WiiU Specs unveiled: PC gaming officially cheaper than console gaming.

 Pages 1 2 NEXT
 

So I've read this article where people opened a WiiU and placed the chips under microscopes and found out the exact hardware specs of the WiiU console.
http://www.eurogamer.net/articles/df-hardware-wii-u-graphics-power-finally-revealed
It features a processor with 3 cores at 1.6 ghz each.
And a graphics card 3 times weaker than a modern 150$ computer graphics card.
Comparing the specs,one can build a PC tower with the same money that will be FAR MORE POWERFUL than WiiU that will be able to do 1080p in all games with the same if not higher detail settings.
So if until recently PC gaming was cheaper only regarding the prices of the games,now it is also cheaper hardware-wise.
I am impressed.

Yeah, I'l liking the outlook of the next console gen.

I think my AMD 7870 is going to be a very valid card for a very long time :D

Well you are sure in a way better position than WiiU owners.
This news story just verifies what we've been already thinking.
A PC with your graphics card can play at good settings games that WiiU can't even run.
Modern games like Far Cry 3 couldn't run on it even at SD 480p with every setting at "low".
Shame. Nintendo should price this hardware like 200-250 euros,not 320-380 euros as it does now.
The value for money ratio is quite bad with this product.

Can the PC play Super mario, smash bros, Zombie U, Monster Hunter, Rayman Legends, Pikmin, or Legend of Zelda; no? Then I'll stick with the Wii U thank you very much.

Andrewtheeviscerator:
Can the PC play Super mario, smash bros, Zombie U, Monster Hunter, Rayman Legends, Pikmin, or Legend of Zelda; no? Then I'll stick with the Wii U thank you very much.

Of course it can't. We are not talking about exclusives or software here,we just comment on that Nintendo makes 200€ worth of hardware and charges it 320€. So you don't care that the company in order to make people buy the system lied and said that that they are selling the hardware at a loss,when in fact you pay almost double price for it ?

If I didn't have to wait 5-10 years to play modern console games on a PC I'd never have to buy anything else. That said, it'll take more than a new Zelda and Shin Megami Tensei x Fire Emblem to get me to drop money on a WiiU, but it's a start.

I'll probably pick one up eventually for the exclusives but yeah as soon as I can afford I'm probably gonna make the jump to PC. Just seems like the better option these days.

Daystar Clarion:
I think my AMD 7870 is going to be a very valid card for a very long time :D

You're welcome :P

PC+Wii U+PS3/4 master race reporting in. I don't have to worry about not getting anything except Halo and Gears of War. I have my PC for graphically awesome games and good multiplats, the PS3/4 for console-exclusive multiplats like Metal Gear Rising, and my Wii U for it's awesome exclusives.

Oh, and you seem to be not noticing the big-ass controller with a touch-screen that comes with the package. That adds about $50 onto the price of every Wii U made. You're also not taking into consideration the other absolute musts for PC gaming, a decent Keyboard and Mouse and a decent Monitor which all add 100 to the price if you shop around well and don't get a crappy 15 inch monitor. So a computer with the same specs as the Wii U would still cost about the same due to those added costs.

Stavros Dimou:
.
A PC with your graphics card can play at good settings games that WiiU can't even run.
Modern games like Far Cry 3 couldn't run on it even at SD 480p with every setting at "low".

That's simply bullshit. The Wii U is actually more powerful than the two other consoles, and they're able to run FC3 at 720p with medium-ish settings. Go look at the 360's and the PS3's specs, they're shit compared to even mid-range computers today.

Stavros Dimou:

Andrewtheeviscerator:
Can the PC play Super mario, smash bros, Zombie U, Monster Hunter, Rayman Legends, Pikmin, or Legend of Zelda; no? Then I'll stick with the Wii U thank you very much.

Of course it can't. We are not talking about exclusives or software here,we just comment on that Nintendo makes 200€ worth of hardware and charges it 320€. So you don't care that the company in order to make people buy the system lied and said that that they are selling the hardware at a loss,when in fact you pay almost double price for it ?

Dude... how the hell would saying "We're selling the console at a loss" get people to buy the system? Nintendo WAS selling the Wii at a profit but that didn't prevent it from becoming one of the best-selling consoles of all time. Nintendo aren't lying about selling it a loss, because they're not.

You're implying that to create a console one has to simply buy the parts and put it in a box like the PC, but it's not that easy. They're using a proprietary graphics card made for the Wii U, that's equivalent to a consumer GPU on the market today. That doesn't mean they're using that GPU. There's manufacturing costs, shipping costs, the costs for the controller, the packaging costs, the costs to keep the company running, the packed in extras such as Nintendo-land and many many more that I'm not businessy enough to know about. PC gaming doesn't have any of those costs because PCs that you build by yourselves aren't made by one company. Look at the massive price difference between a pre-made PC with a brand name on it and buying the parts separately and you'll get my point.

Stavros Dimou:

Andrewtheeviscerator:
Can the PC play Super mario, smash bros, Zombie U, Monster Hunter, Rayman Legends, Pikmin, or Legend of Zelda; no? Then I'll stick with the Wii U thank you very much.

