There's a difference between "weak" and "weaker."
PowerPC is an old design, but x86 is even older. As far as cores are concerned, very few games have been able to make use of more than 3 cores without some major diminishing returns because they can't split up the processing sections into equal parts. Heck, there are a lot that are still reliant on 2 cores for maximum efficiency.
http://lazerlight.x10.mx/ - Lazer Light Studios - Home of the MM2 PTC project
guttertalk posted...There's a difference between "weak" and "weaker."
I'm going to nit: PowerPC 7xx is a specific design of RISC that's not had much of a roadmap for a while. Saying that x86 is an old design is a bit misleading since the A4-5000 SoC design is a bit removed and different from the Pentium Pro x86. There are newer RISC and x86 designs.
But the A4-5000 is a *mobile* processor. TechRadar has a good write-up of the issues with it as a gaming processor: http://www.techradar.com/us/reviews/pc-mac/pc-components/processors/amd-a4-5000-apu-1153738/review
I agree that anyone thinking games will use all 8 cores is assuming a LOT. Sony announced that their party chat supports 8 people. Folks think that's not going to take some threads and processing?
But that doesn't mean the Wii U is almost as powerful as the PS4. It's not. But I think many are exaggerating the difference.
The inferior ports are more the fault of lazy or (more likely) underfunded dev teams than the WiiU itself.
If the Sega Master System was a speed bump to the NES, the Atari 7800 was a tire-staining squirrel.
Weak in comparison to the PS4/X1, stronger then the PS3/360. Ports are a matter of optimizing a game to run on the new hardware which some devs don't put as much effort.
"the problem is you won't know that when the year is up. so you can't exactly cancel it until it's too late." Someone without a calender
PowerPC was designed in the mid 90s and went through changes.
x86 was designed in the 70s specifically for cheap, low-power processors for the hobbyist and cheap market. And in order to maintain backwards compatibility, its semantics can never change, but its instruction library can be appended.
In the design of the CPU it takes many clock cycles to perform one operation. Pipeline design allows multiple operations to simultaneously exist, 1 on each stage. With all of this, the 4 stage CPU in the Wii U has over 1 GHz clock rate. If the CPU gets a statement that requires the pipeline to always be flushed out, its minimum effective clock rate is a little over 250 MHz. Meanwhile, the Jaguar CPU is 14 stage with 6 of them handling the x86 part. If every operation flushed it out operating at 1.6 Ghz, it will run around 114.3 MHz.
The Wii U has the most advanced CPU among both the PS3/X360 era and the PS4/XB1 era. If Sony and MS were smart, they should have requested a new x86 type CPU but designed with a more optimal instruction set.
Here is some comparison sheet
PS4 AMD Radeon Graphics Core Next engine w/ 1152 shaders
XBxone 853 MHz AMD Radeon GPU w/ 768 shaders
WiiU AMD "Latte" 550 MHz GPU w/ 320 shaders
PS4 1.8 terrarflops
XBone 1.3 terraflops
WiiU 0.3 terraflops
PS4 - 8 Core CPU x86
XBone 8 Core CPU x86
WiiU Tri Core Power PC
PS4 8GB GDDR5
XBone 8GB DDR3
WiiU 2GB DDR3
no audio cd support
no ethernet port
no massive storage
no big ram
no fast cpu
no fast gpu
no cross game chat
no multi touch
no unified account
no 3.0 usb
no region free
no third party
full price rehashes and hd ports
OMG that the best cringed ever!!
I hear the Wii U is not weak. It can bench about 300 pounds.
Need For Speed, Splinter Cell, Deus Ex all look better on the Wii U than the 360/PS3 and it will just improve. It's weak compared to the xbone and PS4 but it's not that drastic as most will think.
No n4s rivals coming to wii u
Posted using GameFlux