Slashdot Mirror
Nintendo Wii U Teardown Reveals Simple Design
Vigile writes "Nintendo has never been known to be very aggressive with its gaming console hardware and with today's release (in the U.S.) of the Wii U we are seeing a continuation of that business model. PC Perspective spent several hours last night taking apart a brand new console to reveal a very simplistic board and platform design topped off with the single multi-chip module that holds the IBM PowerPC CPU and the AMD GPU. The system includes 2GB of GDDR3 memory from Samsung and Foxconn/Hon-Hai built wireless controllers for WiFi and streaming video the gamepad. Even though this system is five years newer, many analysts estimate the processing power of Nintendo's Wii U to be just ahead of what you have in the Xbox 360 today."
that's the nintendo way. which device from them had a complicated board or cutting edge performance?
world was created 5 seconds before this post as it is.
Would it be better than a PS3 in terms of processing power?
Red means you're seeing the future.
Of course, part of the problem is just how you define 'Just ahead of'. Part of the problem in the last cycle with the PS3 particularly, from what I undestand, was the complexity of developing the software for the multi-core Cell processor architecture. Even if the speed of the Wii U overall isn't much better overall, the fact that the architecture is simpler may make it easier for developers to wring better performance out of their games. The fastest system in the world isn't going to matter if it's so hard to develop for that you end up writing poorly performant code.
We'll have to wait and see how well newly released titles post-launch are able to do with the new hardware.
The WiiU is able to handle many multiplatform games in 1080p that the existing consoles can barely run at 720p. That alone suggests it's at least 2x more powerful or so. Also consider that developers have had far longer to optimize to the other consoles, and it could be even more capable. And what's more, it has 4x the 360's RAM.
It may not be as different from the PS3 / 360 as they were from the PS2 / Xbox, but saying it's barely an improvement over the current crop is clearly bullshit.
Sounds like it would make a great media player for a change.
"You're right," Fisheye says. "I should have set it on 'whip' or 'chop.'"
since we are talking about WiiU (and I have Wii, and like it), I am wondering: will the Zelda Twilight Princess run in full HDMI resolution on new Wii U? Or it will have the "original" pretty low resolution?
What about other Wii games?
#
#\ @ ? Colonize Mars
#
i don't know exactly what that means, but i hope it's not headshot.
Somewhat misleading. While the CPU power of the Wii U most certainly lies in the realm of what you see in the 360 (rumor is it's basically a 3 core, overclocked Wii processor), the video power is a decent step up. We're talking about a semi modern GPU that supports all sorts of bells and whistles none of the last gen consoles did. The Wii U will most certainly be left in the dust by the PS4/720, but the beautiful thing about it is that it should probably be able to play next gen multi-platform ports in 720p. Which will be fine for most people, as half the HDTVs out there are only 720p to begin with (and look just fine).
Well, I should fucking hope so. The XBOX 360 is seven years old.
I (probably wrongly) smell a Virtual Boy jab.
You can hold down the "B" button for continuous firing.
Calm down, it's a console, that's all.
When you get right down to it: why does the CPU and GPU grunt under the hood matter? Only so they can power the graphics, physics, and AI effects of the games. Come up with a game that's fun to play, and people won't care how powerful the console is, as long as that game will run. We're seeing this play out in a major way on the iPhone and iPad.
And there's a downside too. The more grunt the system has, the harder it becomes to make effective use of that grunt. The PS3, so powerful with its SPUs, is a right royal pain to code for; the Xbox 360, with three more traditional (albeit in-order) CPU cores, is much easier to cope with, so the net effect - especially early on - was that there wasn't much to choose between them, game wise. (The gap might be widening a little, now that coders are more used to the PS3 design, but I'd be surprised.)
So I don't see anything inherently wrong with Nintendo building a system that's "obsolete" technology wise, as long as they focus on bringing games that are fun to play to the party.
We'll see how this plays out when Sony and Microsoft bring out their next consoles. I doubt they're in any particular hurry, though; developing a high end system is expensive, and they may want to milk their existing franchise for a year or two longer.
It allowed for Waverace to run a circular wave model for the entire course at once. Gauging consoles against the PC model that Xbox introduced is fallacy.
Well, what do you expect with a system-on-a-chip? A modern high-volume consumer product should have one IC. That's the whole point of SOIC. It's a bit hard for phones, because they have all those radios that need some isolation, but a modern game console ought to have a very low parts count. Makes assembly very cheap, too.
the Virtual Boy did fail hard, but i always thought it was a uniquely fun system. not refuting your point, i just hate seeing the derision heaped upon the Virtual Boy, it doesn't deserve all that.
nobody's perfect
Wii U has a fucking POWER7 with 4 cores, the cpu alone is more powerful that the xbox 360
I have no doubt that nothing was cut from the version of the POWER7 that ships in $5k+ servers in the process of designing a $300 console...