Of course it can't. We are not talking about exclusives or software here,we just comment on that Nintendo makes 200€ worth of hardware and charges it 320€. So you don't care that the company in order to make people buy the system lied and said that that they are selling the hardware at a loss,when in fact you pay almost double price for it ?

Labor. You don't have to assemble the WiiU.

Also, don't have to worry about the other components. Any WiiU game you want to play on it can be reasonably expected to work.

Stavros Dimou:

Comparing the specs,one can build a PC tower with the same money that will be FAR MORE POWERFUL than WiiU that will be able to do 1080p in all games with the same if not higher detail settings.

So remind me, after all the time and energy required to learn how to build a PC and put one together, the PC is still the better value option? Because of a marginal price reduction?

And this is a question coming from someone who built their own rig.

Andrewtheeviscerator:
Can the PC play Super mario, smash bros, Zombie U, Monster Hunter, Rayman Legends, Pikmin, or Legend of Zelda; no? Then I'll stick with the Wii U thank you very much.

I doubt it will take long until they can, Wii emulation came out fairly quickly.

DazZ.:

Andrewtheeviscerator:
Can the PC play Super mario, smash bros, Zombie U, Monster Hunter, Rayman Legends, Pikmin, or Legend of Zelda; no? Then I'll stick with the Wii U thank you very much.

I doubt it will take long until they can, Wii emulation came out fairly quickly.

No it didn't. The Dolphin emulator came out in 2003 (2 years after the launch of the Gamecube) and barely anything worked on it. It was canned and then re-done in 2005, and even then nothing but the best of computers could emulate a Gamecube game really well. Then the Wii came out which was essentially an overclocked Gamecube. It took about 3 years for anything to get stable, and even then only the most powerful of computers did well. Now Wii emulation is alright, but you still need a VERY good computer to diminish constant framerate drops and weird graphical and sound glitches. Now look at the emulation scene for the 360 and PS3, there isn't any good emulation of them almost 7 years after launch. Add onto that the fact that many Wii U exclusives require the gamepad, and we're going to be waiting for a long time before any sort of Wii U emulation comes out, and a longer time after that before it's good enough to be on the standard of the Wii U.

ToastiestZombie:
Add onto that the fact that many Wii U exclusives require the gamepad

You'll be able to get that running on PC eventually, and 3 years for stable gameplay is fairly quick when you consider as you said it's been 7 years for the Xbox/PS3.

DazZ.:

ToastiestZombie:
Add onto that the fact that many Wii U exclusives require the gamepad

You'll be able to get that running on PC eventually, and 3 years for stable gameplay is fairly quick as you say compared to the Xbox/PS3.

3 years for stable gameplay on the Wii, which was essentially just a slightly upgraded Gamecube. So they only had to change a few things to get good Wii emulation. The Wii U is a massive leap from the Wii, so if you think it'll take 3 years or even 5 years for stable Wii U emulation you're being silly. Also, just because they can get the gamepad to work on PCs doesn't mean they'll be able to make it do exactly what it does with the Wii U. The Wii U uses its own special type of wireless connection to transmit the image from the console to the gamepad, trying to recreate that on a PC will take ages. Even when they get it to work it doesn't mean Wii U emulation, it may mean you'll be able to play PC games on it but no Wii U emulation for ages after that. The kinect works really well with PCs, but there hasn't been any emulated Kinect games since its launch.

Stavros Dimou:

Andrewtheeviscerator:
Can the PC play Super mario, smash bros, Zombie U, Monster Hunter, Rayman Legends, Pikmin, or Legend of Zelda; no? Then I'll stick with the Wii U thank you very much.

Of course it can't. We are not talking about exclusives or software here,we just comment on that Nintendo makes 200€ worth of hardware and charges it 320€. So you don't care that the company in order to make people buy the system lied and said that that they are selling the hardware at a loss,when in fact you pay almost double price for it ?

Your assuming that only the hardware specs factor into the cost, did you forget about the gamepad, the one with a large touchscreen in the middle that you can play full games on, I imagine that costs quite a bit to manufacture.

ToastiestZombie:
The kinect works really well with PCs, but there hasn't been any emulated Kinect games since its launch.

Who would want them? Also we've established there isn't 360 emulation so I don't see why porting a peripheral over would make that any different.

so if you think it'll take 3 years or even 5 years for stable Wii U emulation you're being silly.

I haven't specified a timeframe, certainly not with with numbers.

The Wii U uses its own special type of wireless connection to transmit the image from the console to the gamepad, trying to recreate that on a PC will take ages.


Well "they've" got bits of it working already, I'm sure it won't be long before the rest of it does as well (notice how I didn't say a year, so saying I'm silly for thinking it'll be below a certain year is pointless).

Even when they get it to work it doesn't mean Wii U emulation,

Why is this being noted? Of course getting a peripheral working doesn't mean you can emulate completely different hardware...

Oh for God sake...

Look, the Eurogamer article is complete hokum. The Digital Foundry article from which it's taken is hokum.

