IBM Confirms that Nintendo's Wii U Has a Power-based CPU

[alidan]

[citation][nom]HotRoderx[/nom]I know I catch heat for this but so what. I personally think Nintendo's time in the sun as a console manufacture has come and gone. The Wii was a awesome concept they seriously dropped the ball on with games. I had a Wii the Christmas the year it released and I was like DAMN this thing is awesome. Then I waited for games ZeldaMetroidMarioDragon Ball Z RE4 to me where the only decent games ever released for the console. Nintendo really dropped the ball on pushing manufactures to come out with new decent games. As far as graphics go they where not on par with the Xbox or PS3 but that was ok they made up for it with the controls. This new console looks like Nintendo is doing the same dropping the ball by using a old out dated processor. Why not go ahead and use a new processor to get some more performance out of the product.[/citation]

mad world
no more heros
was there an okami, or was that a ds game?
there are also a few more that you passed up and im forgetting.

 

[mazty]

[citation][nom]ikaruga[/nom]I'm fanboy of nothing and nobody. If I see value in something, I decide if it's worth the price or not, and that's solely a subjective decision. It might worth it for me for the given price while it could be too much for you at the same time. Luckily it's a known fact among mature people that nobody forces you, me or anybody else to buy anything, and the very same fact is what makes you the only tragic element of this story.[/citation]

So how much hardware is literally worth is subjective? No it's not - you are being over charged for yesterdays tech. You are ignoring reality to make a console seem like good value for money. Please explain the maturity in such a purchase.

 

[mazty]

[citation][nom]notuptome2004[/nom]let see the fact it uses Flashed based storage makes it a good deal because flash storage is $$$ and oh how about the fact you can plug in a ext 3TB HDD if you want to expand storage[/citation]
Flash storage prices have bombed recently and how is being able to plug in your own HDD value for money...?

 

[mazty]

[citation][nom]kinggraves[/nom]The enthusiast logic that a system is better purely because it has higher stats is also pretty sad. Have fun playing Duke Nukem Forever on a PC that cost you 3k. The idea that gameplay is more important than graphics is clearly lost on some. I'm sure they'll make the next Dora the Explorer game in 4k just for you. Value is garnered from enjoyment, if they enjoy the game they're playing, they achieved their value for their money.The speculation that it is Broadway and the same from the Wii is an absurd conclusion to draw and PURE speculation. There are far more chips than the Broadway possible. A similar chip would not surprise me though, in order to make backwards compatibility easier. They don't promise backwards compatibility and pull it later due to "incompatibility" like some do -coughSonycough- Wanting to pad their library with GC/Wii classics, what little there are, isn't surprising.I'm also not really concerned whether or not the devs at Koei are having trouble with Dynasty Warriors, a game that's played almost the same since the ps2 days. Do not tell me a modified ps2 engine can not run on this CPU. Koei's idea of updated gameplay is apparently drawing 200 fodder enemies on screen rather than 50. There is a difference between "the CPU is difficult to utilize properly" which is often the case on new systems using new chips and "the CPU is too weak". Dynasty Warriors has NEVER been on a Nintendo console before, it's not surprising a PS friendly dev team isn't used to developing for a Nintendo chip. It speaks volumes to me yet another dev team that hasn't touched NIntendo before is finally on the team at all.With that being said, this system isn't going to deliver a whole lot of horsepower. Lost value? Wasn't the controller estimated to be at least $100? That leaves the system itself to be around $200, only slightly higher than the Wii. For that price, you're getting an HD Wii with a fancy controller, take it or leave it. You will not get a top of the line system at any rate for $200. The pricing is in line with what it should be, considering the controller's cost. I don't expect miracles out of this hardware at that price, doing so would be foolish. That's why I have a PC.[/citation]
It's called value for money. No other company in the world gets away with releasing old tech with an extortionate price tag other then Apple. Why focus on a crappy controller when you are buying a console? Another gimmick.

