Why Wii U is weaker than the 360 and PS3, explained intuitively.

#21strongo9Posted 1/10/2013 5:25:51 PM
ITT: CPUs from 2005 and 2012 are just as powerful as each other and are the only things that matter when determining consoles' power are their amount of cores, threads, and clock speed.
---
Want Luigi's Mansion: Dark Moon, Rayman Legends, and Bioshock Infinite.
i7-2670qm @ 2.2ghz | 6GB DDR3 | 1GB Geforce 540m
#22DarkZV2BetaPosted 1/10/2013 5:29:50 PM
The CPU is. The GPU, however, is a jump ahead of PS360, which makes a bigger difference most of the time anyway.
also, it matters how often each of them has to take a break, or stop to think(waiting on memory management) or how well they know the route(how much a single cycle can do) ect ect.

I think it's pretty obvious at this point, however, that the Wii U CPU is simply weaker than the 360 in everything, and probably weaker than PS3 in most things.
---
AMD CACHING = NOT YET FINISHED
Hey... just so you know...PC is a brand. ;). ~Lord_Kagato
#23omniryuPosted 1/10/2013 5:35:26 PM
strongo9 posted...
ITT: CPUs from 2005 and 2012 are just as powerful as each other and are the only things that matter when determining consoles' power are their amount of cores, threads, and clock speed.


But it has no new feature. It might have a higher ipc. The CPU is weak dude.
---
PSN ID: Omniryu; Skype: Ryan.cox43
Gamertag: Omniryu
#24MewtwoExPosted 1/10/2013 5:39:08 PM
Lol people still cry about power?
TC grow up and get a gf, even if its ugly, you need it
---
http://dunzi.wippiespace.com/pics/trollin-hatin.jpg
#25calhoun1389Posted 1/10/2013 5:59:30 PM
Oh look, it's a thread where someone actually thinks any of this crap matters. If I want a Wii U, I'm going to buy a Wii U. Don't give a damn if it is or is not better than the PS3/360. Honestly, why does it matter to you if people buy the Wii U? It's not harming you.
---
My first born, Jackson was born on Friday, May 11, 2012.
My Anime List: http://tinyurl.com/c6ylh9y (Updates regularly)
#26DarkZV2BetaPosted 1/10/2013 6:06:31 PM
omniryu posted...
strongo9 posted...
ITT: CPUs from 2005 and 2012 are just as powerful as each other and are the only things that matter when determining consoles' power are their amount of cores, threads, and clock speed.


But it has no new feature. It might have a higher ipc. The CPU is weak dude.


It certainly has better cache access/probably memory management in general. You can't get worse than PS3 in that, and yes, that matters a lot for getting higher framerates.
It is undeniably weak though. Even the highest end desktop components aren't going to top Xenon at only 1.3ghz and 3 cores.
---
AMD CACHING = NOT YET FINISHED
Hey... just so you know...PC is a brand. ;). ~Lord_Kagato
#27omniryuPosted 1/10/2013 6:52:16 PM
calhoun1389 posted...
Oh look, it's a thread where someone actually thinks any of this crap matters. If I want a Wii U, I'm going to buy a Wii U. Don't give a damn if it is or is not better than the PS3/360. Honestly, why does it matter to you if people buy the Wii U? It's not harming you.


It affects on how many third party titles we get.
---
PSN ID: Omniryu; Skype: Ryan.cox43
Gamertag: Omniryu
#28omniryuPosted 1/10/2013 6:55:16 PM
DarkZV2Beta posted...
omniryu posted...
strongo9 posted...
ITT: CPUs from 2005 and 2012 are just as powerful as each other and are the only things that matter when determining consoles' power are their amount of cores, threads, and clock speed.


But it has no new feature. It might have a higher ipc. The CPU is weak dude.


It certainly has better cache access/probably memory management in general. You can't get worse than PS3 in that, and yes, that matters a lot for getting higher framerates.
It is undeniably weak though. Even the highest end desktop components aren't going to top Xenon at only 1.3ghz and 3 cores.


Isn't one core and cache dedicated to game pad?
---
PSN ID: Omniryu; Skype: Ryan.cox43
Gamertag: Omniryu
#29Skul_Posted 1/10/2013 7:04:36 PM
From: 3D_Shado | #001
What's faster?

1. One guy with 6 arms carrying bricks at 3.2 feet per second
2. Three guys with 2 arms each carrying bricks at 3.2 feet per second
3. Three guys with 1 arm each carrying bricks at 1.24 feet per second

Both 1 and 2 seem equivalent, right? There are 6 arms in total, each carrying the same amount of bricks at the same speed. But with 3, there are half as many arms and they move far slower.