The photos and analysis of the GPU were done by forum goers at NeoGAF. Eurogamer/DF are just picking and reporting stuff second hand. There's a whole Neogaf thread up and running on the topic. I've been following the thread, and actually posted a thread leading directly to it. And there are quite a few users who are pretty annoyed at how DF/Eurogamer have completely misrepresented the facts thus far:

a) The Wii U GPU is not directly comparable to any off-the-shelf GPU available on the market. DF base their article on the assumption that it is based off R700 architecture. Before these photos, people were assuming that the GPU would at the least have core architecture that makes it comparable to other GPUs, such as the R700. We now know that's not the case at all. This GPU is an almost entirely custom job done by Nintendo and AMD. There's not a lot of off-the-shelf stuff there at all. Everything in the GPU has been tinkered with or redesigned somehow.

b) While direct comparisons are impossible, people are suggesting that a base comparison could be made to a Radeon 4600/4800 series. However, that's only half the picture. The chip has been so heavily modified that many of the people actually analysing the specs believe it may be functionally closer to a 5550 or even a 6760 in terms of output. Again, because the thing is so damn unconventional, no-one really knows. Therefore assumptions cannot be made.

c) There is still a whole load of stuff on the GPU die that hasn't been accounted for yet, which DF/Eurogamer completely ignore. Taken from the updated OP:

Digital Foundry claims that the GPU has a 320:16:8 core config. Even including the ROPs, ARM, DSP, Video codec and command processor this only accounts for 18 out of the 40 logical blocks on there, leaving the majority of the GPU logic unexplained.

DF are trying to offer analysis on the Wii U GPU while knowing less than half of what the logical blocks do. It doesn't matter what sort of tech you're reporting on, that's just bad journalism. If you're trying to make pronouncements on how capable a piece of tech is, make sure you fucking well know what all its parts do. Currently, there are still large parts of the board which are a total bloody mystery.

d) The Wii U currently draws less than half the power of the 360 and the PS3. Around 33W to their figure of 70W+. However the GPU is working, it's doing so with half the leccy of the HD twins. This is where things get really confusing. We know the Wii U is capable of visuals the other two are not, as seen with Trine 2: Directors Cut and Frozenbyte's comments, but it is managing to output those visuals on half the power draw of either the PS3 or 360. The GPU itself is apparently drawing somewhere around 15W of power, possibly more if the other components have lower than standard electricity consumption.

e) Rather than sticking the old Wii GPU on the side of the motherboard to add backwards compatibility, Nintendo seem to have directly integrated the GPU workings of the Wii into the Wii U GPU itself. Essentially, the Wii U GPU has assimilated the Wii GPU into its own workings. What this means is anyone's guess, but many think this means that the BC components can actually be used to improve performance for Wii U games.

f) There's a shitload of eDRAM nestled on the board, which people are still trying out to work out the configuration and fucntion of. Last I checked, the consensus was that the die had eDRAM in a configuration of 32mb/4mb/1mb. Quite if this is the case and how it all works in practise, no-one is yet certain.

The GPU has currently got the actual tech analysts at Neogaf bamboozled, perplexed and confuzzled. The only people complaining on the thread that the system is horribly underpowered are those who haven't done any actual analysis. All the tech analysts seem to be agreeing that this is one slick piece of custom kit. It may not have the raw power of whatever high-end GPUs are currently in Nextbox and PS4, but this thing has been tailored, customised and optimised beyond what you'd expect from a console GPU. This isn't an off-the-shelf card, and you can't compare it as such. While there are a lot of individual components and parts which may be similar to other cards, the whole damn thing is so unconventional in the way it's put together, you can't just assume it's got the same performance as Radeon Model Such-and-such.

The actual thread can be found here, for anyone who's interested. They're still updating it as we speak. Don't give the Eurogamer article the time of day. They trolled you. They took a bunch of info out of context, and presented it counter to what the actual people doing the analysis were saying.

Here's a quite from Jim Morrison, one of the guys at Chipworks who actually did the hi-res photos of the GPU.

Jim Morrison:

Been reading some of the comments on your thread and have a few of my own to use as you wish.

1. This GPU is custom.
2. If it was based on ATI/AMD or a Radeon-like design, the chip would carry die marks to reflect that. Everybody has to recognize the licensing. It has none. Only Renesas name which is a former unit of NEC.
3. This chip is fabricated in a 40 nm advanced CMOS process at TSMC and is not low tech
4. For reference sake, the Apple A6 is fabricated in a 32 nm CMOS process and is also designed from scratch. It's manufacturing costs, in volumes of 100k or more, about $26 - $30 a pop. Over 16 months degrade to about $15 each
a. Wii U only represents like 30M units per annum vs iPhone which is more like 100M units per annum. Put things in perspective.
5. This Wii U GPU costs more than that by about $20-$40 bucks each making it a very expensive piece of kit. Combine that with the IBM CPU and the Flash chip all on the same package and this whole thing is closer to $100 a piece when you add it all up
6. The Wii U main processor package is a very impressive piece of hardware when its said and done.

Trust me on this. It may not have water cooling and heat sinks the size of a brownie, but its one slick piece of silicon. eDRAM is not cheap to make. That is why not everybody does it. Cause its so dam expensive

Andrewtheeviscerator:

Stavros Dimou:

Andrewtheeviscerator:
Can the PC play Super mario, smash bros, Zombie U, Monster Hunter, Rayman Legends, Pikmin, or Legend of Zelda; no? Then I'll stick with the Wii U thank you very much.