 

[ikaruga]

So how much hardware is literally worth is subjective? No it's not - you are being over charged for yesterdays tech. You are ignoring reality to make a console seem like good value for money. Please explain the maturity in such a purchase.

You literally understand nothing. The striking realization that the universe is currently in a state to allow people so stupid as yourself to freely express themselves is truly disturbing, and saddens me deeply.
I’m currently playing FTL (and some quake) on my hopelessly underpowered atom based ion-itx htpc box, and my pimped out gaming rig sits there in the corner turned off and unused for more than a week, and I’m highly entertained and completely satisfied.
Nintendo (along with the other old big names like Sega, Sony and the others) are part of the history of video gaming. Many of the old gamers know that they pioneered and revolutionized most of the gaming related hardware and software mechanics what the industry uses nowadays.
They earned the trust of many gamers in the last (almost) three decades by continuously delivering unforgettable gaming experiences, and many of those gamers will happily give them another chance . Perhaps you are right and they are nothing more than useless relics of the industry now, but perhaps you are wrong. It’s something what history will decide, and not you (in advance!).
The point is - what you are unable to comprehend - that nobody forces you to buy or play anything at all. If you don’t see any (or enough) value in it, just move on and STFU (please).

 

[mazty]

[citation][nom]ikaruga[/nom]You literally understand nothing. The striking realization that the universe is currently in a state to allow people so stupid as yourself to freely express themselves is truly disturbing, and saddens me deeply.I’m currently playing FTL (and some quake) on my hopelessly underpowered atom based ion-itx htpc box, and my pimped out gaming rig sits there in the corner turned off and unused for more than a week, and I’m highly entertained and completely satisfied.Nintendo (along with the other old big names like Sega, Sony and the others) are part of the history of video gaming. Many of the old gamers know that they pioneered and revolutionized most of the gaming related hardware and software mechanics what the industry uses nowadays. They earned the trust of many gamers in the last (almost) three decades by continuously delivering unforgettable gaming experiences, and many of those gamers will happily give them another chance . Perhaps you are right and they are nothing more than useless relics of the industry now, but perhaps you are wrong. It’s something what history will decide, and not you (in advance!). The point is - what you are unable to comprehend - that nobody forces you to buy or play anything at all. If you don’t see any (or enough) value in it, just move on and STFU (please).[/citation]
You literally don't understand the use of the word "literally".
The rest of your argument is merely insults and fanboyism. Go you, how's that attitude working out for you sport?

 

[ikaruga]

You literally don't understand the use of the word "literally".
The rest of your argument is merely insults and fanboyism. Go you, how's that attitude working out for you sport?

I guess you already forgot that you started the whole thing, but I'm doing fine thanks. Have a nice day.

 

[back_by_demand]

Wolfgang,

That previous article was badly titled as the ruck of the developer arguement was that the performance was their but they were not skilled enough to utilise it
...
And now here you are using a bad premise to bad mouth Nintendo again, I expect fanbois and idiots to throw anti-Nintendo comments in the forums but I don't expect it from the article authors

 

[luciferano]

[citation][nom]mazty[/nom]It's called value for money. No other company in the world gets away with releasing old tech with an extortionate price tag other then Apple. Why focus on a crappy controller when you are buying a console? Another gimmick.[/citation]

Let's see here... Almost all games use very outdated game engines, most coolers for CPUs and GPUs still don't use vapor chamber tech to get superior cooling to pretty much anything else, Intel's CPUs beat AMD's that have more cores pretty much mostly because of Windows currently using an ancient, poor-quality method of thread scheduling that also hinders any CPU that has Turbo/core parking and similar features, GPUs still use GDDR5 despite there having been a superior memory (XDR2) for years that could have been had by pretty much any billion dollar company had they simply bought Rambus and fired all of those Rambus assholes, most displays still don't use modern LED/IPS technology that's been around for quite a while now (well, LED more so than IPS AFAIK, but still), the highest common display resolution is still the same as some five to eight year old TVs, and oh does the list go on. Name me a single company that uses no outdated tech at all and I'd be surprised.

