPU. So while the base speed is slower, it can move much more data in the same number of cycles. This was to save on cost.

- The Wii U CPU clockspeed is slow, but purposefully so. For one, the architecture of the chip itself is of a much more advanced pedigree than the Xenon or the Cell. So while it's clockspeed is technically lower, real-world performance puts it on par, more or less, with Xenon and Cell. This allows the Wii U CPU alone to match 360/PS3 visuals while using less than half the power draw, and substantially less heat.

- The Wii U GPU is actually a GPGPU, and one that is significantly more capable than the oens found within the PS3/360. The Wii U is an unorthodox system compared to current gen consoles. It was designed to be a GPGPU intensive system. Even most high end gaming PCs are leaning towards utilizing beefy GPGPUs. What this means is that the GPGPU helps offload many of the processing tasks normally handled by the CPU, and it performs them better. This helps mitigate the lower clocked CPU, as much of the load the CPU traditionally performs is being offloaded by the Wii U's powerful GPGPU.

- The problem with launch games is that the CPU is being overstrained by being assigned almost all the process-heavy tasks, while the GPGPU is being underutilized. Most likely due to the fact that developers are basically porting over 360 code to Wii U.

In conclusion, the Wii U is definitely a more capable system than the 360/PS3. And given time, developers will get used to designing for a GPU focused system (they have to, as the PS4 and 720 will likely follow suit).
#95BigAl519Posted 12/20/2012 12:56:37 PM
JKatarn posted...
AbysmalTrinity posted...
FPS_hitman posted...
No its not I posted multiple articles that proved this while no one can post anything claiming opposite. Its weaker then the 360 and based off of 1997 gamecube tech.


Gamecube could do 1080p 60FPS?

Nice.


None of the current titles are running at native 1080p at 60FPS, many third-party parts are even lagging behind the 360/PS3 in performance/visuals. I'm not saying the console isn't capable of 1080p, but based on what we've seen thusfar from first and third-party games, it seems doubtful.


If you are going to try and argue something, at least be educated on the point you are arguing. Trine 2 runs at a full 1080p with 60fps and has been hailed as far superior to the PS3/360 versions graphically.

http://www.eurogamer.net/articles/digitalfoundry-trine-2-face-off
---
A real gamer will buy any system and enjoy it, a tool will sit on a forum trying to bash one or the other!
#96Rasputin77Posted 12/20/2012 1:07:25 PM
Ahhh, GameFAQs. 'Dem conversational training wheels!

http://alturl.com/rue4h -- Whoa! Watch out!!
---
Fun game: Find a Wii U thread on GameFAQs where the word "troll" isn't typed by post #10. Good luck.
"TL;DR" = My parents; failed me.
#97TechniMyokoPosted 12/20/2012 1:24:41 PM
Enigma149 posted...
mistermerk posted...
RedOrion posted...
mistermerk posted...
knightimex posted...
More so than ps3.

See trine 2.

More to come.

Believe it.


Less so than the PS3.

See Tekken Tag Tournament 2 (http://www.eurogamer.net/articles/digitalfoundry-tekken-tag-tournament-2-on-wii-u-face-off) and most other 3d big-budget third-party games.

It's easy to cherry-pick examples to paint the picture we want.

Having said that, TC, the graphics for the Wii U have been grossly overestimated. There were times this year and last where the fanboys spouted the the Wii U would do 360/Ps3 games in 1080p/60fps, or run equivalent to a high-end PC version (lol). Not only has that not been achieved, but the Wii U version of games isn't even up to par to the 360 version in most cases so far—I'd say that's an overestimation.

On a technical level, I doubt we'll ever see anything on the Wii U approach God of War:Ascensions, The Last of Us, or Halo 4. Artistically, there will be Wii U games that are gorgeous for the hardware they're on on, a la Galaxy 1/2, Xenoblade, etc.


This is grossly inaccurate.


How so? I'll wait.


Well, for one, numerous developers have said as much.

For another, look at the specs of the Wii U: it has 4x the RAM of the HD Twins. Tech breakdowns (the same tech breakdowns which revealed the CPU clock speed) revealed a GPU based on the Radeon HD 4730, a GPU about 4x as powerful as the one found in the Xbox 360, and a little over 2x as powerful as the one found in the PS3.

Now, there is one aspect the Wii U is weaker in: the CPU is slower. Of course, apparently, so is the Xbox 720's CPU (again, the leak was done by the same guy who first revealed the Wii U's CPU), so time will tell how much that actually matters.

Source for GPU: http://www.tomshardware.com/news/radeon-hd-rv770-gpu-wii,12941.html
Source for CPU: http://www.ubergizmo.com/2012/12/xbox-720-processor-clocked-at-1-6ghz/


Your math is backwards. 360 has a more powerful gpu than ps3, but not two times as powerful.

And that same guy revealed 720s cpu is more than twice as powerful as wiius

As others have said, nintendo fanboys promised 1080p 60 fps, and we arent getting that

Devs are saying wiiu is weaker than current gen, and the games prove it
As others have said, these arent the equivalents of ps3/360 launch titles
Wiius hardware isnt new to devs, theyve been using it since the gamecube
Thats why wiius launch games were as good as they were
#98TechniMyokoPosted 12/20/2012 1:26:02 PM
DemonDog666 posted...
angry_cowtipper posted...
No it doesn't. It has 1 GB available for games, a little less than twice as powerful as the 360's 512.


Actually it'd be 1024 not 1GB, they just rounded it.


Um. 1 GB = 1024 MB
#99TechniMyokoPosted 12/20/2012 1:32:19 PM
Buretsu posted...
Luthor_ posted...
cheaps out on hardware that is vital for gameplay


Like?


The cpu, high speed ram
#100tastethecouragePosted 12/20/2012 1:33:27 PM
I think it's ironic that console gamers are constantly firing back at PC gamers saying things like, "It's not the graphics that count! It's the experience! I don't need super fancy graphics!" (And that's a fair argument, I won't dispute that).

But whenever a new console is released, you guys start a mud-flinging contest amongst yourselves. "No, MY console is the most powerful and has the best graphics!", "Wtf, shut up, my console has a better GPU and more RAM and therefore can rush Crysis 3 blah blah blah".

Observation. :P
---
Antec 900 | Intel Q6600 @ 3.0ghz | GTX 560Ti 1gb | 4gbram | WD 320gb HDD | Tuniq Tower 120