Of course it can't. We are not talking about exclusives or software here,we just comment on that Nintendo makes 200€ worth of hardware and charges it 320€. So you don't care that the company in order to make people buy the system lied and said that that they are selling the hardware at a loss,when in fact you pay almost double price for it ?

Your assuming that only the hardware specs factor into the cost, did you forget about the gamepad, the one with a large touchscreen in the middle that you can play full games on, I imagine that costs quite a bit to manufacture.

My mobile phone (Vodafone Smart 2) has a way better and newer technology touch-screen with higher resolution,more colors projection,and multi-touch instead of WiiU's single-touch, and let alone all the other stuff it has (camera,gps,wifi,bluetooth...) it still only costs 99 euros.

DazZ.:

ToastiestZombie:
The kinect works really well with PCs, but there hasn't been any emulated Kinect games since its launch.

Who would want them? Also we've established there isn't 360 emulation so I don't see why porting a peripheral over would make that any different.

so if you think it'll take 3 years or even 5 years for stable Wii U emulation you're being silly.

I haven't specified a timeframe, certainly not with with numbers.

The Wii U uses its own special type of wireless connection to transmit the image from the console to the gamepad, trying to recreate that on a PC will take ages.


Well "they've" got bits of it working already, I'm sure it won't be long before the rest of it does as well (notice how I didn't say a year, so saying I'm silly for thinking it'll be below a certain year is pointless).

Even when they get it to work it doesn't mean Wii U emulation,

Why is this being noted? Of course getting a peripheral working doesn't mean you can emulate completely different hardware...

You said in your original post "I doubt it would take longer until you can", so you're implying at least under 5 years. The fact of the matter is that the Wii U is a much more complicated and a more powerful system than the 360 and PS3, so if you really think Wii U emulation will come at a time before the next Nintendo console or even a big price-drop and many more games.

By "Even when they get it to work it doesn't mean Wii U emulation," I meant that just because they will get it working with the PC doesn't mean they'll be able to emulate what it does with the Wii U. What I'm basically saying is Wii U emulation is going to take a bloody long time; and if you're going to wait for it you'll end up looking like a fool because before Wii U emulation comes out there will most likely be a big price drop, and many more worthwile games will come out for it.

ToastiestZombie:

Stavros Dimou:

Andrewtheeviscerator:
Can the PC play Super mario, smash bros, Zombie U, Monster Hunter, Rayman Legends, Pikmin, or Legend of Zelda; no? Then I'll stick with the Wii U thank you very much.

Of course it can't. We are not talking about exclusives or software here,we just comment on that Nintendo makes 200€ worth of hardware and charges it 320€. So you don't care that the company in order to make people buy the system lied and said that that they are selling the hardware at a loss,when in fact you pay almost double price for it ?

Dude... how the hell would saying "We're selling the console at a loss" get people to buy the system? Nintendo WAS selling the Wii at a profit but that didn't prevent it from becoming one of the best-selling consoles of all time. Nintendo aren't lying about selling it a loss, because they're not.

You're implying that to create a console one has to simply buy the parts and put it in a box like the PC, but it's not that easy. They're using a proprietary graphics card made for the Wii U, that's equivalent to a consumer GPU on the market today. That doesn't mean they're using that GPU. There's manufacturing costs, shipping costs, the costs for the controller, the packaging costs, the costs to keep the company running, the packed in extras such as Nintendo-land and many many more that I'm not businessy enough to know about. PC gaming doesn't have any of those costs because PCs that you build by yourselves aren't made by one company. Look at the massive price difference between a pre-made PC with a brand name on it and buying the parts separately and you'll get my point.

But the prices of the components I chose for the hardware equivalent PC already have these added costs,as I counted full retail prices,including manufacturing and shipping costs,taxes,and store's income. If I didn't added these costs then the production cost of a WiiU would be even less than 200$

Stavros Dimou:
So I've read this article where people opened a WiiU and placed the chips under microscopes and found out the exact hardware specs of the WiiU console.
http://www.eurogamer.net/articles/df-hardware-wii-u-graphics-power-finally-revealed
It features a processor with 3 cores at 1.6 ghz each.
And a graphics card 3 times weaker than a modern 150$ computer graphics card.
Comparing the specs,one can build a PC tower with the same money that will be FAR MORE POWERFUL than WiiU that will be able to do 1080p in all games with the same if not higher detail settings.
So if until recently PC gaming was cheaper only regarding the prices of the games,now it is also cheaper hardware-wise.
I am impressed.

...

Who cares? Why does everyone always put some much care into the graphics of a system? The games are what matters and I am greatly enjoying the games on my Wii U and other consoles that are exclusives.

Why can't gamers use their heads and just accept all consoles/PC and play games for the games?

ToastiestZombie:
PC+Wii U+PS3/4 master race reporting in. I don't have to worry about not getting anything except Halo and Gears of War. I have my PC for graphically awesome games and good multiplats, the PS3/4 for console-exclusive multiplats like Metal Gear Rising, and my Wii U for it's awesome exclusives.

Oh, and you seem to be not noticing the big-ass controller with a touch-screen that comes with the package. That adds about $50 onto the price of every Wii U made. You're also not taking into consideration the other absolute musts for PC gaming, a decent Keyboard and Mouse and a decent Monitor which all add 100 to the price if you shop around well and don't get a crappy 15 inch monitor. So a computer with the same specs as the Wii U would still cost about the same due to those added costs.