I'm not even going to argue with you over the semantics of how good a console that we don't even know the specifications of is nor how much value it has and how good or bad the controller is for that same reason as well as that obviously being subjective.

 

[luciferano]

[citation][nom]ikaruga[/nom]You literally understand nothing. The striking realization that the universe is currently in a state to allow people so stupid as yourself to freely express themselves is truly disturbing, and saddens me deeply.I’m currently playing FTL (and some quake) on my hopelessly underpowered atom based ion-itx htpc box, and my pimped out gaming rig sits there in the corner turned off and unused for more than a week, and I’m highly entertained and completely satisfied.Nintendo (along with the other old big names like Sega, Sony and the others) are part of the history of video gaming. Many of the old gamers know that they pioneered and revolutionized most of the gaming related hardware and software mechanics what the industry uses nowadays. They earned the trust of many gamers in the last (almost) three decades by continuously delivering unforgettable gaming experiences, and many of those gamers will happily give them another chance . Perhaps you are right and they are nothing more than useless relics of the industry now, but perhaps you are wrong. It’s something what history will decide, and not you (in advance!). The point is - what you are unable to comprehend - that nobody forces you to buy or play anything at all. If you don’t see any (or enough) value in it, just move on and STFU (please).[/citation]

mazty does seem to be being quite unreasonable, but for what it's worth, you seem to have really gone overboard on mazty although you have some good points. Please, try to relax at least a little.

 

[spookyman]

They will all use a Power PC processor and an ATI graphics card.

Its easier for game manufacturers to make software for the 3 platforms. The funny part all 3 systems are so similar to each other. Its the controls that make them different.

 

[mazty]

I guess you already forgot that you started the whole thing, but I'm doing fine thanks. Have a nice day.

I used the word in the correct manner; you have yet to do so and do not even have the good grace to accept that fact. How can I have a discussion with you if we can't agree on the facts?

 

[mazty]

Let's see here... Almost all games use very outdated game engines, most coolers for CPUs and GPUs still don't use vapor chamber tech to get superior cooling to pretty much anything else, Intel's CPUs beat AMD's that have more cores pretty much mostly because of Windows currently using an ancient, poor-quality method of thread scheduling that also hinders any CPU that has Turbo/core parking and similar features, GPUs still use GDDR5 despite there having been a superior memory (XDR2) for years that could have been had by pretty much any billion dollar company had they simply bought Rambus and fired all of those Rambus assholes, most displays still don't use modern LED/IPS technology that's been around for quite a while now (well, LED more so than IPS AFAIK, but still), the highest common display resolution is still the same as some five to eight year old TVs, and oh does the list go on. Name me a single company that uses no outdated tech at all and I'd be surprised.

I'm not even going to argue with you over the semantics of how good a console that we don't even know the specifications of is nor how much value it has and how good or bad the controller is for that same reason as well as that obviously being subjective.

Your argument is flawed as you are saying the best should always be used regardless of cost and other features. IPS displays have ~8ms refresh time hence why they are not, and will not be popular with gamers. Heatpipes are also more cost effective and when you consider the price of silicon + everything else, why not use heatpipes as the cooling is more the adequate whilst helping to lower overall cost.
From the sounds of things the Wii U is already years out of date whereas you are making it sound like it simply isn't the latest technology going.

 

[luciferano]

[citation][nom]spookyman[/nom]They will all use a Power PC processor and an ATI graphics card.Its easier for game manufacturers to make software for the 3 platforms. The funny part all 3 systems are so similar to each other. Its the controls that make them different.[/citation]

The PS3's Cell isn't so similar. It may have similar roots, but it's more different from the Xbox 360 CPU and probably the Wii U CPU than even the LGA i7s from FX and they're fairly different.

 

[ikaruga]

mazty does seem to be being quite unreasonable, but for what it's worth, you seem to have really gone overboard on mazty although you have some good points. Please, try to relax at least a little.