1 and 2 correspond to the PS3 and 360, respectively. The 360 has 3 physical cores, each with 2 logical cores - 3*2 = 6, i.e. 6 things operating in tandem with the same capability. The PS3 has a more unique architecture, with a single core called the PPE acting as a master to 6 slaves called SPEs, that receive and execute instructions independently. Since the PPE is mostly busy controlling the SPEs, we once again have 6 things operating in tandem at the same speed.

3 corresponds to the Wii U. Wii U has 3 cores, which cannot split into logical cores as the 360 CPU does. So only 3 things can execute simultaneously using this CPU. In addition, the speed at which things execute is nearly 1/3rd of the other two consoles (3.2 Ghz). So theoretically, Wii U is 5 times SLOWER than the 360 and PS3. The reasons it can push graphics almost equal to these consoles is:

- a stronger GPU (FAR superior to the others)
- less overhead (Though it can only push 14 GFLOPS compared to the 360's 115 and the PS3's 218, less processing power is spent on the numerous background tasks of more complex operating systems)
- more RAM, allowing more game data to occupy memory instead of being read from disk

I hope this has been educational for you.


OK. Sure they move faster, have more arms in which to carry bricks. But the Wii U has been working out. Been going to the gym every day. While the PS360 can only carry 1 brick in every hand, the Wii U can carry 2. And then theres the fact that the Wii U is a craft bastard, and uses that hidden warp pipe. This cuts more than half the travel time. So lets say a trip for PS360 is 50 feet, with the pipe its 15 feet for the wii u.

The 360 takes 15.625 seconds to deliver bricks, and delivers (3x2x1) 6 bricks.
The Wii U 12.1 Seconds to deliver bricks, and delivers (3x1x2) 6 bricks.

So they are similar, with the Wii U being slightly faster. 100% comfirmed by math. Thank you ladies and gentleman. Good night.
---
cave story is a nes or snes port-DemonDog666
i5-2500-GTX550TI-8GB; DSi; 3DS; GBASP; Wii;Galaxy SIII; iPod Touch 4th Gen;
#303D_Shado(Topic Creator)Posted 1/10/2013 7:25:28 PM
Skul_ posted...
From: 3D_Shado | #001
What's faster?

1. One guy with 6 arms carrying bricks at 3.2 feet per second
2. Three guys with 2 arms each carrying bricks at 3.2 feet per second
3. Three guys with 1 arm each carrying bricks at 1.24 feet per second

Both 1 and 2 seem equivalent, right? There are 6 arms in total, each carrying the same amount of bricks at the same speed. But with 3, there are half as many arms and they move far slower.

1 and 2 correspond to the PS3 and 360, respectively. The 360 has 3 physical cores, each with 2 logical cores - 3*2 = 6, i.e. 6 things operating in tandem with the same capability. The PS3 has a more unique architecture, with a single core called the PPE acting as a master to 6 slaves called SPEs, that receive and execute instructions independently. Since the PPE is mostly busy controlling the SPEs, we once again have 6 things operating in tandem at the same speed.

3 corresponds to the Wii U. Wii U has 3 cores, which cannot split into logical cores as the 360 CPU does. So only 3 things can execute simultaneously using this CPU. In addition, the speed at which things execute is nearly 1/3rd of the other two consoles (3.2 Ghz). So theoretically, Wii U is 5 times SLOWER than the 360 and PS3. The reasons it can push graphics almost equal to these consoles is:

- a stronger GPU (FAR superior to the others)
- less overhead (Though it can only push 14 GFLOPS compared to the 360's 115 and the PS3's 218, less processing power is spent on the numerous background tasks of more complex operating systems)
- more RAM, allowing more game data to occupy memory instead of being read from disk

I hope this has been educational for you.


OK. Sure they move faster, have more arms in which to carry bricks. But the Wii U has been working out. Been going to the gym every day. While the PS360 can only carry 1 brick in every hand, the Wii U can carry 2. And then theres the fact that the Wii U is a craft bastard, and uses that hidden warp pipe. This cuts more than half the travel time. So lets say a trip for PS360 is 50 feet, with the pipe its 15 feet for the wii u.

The 360 takes 15.625 seconds to deliver bricks, and delivers (3x2x1) 6 bricks.
The Wii U 12.1 Seconds to deliver bricks, and delivers (3x1x2) 6 bricks.

So they are similar, with the Wii U being slightly faster. 100% comfirmed by math. Thank you ladies and gentleman. Good night.


So you're saying the Wii U has:

- optimization of pre-compiled games at the runtime level (i.e. "cutting the travel time" by skipping instructions)
- heightened vectorization (meaning, while PS3 and 360 support SIMD with 128 bits and could operate on 4 integers simultaneously, Wii U can do significantly more at once and is "stronger")

I saw no such information about the Wii U. If I did I would've mentioned it as a bonus for the CPU. Where'd you find this information? You should support the metaphor with technical data so people understand it better.