Stavros Dimou:
.
A PC with your graphics card can play at good settings games that WiiU can't even run.
Modern games like Far Cry 3 couldn't run on it even at SD 480p with every setting at "low".

That's simply bullshit. The Wii U is actually more powerful than the two other consoles, and they're able to run FC3 at 720p with medium-ish settings. Go look at the 360's and the PS3's specs, they're shit compared to even mid-range computers today.

Explain me how an IBM POWER6 processor with 3 cores running at 1.6Ghz (WiiU) is more powerful than an IBM POWER 6 processor with 3 cores at 3.2Ghz (xbox360) ?

Oh and no,you dont have to add the costs of the monitor in the computer's price. That's like getting a new TV every time you get a new console,and from what I know more than 90% of the people doesn't.

Stavros Dimou:

Andrewtheeviscerator:

Stavros Dimou:

Of course it can't. We are not talking about exclusives or software here,we just comment on that Nintendo makes 200€ worth of hardware and charges it 320€. So you don't care that the company in order to make people buy the system lied and said that that they are selling the hardware at a loss,when in fact you pay almost double price for it ?

Your assuming that only the hardware specs factor into the cost, did you forget about the gamepad, the one with a large touchscreen in the middle that you can play full games on, I imagine that costs quite a bit to manufacture.

My mobile phone (Vodafone Smart 2) has a way better and newer technology touch-screen with higher resolution,more colors projection,and multi-touch instead of WiiU's single-touch, and let alone all the other stuff it has (camera,gps,wifi,bluetooth...) it still only costs 99 euros.

The Vodafone Smart 2 is a phone running on an out of date version of an existing OS(Android), it has a resolution of 320X480 when in comparison all Wii U games are at minimum 720p HD, it can't run anything to the standard of something like Assassin's Creed 3 or Mass Effect 3, it has a single core 832Mhz CPU compared to the Wii U's estimated 1.6 3 core CPU, it has a tiny 130mb of storage compared to the Wii U's 8GB or 32GB, the Wii U has 2 cameras, Wifi support (It doesn't need GPS or bluetooth because it's not a portable system) and it's a goddamn phone made for Facebook, talking to people and texting, not a dedicated gaming console made for HD gaming on a big HD TV with a ton of extra features such as Netflix, Miiverse and Nintendo TVii.

ToastiestZombie:
You said in your original post "I doubt it would take longer until you can", so you're implying at least under 5 years.

No I didn't, I said "long" so wasn't comparing it to anything and not implying any timeframe other than your subjective opinion on the term "long".

The fact of the matter is that the Wii U is a much more complicated and a more powerful system than the 360 and PS3, so if you really think Wii U emulation will come at a time before the next Nintendo console or even a big price-drop and many more games.

I really don't think it is a "much more powerful" system than a PS3/360, which thankfully gets us back on topic of the thread. It is indeed better, but not by much. Although I fear arguing subjective opinions with you will yield numbers and statistics being put in my mouth that I didn't know I was implying.

Compared to the last round of consoles, top end PC hardware this generation is going to be much more advanced than what they were at the last round, meaning where it needed a beefy computer to get stability in the early Wii emulation, I don't think it'll need quite the heft and I'd wager it would run on today's average hardware. Obviously I'm not a time traveller so this is speculation.

ToastiestZombie:

Stavros Dimou:

Andrewtheeviscerator:

Your assuming that only the hardware specs factor into the cost, did you forget about the gamepad, the one with a large touchscreen in the middle that you can play full games on, I imagine that costs quite a bit to manufacture.

My mobile phone (Vodafone Smart 2) has a way better and newer technology touch-screen with higher resolution,more colors projection,and multi-touch instead of WiiU's single-touch, and let alone all the other stuff it has (camera,gps,wifi,bluetooth...) it still only costs 99 euros.

The Vodafone Smart 2 is a phone running on an out of date version of an existing OS(Android), it has a resolution of 320X480 when in comparison all Wii U games are at minimum 720p HD, it can't run anything to the standard of something like Assassin's Creed 3 or Mass Effect 3, it has a single core 832Mhz CPU compared to the Wii U's estimated 1.6 3 core CPU, it has a tiny 130mb of storage compared to the Wii U's 8GB or 32GB, the Wii U has 2 cameras, Wifi support (It doesn't need GPS or bluetooth because it's not a portable system) and it's a goddamn phone made for Facebook, talking to people and texting, not a dedicated gaming console made for HD gaming on a big HD TV with a ton of extra features such as Netflix, Miiverse and Nintendo TVii.

I didn't compared the phone to the main console WiiU,but solely to its gamepad.
And my point was,that even with the cost of the gamepad,the overall retail price of the WiiU is still more than the manufacturing and shipping costs that Nintendo has to pay. Because one of the many points of this thread was to discuss Nintendo's statement that the WiiU is so expensive for them to produce that they loose money with every console they sell.

Stavros Dimou:

Explain me how an IBM POWER6 processor with 3 cores running at 1.6Ghz (WiiU) is more powerful than an IBM POWER 6 processor with 3 cores at 3.2Ghz (xbox360) ?