You are right and I apologize, but he was the one who insulted me first, than he made no sense whatsoever. If you read both of the posts I made, you will find that I really tried to give him a good reasoning in the argument, and I honestly did.

I begin to suspect that he really believes that all the console gamers are enthusiast as well, and that's the one and only group which should be the target audience of the product like the Wii-U. Nintendo had a target price and the controller is too expensive, so they made the sacrifice on the base hardware. Time will tell if it was a good or a bad decision, but I honestly hope that it will turn out well, because I don't want to see Nintendo or Sony or anybody else disappear like how we lost Sega.
The more system there are, the better for the gamers

 

[luciferano]

[citation][nom]mazty[/nom]Your argument is flawed as you are saying the best should always be used regardless of cost and other features. IPS displays have ~8ms refresh time hence why they are not, and will not be popular with gamers. Heatpipes are also more cost effective and when you consider the price of silicon + everything else, why not use heatpipes as the cooling is more the adequate whilst helping to lower overall cost. From the sounds of things the Wii U is already years out of date whereas you are making it sound like it simply isn't the latest technology going.[/citation]

My argument is not flawed. I never said nor tried to imply that we need to have everything as the latest tech. My point is that there aren't any companies that I'm aware of without any products that use old tech in some way.

http://pcpartpicker.com/parts/monitor/#sort=a3&p=1

I can name numerous IPS displays with 5ms response times, one of the most common in modern displays without IPS technology.

You say that vapor chambers aren't used because heat pipes are cheaper and more cost effective. Assuming that the Wii U does actually have old hardware like this, that's probably the exact same reasoning behind it.

You're using double-sided logic to say that it's okay to use old, inferior tech in other things just because it's cheaper and/or more cost effective, but saying that it's not okay for a mere low-end console.

 

[mazty]

My argument is not flawed. I never said nor tried to imply that we need to have everything as the latest tech. My point is that there aren't any companies that I'm aware of without any products that use old tech in some way.

http://pcpartpicker.com/parts/monitor/#sort=a3&p=1

I can name numerous IPS displays with 5ms response times, one of the most common in modern displays without IPS technology.

You say that vapor chambers aren't used because heat pipes are cheaper and more cost effective. Assuming that the Wii U does actually have old hardware like this, that's probably the exact same reasoning behind it.

You're using double-sided logic to say that it's okay to use old, inferior tech in other things just because it's cheaper and/or more cost effective, but saying that it's not okay for a mere low-end console.

So no IPS monitor has the gamer response of 2ms? And why bother with a 5ms IPS when if you really want good colour reproduction you should look into the professional Dell monitors? I'm not going to bother with this point any more as you don't seem to understand the market for which IPS monitors are aimed at.

No one cares about vapour chambers vs heatpipes; what they care about is what is being cooled. When they are cooling chips that are kicking out power from 5 years ago, well, why not just get a 360 or PS3?

 

[luciferano]

So no IPS monitor has the gamer response of 2ms? And why bother with a 5ms IPS when if you really want good colour reproduction you should look into the professional Dell monitors? I'm not going to bother with this point any more as you don't seem to understand the market for which IPS monitors are aimed at.

No one cares about vapour chambers vs heatpipes; what they care about is what is being cooled. When they are cooling chips that are kicking out power from 5 years ago, well, why not just get a 360 or PS3?

You're arguing semantics that don't impact what I said. My point is that we use old tech in pretty much everything to some extent, yet you only began to complain about it when you have hints that the Wii U might have a CPU that is based on an old CPU, yet not only do you not know if this is even true, but even if it is true, you have no accurate way of knowing about how loosely based on that older CPU it is.

Also, the vast majority of gamers don't have a near 2ms response time on their displays, so that's hardly the point of anything. That might be what some higher end gamers shoot for, but even then, that's unlikely. Saying that 2ms is the gamer response is like saying that 120Hz is the gamer refresh rate. Sure, it's great if you can get it (especially if you can get FPS high enough for that without sacrificing on graphics quality), but it is not normal for gamers.

