Hardware Possible Reasoning for the CPU.

[MWisBest]

Since I keep hearing about how the CPU is going to be a let down, I've noticed the GPU looks like it will be pretty decent. Has anybody considered GPGPU? Considering that AMD has made such a push for OpenCL in recent times, it would make a lot of sense to have a slightly less powerful CPU if GPGPU could be put to good use.

Thoughts?

 

[Deleted_171835]

Already discussed in the other thread. But yes, it seems Nintendo is hoping that the GPGPU functions will help with the supposedly sub-par CPU.

 

[MWisBest]

Already discussed in the other thread. But yes, it seems Nintendo is hoping that the GPGPU functions will help with the supposedly sub-par CPU.

Sorry, I haven't been following Wii U much and was only just told about some of these things by a friend. My only worry is that GPGPU can't be applied in every situation, and there will be issues where it can't be with certain games.

 

[Foxi4]

Already discussed in the other thread. But yes, it seems Nintendo is hoping that the GPGPU functions will help with the supposedly sub-par CPU.

Supposedly being the keyword here, all signs on heaven and earth show that there's no way it's less capable than the CPU's of its current competition.

 

[Maxternal]

My only worry is that GPGPU can't be applied in every situation, and there will be issues where it can't be with certain games.

Technically, it can do pretty much anything the main processor can but just has to be programmed differently. It's like having a fourth processor core that has to be programmed in a different language but can still interact fine with the other cores.

Any game should be able to use it as long as the developers are willing to take the effort to do so.

 

[MWisBest]

My only worry is that GPGPU can't be applied in every situation, and there will be issues where it can't be with certain games.

Technically, it can do pretty much anything the main processor can but just has to be programmed differently. It's like having a fourth processor core that has to be programmed in a different language but can still interact fine with the other cores.

Any game should be able to use it as long as the developers are willing to take the effort to do so.

That's the thing, I don't think every developer is going to want to take the effort to do it from scratch. I think the SDK is going to have to pull through to make it more accessible to developers, and the SDK will either be the rise or the downfall of the Wii U.

 

[Foxi4]

Uhm... so, for those who want to know more: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/GPGPU

The short version is that yes, this technology allows the GPU to perform calculations normally reserved for the CPU... but! The architectures of GPU's and CPU's differ. GPU's perform better as far as floating point operations are concerned, but they lack in areas in which CPU's excel, for example encoding or compressing. A skillful programmer keeps that in mind and divides tasks in a way that will allow the best performance.

GPGPU allows you to push away the tasks the CPU would be slow at anyways to the GPU where they are performed and merely ask for the results of the calculation later - that's the idea.

To better picture it, imagine two students writing an exam - one knows the answers to some questions, the other knows the answers to the rest. They share a connection - let's call it a cheat sheet, which they pass to each other so that they both receive a perfect score without being good at every excercise. That cheat sheet is GPGPU.

 

[Rydian]

Well a GPGPU can compress video and such quite well (since GPUs were originally made to output huge sets of three numbers, R/G/B parameters and current implementations still aim for this), but it does have to use totally different software than ones that run on the CPU. Tests I've seen on consumer-level GPUs show video encoding is well faster than using a modern CPU, but of course this is using specifically-designed software from the GPU's company as well, which has a lot of work and design in it.

 

[Maxternal]

Well a GPGPU can compress video and such quite well (since GPUs were originally made to output huge sets of three numbers, R/G/B parameters and current implementations still aim for this), but it does have to use totally different software than ones that run on the CPU. Tests I've seen on consumer-level GPUs show video encoding is well faster than using a modern CPU, but of course this is using specifically-designed software from the GPU's company as well, which has a lot of work and design in it.

It's be nice if such software were already designed by Nintendo and included in the SDK ... none of us poor simpletons who don't actually work for a game developer will ever know, though.

 

[tronic307]

Already discussed in the other thread. But yes, it seems Nintendo is hoping that the GPGPU functions will help with the supposedly sub-par CPU.