Oh and no,you dont have to add the costs of the monitor in the computer's price. That's like getting a new TV every time you get a new console,and from what I know more than 90% of the people doesn't.

Alright, so the CPU may be less powerful (but we still don't know because console CPUs aren't as simple as computer CPU's), but it's been confirmed that the GPU is more powerful and you can see this in the Wii U's version of Trine 2, a GPU heavy game. It runs at a standard much, much closer to the PC than the 360's version which looks crap compared to the PC version. It's also been confirmed to have much more RAM than the 360, the 360 has 512mb of shared RAM and the WII has 2gb of RAM (1gb for the games, 1 for the OS), and it's been confirmed to have Nintendo's equivalent of Blu Ray discs compared to the Xbox still uses their equivalent of DVDS (The reason LA Noire came on 3 discs on the 360, compared to 1 on the PS3).

Oh, and are you taking every single thing you need to build a PC into consideration? Here's what you need to build a PC:
.CPU
.GPU
.Motherboard
.Case
.Hardrive
.OS
.Thermal glue
.Fans
.Network card
.It's recommended you get a Disc-Drive
.Keyboard
.Mouse

I can confirm that you can't get a PC of equal or better power for $350.

You're also implying that everyone owns a decent, 1080p monitor. Unless you want to use your PC on your TV you'll have to buy a monitor. Most people buying a desktop PC for the first time don't own a monitor, yet pretty much everyone owns a TV. It's sensible to take that into consideration.

Stavros Dimou:

ToastiestZombie:
PC+Wii U+PS3/4 master race reporting in. I don't have to worry about not getting anything except Halo and Gears of War. I have my PC for graphically awesome games and good multiplats, the PS3/4 for console-exclusive multiplats like Metal Gear Rising, and my Wii U for it's awesome exclusives.

Oh, and you seem to be not noticing the big-ass controller with a touch-screen that comes with the package. That adds about $50 onto the price of every Wii U made. You're also not taking into consideration the other absolute musts for PC gaming, a decent Keyboard and Mouse and a decent Monitor which all add 100 to the price if you shop around well and don't get a crappy 15 inch monitor. So a computer with the same specs as the Wii U would still cost about the same due to those added costs.

Stavros Dimou:
.
A PC with your graphics card can play at good settings games that WiiU can't even run.
Modern games like Far Cry 3 couldn't run on it even at SD 480p with every setting at "low".

That's simply bullshit. The Wii U is actually more powerful than the two other consoles, and they're able to run FC3 at 720p with medium-ish settings. Go look at the 360's and the PS3's specs, they're shit compared to even mid-range computers today.

Explain me how an IBM POWER6 processor with 3 cores running at 1.6Ghz (WiiU) is more powerful than an IBM POWER 6 processor with 3 cores at 3.2Ghz (xbox360) ?

I actually posted a link to the original Neogaf thread a few posts above you, where they do exactly that. Kindly read it. It will explain things much better than I could, regarding the Wii U's memory management, optimisation, higher amounts of RAM, and the fact that the hardware is almost completely custom.

Slightly more on-topic: My other objection with the DF/Eurogamer piece is how it completely misrepresents how information about console specs is obtained.

Digital Foundry:

It took an extraordinary effort to get this far and you may be wondering quite why it took a reverse engineering specialist using ultra-magnification photography to get this information, when we already know the equivalent data for Durango and Orbis. The answer is fairly straightforward - leaks tend to derive from development kit and SDK documentation and, as we understand it, this crucial information simply wasn't available in Nintendo's papers, with developers essentially left to their own devices to figure out the performance level of the hardware.

This is bullshit. The reason we didn't learn anything about the Wii U's specs is because of NDAs. Anyone working in the games industry has to sign an NDA if they want to work on next-gen/unreleased hardware. This basically means, if you get caught leaking anything, you will get the living shit sued out of you and never work in the games industry again.

Those AMD workers who got caught leaking hardware documents for the Nextbox and PS4? AMD is currently suing them to oblivion.

We don't have any confirmed, nailed-down specs for the PS4 and Nextbox. All we have is a bunch of rumours and possible out-of-date documents, which may or may not have come from people breaking their NDAs. Just because a console doesn't get much in the way of specs leaked, that doesn't mean anything. Developers may simply think its not worth getting sued just to put another anonymous rumour up on the internet. Who knows? But acting as if this is some specific flaw of Nintendo's, when it's actually an industry wide practise, is just foolishness.

Stavros Dimou:
Snip

You're simply pulling facts out from thin air because the CPU isn't overly powerful. If Nintendo says they're selling it at a loss, they're goddamn selling it at a loss. Why do you trust your own limited view of how many costs go into building and selling consoles over the word of the president of Nintendo himself? There are a LOT of costs to making one singular piece of tech, and I can guarantee you that you can't get a PC that could run games like Black Ops 2 at 720p at 60fps for under $300.

ToastiestZombie:

Stavros Dimou:

Explain me how an IBM POWER6 processor with 3 cores running at 1.6Ghz (WiiU) is more powerful than an IBM POWER 6 processor with 3 cores at 3.2Ghz (xbox360) ?

