(Rumour) Wii U has quad core 3GHz CPU, 768 MB/1GB of DRAM
- Thread starter heartgold
- Start date
- Views 3,803
- Replies 35
D
Deleted_171835
Guest
D
Deleted User
Guest
...and then both the PS4 and the Next Xbox come out, slapping Wii U in the face with its own "revolutionary" tablet controller
D
Deleted_171835
Guest
This is coming out 5-6 years too late already. This one isn't even on par with the ps3.
The Wii was one generation late and now this one is too. Nintendo are always gonna be one step behind from now on.
LAst I checked, a 3Ghz quad core is nothing, even for 5 years ago. I mean look at the PS3 CPU, it's better than that.
The Wii was one generation late and now this one is too. Nintendo are always gonna be one step behind from now on.
LAst I checked, a 3Ghz quad core is nothing, even for 5 years ago. I mean look at the PS3 CPU, it's better than that.
- Joined
- Feb 10, 2009
- Messages
- 5,484
- Trophies
- 2
- Location
- Sacramento, California
- Website
- lazerlight.x10.mx
- XP
- 5,491
- Country
/facepalm
The PS3 has one CPU with one core and multiple SPEs. SPEs are not cores. Besides, architecture makes a difference, and the PS3's CPU architecture is at least 5 years old based on launch date. Older when taking into account its actual development.
I wonder when console manufacturer will switch their home systems from PPC to ARM...
A quad core ARM + quad gpu + a handful of ram would be certainly more cost effective, more power efficient, more reliable, more developer friendly, than those horrible ppc that just transform your console into disposable toasters.
A quad core ARM + quad gpu + a handful of ram would be certainly more cost effective, more power efficient, more reliable, more developer friendly, than those horrible ppc that just transform your console into disposable toasters.
fgvhsdfghksd
Ghz and number of cores doesn't mean shit, people.
Older Processors.
The "Intel Pentium D" (dual core) 2.66GHz processor scores 679.
Newer Processors.
The "Intel Core 2 Duo P7350" (dual core) 2.00ghz processor scores 1,401, even though it's got the same number of cores and "less ghz".
Also more cores don't really mean much for a gaming console, which generally runs one or two things at once (such as the game and an overlay). Even PC gaming rarely uses more than 2-3 cores, and that's on some of the latest games.
Two things benefit from more cores; highly-paralleled tasks, and systems with many concurrent tasks. Gaming doesn't really fall into the first to the point that going quad-core would bring a noticeable benefit to game performance (so why would Nintendo spend the money?), and traditionally console systems don't have a ton of background tasks like PCs do. If they ARE using quad-chips with one or two cores disabled though, that would be a lot cheaper, and it looks like modern game systems do intent to try to replace PCs to an extent when it comes to entertainment (such as netflix and crap), but that still doesn't count much for background tasks (unless they have a core dedicated to AP or something
).
And anyways, the PS3's processor isn't powerful compared to a PC's, that's an old myth. The reason it's being used for scientific stuff is because the number of cores makes it very good for parallel tasks and it's cheaper than other systems that are set up that way, so you can hook up a couple as a cheap many-core cluster. It's definitely not the same sort of thing as a normal desktop, in fact the PS3's processor as-is would run normal desktop stuff quite crappily since most things are still dual-threaded at the most and the pre-core clock is relatively low.
And blah blah blah blah "shit doesn't work like that" some more.
Ghz and number of cores doesn't mean shit, people.
Older Processors.
The "Intel Pentium D" (dual core) 2.66GHz processor scores 679.
Newer Processors.
The "Intel Core 2 Duo P7350" (dual core) 2.00ghz processor scores 1,401, even though it's got the same number of cores and "less ghz".
Also more cores don't really mean much for a gaming console, which generally runs one or two things at once (such as the game and an overlay). Even PC gaming rarely uses more than 2-3 cores, and that's on some of the latest games.
Two things benefit from more cores; highly-paralleled tasks, and systems with many concurrent tasks. Gaming doesn't really fall into the first to the point that going quad-core would bring a noticeable benefit to game performance (so why would Nintendo spend the money?), and traditionally console systems don't have a ton of background tasks like PCs do. If they ARE using quad-chips with one or two cores disabled though, that would be a lot cheaper, and it looks like modern game systems do intent to try to replace PCs to an extent when it comes to entertainment (such as netflix and crap), but that still doesn't count much for background tasks (unless they have a core dedicated to AP or something
).And anyways, the PS3's processor isn't powerful compared to a PC's, that's an old myth. The reason it's being used for scientific stuff is because the number of cores makes it very good for parallel tasks and it's cheaper than other systems that are set up that way, so you can hook up a couple as a cheap many-core cluster. It's definitely not the same sort of thing as a normal desktop, in fact the PS3's processor as-is would run normal desktop stuff quite crappily since most things are still dual-threaded at the most and the pre-core clock is relatively low.
And blah blah blah blah "shit doesn't work like that" some more.
That's harsh, some people have limited knowledge.
People away think higher GHZ means higher performance, that is far from true unless they are the same architecture. Simple way to put it, power7 processor is more capable than the PS3/X360 ones.
@Rydian: Devs kits are rumored to have 4 cores, one core is locked out for the OS, i assume one other will be used for the controller processing and the remaining for the actual game. if they do go for the quad core, It'll be in full use most likely.
Kind of harsh...
I have a feeling that, it doesn't matter what the specs say, someone going to say we need more power or this is last gen hardware and
any other belittling comment...
'd
- Joined
- Sep 25, 2008
- Messages
- 563
- Trophies
- 1
- Location
- The Pirate Homeworld
- Website
- Visit site
- XP
- 265
- Country
I dont know how well a 3ghz power pc quad core performs but considering a 3ghz quad core would barely hold back a modern gaming pc I think it will do just fine. really the most interesting factor here is the gpu and also if the gpu supports newer instructions also found in dx11 (this has nothing to do with actual specs but can make a big difference) . The ram could be a limiting factor at 768mb I know this is no pc but higher amounts of ram could be very beneficial for loading times and such especially when using optical disks to read the games of.
How is a standard PowerPC quad-core CPU in any way similar to a Xenon Tri-Core except being based on the PowerPC architecture and having the same instruction set?
Also an elephant embedded in a mouse, this fall!
We already know it's going to be a custom version of the R770. Also, ATi's been out of the game for years now, let's officially call it AMD and forget about the no longer existing ATi.
Similar threads