Supposedly being the keyword here, all signs on heaven and earth show that there's no way it's less capable than the CPU's of its current competition.

Tekken series producer Katsuhiro Harada and Akihiro Suzuki, producer of the Dynasty Warriors franchise have complained about the low clock speed and/or processing power of the Wii U CPU. On the other hand, praise for the Wii U GPU has been virtually universal. Judging from these hints, and the factors of necessary Wii backwards compatibility, and a TDP of 40-45W total, we can arrive at an expectation of 6-10x Broadway for the Wii U CPU, but 25-30x Hollywood for the GPU. The GPGPU seems to be where most of the floating-point action is on the Wii U. I expect Nintendo to make brilliant use of GPGPU, as will some 3rd-party exclusives. Wii U GamePad implementation could raise the budget for ports; to ask these developers to re-factor their code for GPGPU might be a tough sell. All things considered, I expect the Wii U to be a cut above the current generation: It will be like an SNES with a SuperFX chip vs a Genesis with "blast processing".

 

[iNFiNiTY]

A cut above 6 year old hardware. Shouldn't this be EXPECTED not celebrated?

 

[TripleSMoon]

A cut above 6 year old hardware. Shouldn't this be EXPECTED not celebrated?

Perhaps, if Sony and M$ drones didn't keep posting around all these BS rumors about how the Wii U's hardware still won't be as powerful as the PS3 or 360.

 

[Rydian]

Well a lot of focus is on numbers that really don't matter. Like the PS3's Cell Processor. Everybody talked about the theoretical power, number of cores, and the GFLOPS when all are combined. But that doesn't mean better-running games. Actual examples of uses would matter more, like some tech demo akin to what Valve's put out showing shader and particle/AI stuff. That's technical stuff that even a normal player can instantly tell a difference between. If you show some guy a particle demo and the PS2 can manage 500 particles and the PS3 can manage 50,000, even a normal guy can tell that shit's serious.

And when people mention GPUs, do you hear things like "shader computations a second" and "poly/pixel fill rate"? No, you hear "550mhz!!" and "next-gen graphics!", along with doctored-up screenshots. Why not some actual notes of what can be done versus previous generations? Like "Notice the Wii is limited to bump-mapping, while the Wii U can do actual surface deformation", and then show the differences.

But nope, buzzwords, buzzwords, buzzwords.

Yes, "ghz" is a buzzword, and I'm not the happiest about it.

 

[godreborn]

why does it matter how powerful the wii u? there have been games from popular series that were a major letdown this gen final fantasy 13. the added power did nothing but change the priorities of the development staff. if I wanted raw power, I'd be a pc gamer. that's my opinion anyway.

 

[Rydian]

why does it matter how powerful the wii u? there have been games from popular series that were a major letdown this gen <cough>final fantasy 13</cough>. the added power did nothing but change the priorities of the development staff. if I wanted raw power, I'd be a pc gamer. that's my opinion anyway.

Well if a new system came out and was only as powerful as the PS1, that'd really limit the games that could be run on it, and developers might put their games on other systems instead that can run them.

Can't run Crysis on an SNES, after all (for a more extreme example).

 

[godreborn]

regardless, I don't think gamers should expect supercomputer capabilities on a system that costs $350 and even less to manufacture. personally, I think most developers want less powerful systems due to the high cost of development. it seems like a number of developers go bankrupt every gen with this gen creating the most casualties. high dev costs usually equal sequel after sequel of lesser and lesser quality. aside from indies, no big developer will want to focus on new ips at the risk of losing a lot of money.

 

[TripleSMoon]

regardless, I don't think gamers should expect supercomputer capabilities on a system that costs $350 and even less to manufacture. personally, I think most developers want less powerful systems due to the high cost of development.

A WHOLE crapton of third-party titles that never appeared on the Wii would like to have a word with you.