Oh and no,you dont have to add the costs of the monitor in the computer's price. That's like getting a new TV every time you get a new console,and from what I know more than 90% of the people doesn't.

Alright, so the CPU may be less powerful (but we still don't know because console CPUs aren't as simple as computer CPU's), but it's been confirmed that the GPU is more powerful and you can see this in the Wii U's version of Trine 2, a GPU heavy game. It runs at a standard much, much closer to the PC than the 360's version which looks crap compared to the PC version. It's also been confirmed to have much more RAM than the 360, the 360 has 512mb of shared RAM and the WII has 2gb of RAM (1gb for the games, 1 for the OS), and it's been confirmed to have Nintendo's equivalent of Blu Ray discs compared to the Xbox still uses their equivalent of DVDS (The reason LA Noire came on 3 discs on the 360, compared to 1 on the PS3).

Oh, and are you taking every single thing you need to build a PC into consideration? Here's what you need to build a PC:
.CPU
.GPU
.Motherboard
.Case
.Hardrive
.OS
.Thermal glue
.Fans
.Network card
.It's recommended you get a Disc-Drive
.Keyboard
.Mouse

I can confirm that you can't get a PC of equal or better power for $350.

You're also implying that everyone owns a decent, 1080p monitor. Unless you want to use your PC on your TV you'll have to buy a monitor. Most people buying a desktop PC for the first time don't own a monitor, yet pretty much everyone owns a TV. It's sensible to take that into consideration.

To be honest,I didn't added a hard drive to the system,because there are no comparable 8gb drives in the market. The drive with the shortest capacity I could find is 256gb (32 times more capacity) and costs 40 euros. I also completely missed the OS.
Now every manufacturer that respects itself adds network cards embed on the motherboards,and every case have a fan.

Also I forgot to note something. Please note that for the comparison I did,I used European prices.
In Europe PC hardware tends to have the same value in Euros as it has in the U.S.A.,but Nintendo prices WiiU at a much higher price in Europe than it does in the U.S.A.
Europe's price for the standard WiiU pack is 320 euros,which is equivalent to 433.18 US dollars.

j-e-f-f-e-r-s:

Stavros Dimou:

ToastiestZombie:
PC+Wii U+PS3/4 master race reporting in. I don't have to worry about not getting anything except Halo and Gears of War. I have my PC for graphically awesome games and good multiplats, the PS3/4 for console-exclusive multiplats like Metal Gear Rising, and my Wii U for it's awesome exclusives.

Oh, and you seem to be not noticing the big-ass controller with a touch-screen that comes with the package. That adds about $50 onto the price of every Wii U made. You're also not taking into consideration the other absolute musts for PC gaming, a decent Keyboard and Mouse and a decent Monitor which all add 100 to the price if you shop around well and don't get a crappy 15 inch monitor. So a computer with the same specs as the Wii U would still cost about the same due to those added costs.

That's simply bullshit. The Wii U is actually more powerful than the two other consoles, and they're able to run FC3 at 720p with medium-ish settings. Go look at the 360's and the PS3's specs, they're shit compared to even mid-range computers today.

Explain me how an IBM POWER6 processor with 3 cores running at 1.6Ghz (WiiU) is more powerful than an IBM POWER 6 processor with 3 cores at 3.2Ghz (xbox360) ?

I actually posted a link to the original Neogaf thread a few posts above you, where they do exactly that. Kindly read it. It will explain things much better than I could, regarding the Wii U's memory management, optimisation, higher amounts of RAM, and the fact that the hardware is almost completely custom.

Slightly more on-topic: My other objection with the DF/Eurogamer piece is how it completely misrepresents how information about console specs is obtained.

Digital Foundry:

It took an extraordinary effort to get this far and you may be wondering quite why it took a reverse engineering specialist using ultra-magnification photography to get this information, when we already know the equivalent data for Durango and Orbis. The answer is fairly straightforward - leaks tend to derive from development kit and SDK documentation and, as we understand it, this crucial information simply wasn't available in Nintendo's papers, with developers essentially left to their own devices to figure out the performance level of the hardware.

This is bullshit. The reason we didn't learn anything about the Wii U's specs is because of NDAs. Anyone working in the games industry has to sign an NDA if they want to work on next-gen/unreleased hardware. This basically means, if you get caught leaking anything, you will get the living shit sued out of you and never work in the games industry again.

Those AMD workers who got caught leaking hardware documents for the Nextbox and PS4? AMD is currently suing them to oblivion.

We don't have any confirmed, nailed-down specs for the PS4 and Nextbox. All we have is a bunch of rumours and possible out-of-date documents, which may or may not have come from people breaking their NDAs. Just because a console doesn't get much in the way of specs leaked, that doesn't mean anything. Developers may simply think its not worth getting sued just to put another anonymous rumour up on the internet. Who knows? But acting as if this is some specific flaw of Nintendo's, when it's actually an industry wide practise, is just foolishness.

Sorry for not replying earlier,I'll read the link right now.