You say that don't care about vapor chambers versus heat pipes, but that doesn't matter. Vapor chambers are superior yet underused compared to heat pipes and that's all that mattered for my argument just as superior hardware than what is in the Wii U might be around these days, but might have been ignored for cost and the probable fact that Nintendo didn't need more performance to achieve their goals.

If you can argue about why we don't use better displays (IPS or not) and better cooling tech (whether it's vapor chambers or something else), then why can't you use that same logic about the Wii U, something that you don't actually even know the hardware specifications for and simply demonized it anyway?

 

[ikaruga]

So no IPS monitor has the gamer response of 2ms? And why bother with a 5ms IPS when if you really want good colour reproduction you should look into the professional Dell monitors? I'm not going to bother with this point any more as you don't seem to understand the market for which IPS monitors are aimed at.

Are you for real, or are you still stuck in 2007? (honest questions)?

It's 2012 now, perhaps trying a good IPS panel and measuring things would be a good idea before you write something on the internet (or go to a professional site like tftcentral or prad and educate yourself a little).

- IPS panels have less input lag
- They do not have as much ugly overshoots and artifacts like TN panels do
- (8ms ISP response time rougly translates to 3ms TN response time)
- IPS panels can actually display colors, playing games on a TN panel is an insult to the hard working artists and game developers.
- you can view them from a wider angle, (so you can actually move your head, or two of you can watch the same screen)
- i could go on.... (and yes, I tested hundreds of them)

"LED" and "TN", these are calling words for clueless rednecks to sell them some overpriced gamer gimmicks. TN is an inferior and old technology, and you are stuck in the past.

 

[mazty]

Are you for real, or are you still stuck in 2007? (honest questions)?

It's 2012 now, perhaps trying a good IPS panel and measuring things would be a good idea before you write something on the internet (or go to a professional site like tftcentral or prad and educate yourself a little).

- IPS panels have less input lag
- They do not have as much ugly overshoots and artifacts like TN panels do
- (8ms ISP response time rougly translates to 3ms TN response time)
- IPS panels can actually display colors, playing games on a TN panel is an insult to the hard working artists and game developers.
- you can view them from a wider angle, (so you can actually move your head, or two of you can watch the same screen)
- i could go on.... (and yes, I tested hundreds of them)

"LED" and "TN", these are calling words for clueless rednecks to sell them some overpriced gamer gimmicks. TN is an inferior and old technology, and you are stuck in the past.

Please explain how input lag (how long in takes something to be displayed) is measured differently between the two types of monitor even though what is being measured is identical.
Yes I know ISP monitors have advantages but to the gaming market, these advantages (better colour ratio) are not as important as the input response. And LED etc are not calling words for "clueless rednecks" - that's just you being a tech snob.

 

[mazty]

You're arguing semantics that don't impact what I said. My point is that we use old tech in pretty much everything to some extent, yet you only began to complain about it when you have hints that the Wii U might have a CPU that is based on an old CPU, yet not only do you not know if this is even true, but even if it is true, you have no accurate way of knowing about how loosely based on that older CPU it is.

Also, the vast majority of gamers don't have a near 2ms response time on their displays, so that's hardly the point of anything. That might be what some higher end gamers shoot for, but even then, that's unlikely. Saying that 2ms is the gamer response is like saying that 120Hz is the gamer refresh rate. Sure, it's great if you can get it (especially if you can get FPS high enough for that without sacrificing on graphics quality), but it is not normal for gamers.

You say that don't care about vapor chambers versus heat pipes, but that doesn't matter. Vapor chambers are superior yet underused compared to heat pipes and that's all that mattered for my argument just as superior hardware than what is in the Wii U might be around these days, but might have been ignored for cost and the probable fact that Nintendo didn't need more performance to achieve their goals.

If you can argue about why we don't use better displays (IPS or not) and better cooling tech (whether it's vapor chambers or something else), then why can't you use that same logic about the Wii U, something that you don't actually even know the hardware specifications for and simply demonized it anyway?