 

[godreborn]

regardless, I don't think gamers should expect supercomputer capabilities on a system that costs $350 and even less to manufacture. personally, I think most developers want less powerful systems due to the high cost of development.

A WHOLE crapton of third-party titles that never appeared on the Wii would like to have a word with you.

well, I think a lot of those were to finance 360/ps3 titles. there was an article that said most ps3 games had to sell at least half a million to break even. if u count every ps3/360 game, it's likely less than 10 percent that have sold more than that.

plus, games like wii fit sold like 25 million which is 3 times more than black ops which is on two systems. u may not like it, but it's the nature of things. I can't imagine the development costs of next gen.

I might also say that it's delusional to expect graphics, processing power, etc. yet not pay for it. that's the reason for the bs dlc on the disc crap. development costs have spiraled out of control. I can say I'd rather play final fantasy vi any day of the week than final fantasy xiii. more power doesn't exactly make a better game. all it does is channel the budget in another direction.

 

[TripleSMoon]

well, I think a lot of those were to finance 360/ps3 titles. there was an article that said most ps3 games had to sell at least half a million to break even. if u count every ps3/360 game, it's likely less than 10 percent that have sold more than that.

plus, games like wii fit sold like 25 million which is 3 times more than black ops which is on two systems. u may not like it, but it's the nature of things. I can't imagine the development costs of next gen.

It has nothing to do with whether I like it or not (I'm an admitted Nintendo fanboy myself), it has to do with what real-world examples show. And real world examples from this generation (Wii, 360, PS3) show that if Nintendo is too far behind the other two in terms of power, they'll get abandoned for multiplat support.

In short, power doesn't make a system better, of course. But power does DEFINITELY matter, no matter how much any of us wish it were otherwise.

 

[Rydian]

regardless, I don't think gamers should expect supercomputer capabilities on a system that costs $350 and even less to manufacture. personally, I think most developers want less powerful systems due to the high cost of development. it seems like a number of developers go bankrupt every gen with this gen creating the most casualties. high dev costs usually equal sequel after sequel of lesser and lesser quality. aside from indies, no big developer will want to focus on new ips at the risk of losing a lot of money.

We're not talking supercomputers, videocards from two years ago are already 19 times as powerful as the PS3.

The issue with game companies going bankrupt is usually their own fault, not the fault of the console. Make a shitty game, and people won't buy it. Hell, people are already predicting another video game crash due to the huge influx of shitty titles that had way too much spent on them, too many "HD" ports, etc.

Look at PC games like Minecraft. It was originally coded by a single hairy swedish dude, and now the development team is like, an entire five people, but it's one of the best-selling games of all time. Then look at all the generic-level games coming out for modern systems that have so little point that the commercials don't even show any gameplay, think about all the fees and money used to make shit games, and wonder who's at fault when a game dies?

Of course there's also things the system is in control of, like not putting your games in a country and then bitching that the country is pirating the games instead.

But yeah, usually when a game dies, it's the Dev's fault. Either they did something they shouldn't (spent way too much on low-content games, hyped features that weren't even in the game at the time and never made it in, and so on), or didn't do something they should (no advertising at all, not getting feedback and actually changing things in development, and so on).

When some guy can fire up XNA and make Terraria and sell millions, you have to look at all the companies making shitty console games and shake your head. Check the article for info on what caused the latest crash, compare that to the actions of a lot of upcoming games, and notice a pattern.

And no, I'm NOT talking about bit companies like Square. I'm talking about all the OTHER companies that are suddenly trying to muscle in on the whole gaming thing, and are just shoveling out bad titles. Go to your local walmart or something and look at the game rack, and I bet you've never even heard of half the games there, because there's nothing to discuss about them, they don't stand out, they don't do anything new or different, they're just trying to cash in.

Okay, I guess that does count Disney and stuff making tie-in movie video games, but movie tie-ins are like, god's promise or something. "Spaceballs the flamethrower!"