ToastiestZombie:

Stavros Dimou:
Snip

snip

Because the president of Nintendo has a motive to lie: money. His mission is to make it so Nintendo gets as much money as it can. But I don't have a motive to lie,so that's why I trust myself more than Nintendo's president.
The truth is that I tried to find which parts equal similar performance to those of WiiU,and I found out that parts with such specs are so old you can't even find them in stores any more. So by buying the cheapest parts I could find (cpu,gpu,etc..) they would still be more powerful than those used by WiiU.
If you don't believe me and you think that WiiU is a powerhouse,then OK.

Stavros Dimou:

ToastiestZombie:

Stavros Dimou:
Snip

snip

Because the president of Nintendo has a motive to lie: money. His mission is to make it so Nintendo gets as much money as it can. But I don't have a motive to lie,so that's why I trust myself more than Nintendo's president.
The truth is that I tried to find which parts equal similar performance to those of WiiU,and I found out that parts with such specs are so old you can't even find them in stores any more. So by buying the cheapest parts I could find (cpu,gpu,etc..) they would still be more powerful than those used by WiiU.
If you don't believe me and you think that WiiU is a powerhouse,then OK.

You really think the CEO who took a massive pay cut because the 3DS wasn't selling well, who admitted the Wii U didn't have many good games released over Christmas and said sorry for it would say they're losing money on a console just to get more money? Explain to me how "We're selling it at a loss" is a legitimate business practice, because if it was why didn't Nintendo do it for every other of their systems. The truth is, selling at a loss is a very negative thing for a company and share-holders and investors do NOT like it because it means they get much less money. Why would Iwata lie about something that negative just to get a few sympathy buys? You haven't answered that yet.

When did I say I think that it's a powerhouse? It's not, my PC is a powerhouse and my Wii U is my Nintendo exclusive machine.

ToastiestZombie:

Stavros Dimou:

ToastiestZombie:

snip

Because the president of Nintendo has a motive to lie: money. His mission is to make it so Nintendo gets as much money as it can. But I don't have a motive to lie,so that's why I trust myself more than Nintendo's president.
The truth is that I tried to find which parts equal similar performance to those of WiiU,and I found out that parts with such specs are so old you can't even find them in stores any more. So by buying the cheapest parts I could find (cpu,gpu,etc..) they would still be more powerful than those used by WiiU.
If you don't believe me and you think that WiiU is a powerhouse,then OK.

You really think the CEO who took a massive pay cut because the 3DS wasn't selling well, who admitted the Wii U didn't have many good games released over Christmas and said sorry for it would say they're losing money on a console just to get more money? Explain to me how "We're selling it at a loss" is a legitimate business practice, because if it was why didn't Nintendo do it for every other of their systems. The truth is, selling at a loss is a very negative thing for a company and share-holders and investors do NOT like it because it means they get much less money. Why would Iwata lie about something that negative just to get a few sympathy buys? You haven't answered that yet.

When did I say I think that it's a powerhouse? It's not, my PC is a powerhouse and my Wii U is my Nintendo exclusive machine.

Are you kidding me ?
By saying that they sell the system at a loss and hiding the true specs of the system,they make you believe that its much more powerful than what it really is,so you get a perception of value that is fake. Thinking that a product has good value for its money is a very important factor that drives sales. And WiiU simply put,doesn't have a value/money ratio good enough for the costumers.

Stavros Dimou:

Are you kidding me ?
By saying that they sell the system at a loss and hiding the true specs of the system,they make you believe that its much more powerful than what it really is,so you get a perception of value that is fake. Thinking that a product has good value for its money is a very important factor that drives sales. And WiiU simply put,doesn't have a value/money ratio good enough for the costumers.

Sorry, but this is total and utter bull.

If Nintendo were marketing their console as being sold at a loss while not actually selling a loss, their shareholders would crucify them.

Shareholders hate anything being sold at a loss, as it's not as ideal as being sold at a profit. In order to get away with selling at a loss, you have to convince your shareholders that the long term income will outweigh the short term losses. And that isn't always an easy sell.

You're basically arguing, without any shred of evidence, that Nintendo is not only pulling the wool over the gaming industry's eyes by claiming to sell at a loss when they're not, but they're also fooling their own shareholders, for reasons you've not yet given. There's a term for lying to your shareholders. It's called Investment Fraud, and it's illegal.

So yeah, if you've got any evidence that Nintendo is actually taking part in high level stock manipulation, illegal trading and investment fraud, then do please share it with us. Or even better, take it to the authorities. As it is, you're pulling grand claims out of nowhere, without even thinking about what it is you're implying.

And for the record, it is completely conceivable that the Wii U is being sold at a loss. The quote I linked you to already pointed out that the essential hardware of the Wii U (GPU/CPU/Flahs drive) is going to cost them $100 in materials. You then also have to factor the cost of the Gamepad, the disc drive, various other components, and the production cost of putting it all together.

Then you have to remember that Nintendo is selling these consoles to retailers at warehouse price, not retail price. Nintendo isn't selling the Wii U to Walmart and Gamestop for $349. That's how much they're selling it for, in order to get a return on investment. Nintendo is far likelier to be selling it at between $250-300, and at that price it's more than likely that they're taking a loss with each console.

So yeah, feel free to refute those production figures with figures of your own, but stop pulling claims out of nowhere with nothing to substantiate them. And for God sakes, read the thread I linked you to.

 Pages 1 2 NEXT

Reply to Thread

This thread is locked