Explain why someone would care about heat pipes vs vapour chambers when they both do the same job (cooling chip to a necessary temp) whereas certain CPU's obviously do not perform as required, or expected (wii u CPU weaker then 360 & PS3).

Going on about parts of the hardware which do not effect the gaming aspect of the console is a complete tangent. 120hz is not the gamer refresh rate as that applies to 3d. Reducing input lag on the other hand does matter. Your argument shows a complete misunderstanding of focusing on the hardware that effects the gaming aspect of a console. Instead you may as well be arguing why the wii isn't made out of graphine or something just as ridiculous. It's a game console, not a fighter jet.
However you are missing the point entirely - the entire contents of the wii u seems outdated and therefore how can it be seen good value for money when you can just pick up the 360 or PS3 which, let's not forget, also play a lot of the same games as the Wii U.

 

[luciferano]

Please explain how input lag (how long in takes something to be displayed) is measured differently between the two types of monitor even though what is being measured is identical.
Yes I know ISP monitors have advantages but to the gaming market, these advantages (better colour ratio) are not as important as the input response. And LED etc are not calling words for "clueless rednecks" - that's just you being a tech snob.

IPS panels have a much more simple and optimized order in how the sub-pixels are organized. I don't know if that would reduce input lag, but it is possible and worth looking into.

 

[mazty]

IPS panels have a much more simple and optimized order in how the sub-pixels are organized. I don't know if that would reduce input lag, but it is possible and worth looking into.

Possibly but I would have thought the measuring method of monitoring the input delay would be the same, hence why the guys original comment is rather baffling.

 

[luciferano]

Explain why someone would care about heat pipes vs vapour chambers when they both do the same job (cooling chip to a necessary temp) whereas certain CPU's obviously do not perform as required, or expected (wii u CPU weaker then 360 & PS3).

Going on about parts of the hardware which do not effect the gaming aspect of the console is a complete tangent. 120hz is not the gamer refresh rate as that applies to 3d. Reducing input lag on the other hand does matter. Your argument shows a complete misunderstanding of focusing on the hardware that effects the gaming aspect of a console. Instead you may as well be arguing why the wii isn't made out of graphine or something just as ridiculous. It's a game console, not a fighter jet.
However you are missing the point entirely - the entire contents of the wii u seems outdated and therefore how can it be seen good value for money when you can just pick up the 360 or PS3 which, let's not forget, also play a lot of the same games as the Wii U.

120Hz doesn't necessarily mean anything related to 3D. I've played games using 120Hz displays for regular gaming and it was noticeably smoother than my 60Hz displays. I wasn't saying that it's the gamer refresh rate, I was saying that calling it that is no less unreasonable than calling 2ms the gamer response time and nothing that you've said has proven otherwise.

Someone should care about vapor chambers because a lot of issues causing console hardware failure are related to the cooling. Better cooling could help that and vapor chambers could provide better cooling, especially in such compact form factors.

You're missing the point. Not only do you say that the Wii U seems outdated without actually knowing anything about its performance, but you claim that even if this is true, it's bad when other outdated things aren't bad. It's entirely impossible to assert the value of something without even knowing what it actually is or at least how it performs and I'm willing to bet that you don't know that based on this conversation.

I'm not misunderstanding anything except why you are using double-sided logic.

 

[luciferano]

Possibly but I would have thought the measuring method of monitoring the input delay would be the same, hence why the guys original comment is rather baffling.

It might be, but if the pixels are easier to work with, then not only is it possible that they can display something more quickly than conventional LCD tech, but it's also possible that other, better hardware can be used to better effect in these displays, especially given that they're mostly fairly high-end displays AFAIK. For example, any hardware used to monitor and write input to the display itself might be better.

IDK why it would mean that response times are different between them unless response times refer to only how long it takes the displays to know that they need to display a frame instead of how long it takes to display a frame once they know that they need to display it. If this is the case, then my above theories might come into play here. Maybe a Google search will be more helpful, so I'll give that a try.