I'm not sure they really had a choice. Nintendo can't afford to subsidize the hardware for the next five years before it can turn a profit, so this allows them to be price competitive without going bankrupt.
in time for Christmas w/o having to wait in line overnight or visiting every Best Buy, Wal-Mart, GameStop, and Toys R Us in the county would be a nice feature too.
Incorrect. It's neither a quad core nor POWER7. It's basically a triple core version of what's in the Wii but clocked higher. Some developers have said that it's weaker than the Xbox 360 and PS3 in terms of CPU.
http://hothardware.com/News/IBM-Confirms-WII-U-Utilizes-PowerBased-CPU-Not-Power-7/
Mada mada dane.
Couldn't you just use a small-form-factor PC if you want homebrew games and a media player?
Just as lots of homebrew coolness has come out of the Wii controller, it'd be interesting to find out if something similar can be done for the Wii U controller.
The Wii Remote was special because it was a relatively cheap accelerometer wand. But I just don't really see the unique selling point of the Wii U GamePad over an Android tablet, especially once this Archos product that combines an Android tablet with traditional gaming buttons comes out.
Maybe even implement a PC display driver so people could use it as a cheap extra screen for their home computer.
If you just want to show PC graphics on a tablet, I seem to remember VNC clients being available for Android tablets.
Come up with a game that's fun to play, and people won't care how powerful the console is, as long as that game will run.
Just "a game that's fun to play" will get you nowhere. You also need an established publisher in order to get the game out of the PC ghetto.
Och! Time for a Wi cluster in the server room laddie!
It could very well be a POWER7-based design. Key word "based". Nobody (well, nobody with two brain cells) is saying they put a full POWER7 chip in the console.
But here's what they could have done:
Take a stock POWER7 chip. Strip it down to 4 cores - or maybe down to triple- or dual-core. Strip out some of the more redundant execution units (decimal float? four floating-point units?). Cut down on the massive cache. Cut out all the multi-socket stuff, the ECC support, trim down the memory controller to what a console needs, and lower the clock speed to keep the heat down.
That probably just cut your performance to under a quarter of a full POWER7, but it probably cut your costs down even more, to something that could actually fit in a console.
It does not mean "very simple".
Nintendo is keeping the same game development track they always have. When the option came to going with CDs they opted for another Generation of Carts. MS and Sony decided to do a Chinese Great Leap Forward with the PS3 and 360 and Nintendo stated very clearly that it would increase development cost too quickly. All Sony and MS did with the added cost was make it so they have a System that they have to leave out in the market for 8 to 10 years instead of replacing in 5 years. From the Business stand point Nintendo is, and has been, making the better choices on that side of things. It's better to be in the black in the short term then in the Red and hope that you get into the black in the long term.
Even though this system is five years newer, many analysts estimate the processing power of Nintendo's Wii U to be just ahead of what you have in the Xbox 360 today.
That may be so, but the style of play and the games themselves are still much more appealing to certain people, generally those who are considered casual gamers. The Wii hardware was a joke compared to that of the PS3 or XBOX 360, but the games were interesting and involving for folks who didn't want to spend hours upon hours leveling-up and shooting people, and Nintendo had Mario, Zelda, etc. It isn't all about processing power, which is why the Wii was able to sell so well despite lacking in capabilities. Expect the Wii U to be hard to find in the USA by Christmas time, since it is reasonably priced, adds significant functionality (1080p, innovative controllers), has no new competitors, and is launching with a number of pretty decent looking games.
This is a hacked account, for which the owner can not be held responsible.
Its a tablet without a brain. It is a fancy remote control which makes it somewhat cheaper.
They made a profit on day one with the Wii. This should be similar.
Its certainly nothing like the Xbox or PS where every device loses the company hundreds of dollars each time.
The KISS principle is the best engineering principle
I'd love to get ahold of one of those. If indeed it's what you say it is (source?), that's one hell of a computer. I wonder how long until someone's ported linux to it...
~/ssh slashdot.org ssh: connect to host slashdot.org port 22: too many beers
So they've not moved from POWER to x64 - they're just using the (ATI) GPU, and that's the part that is AMD. So looks like the game makers are probably happy w/ POWER, and it would probably remain their CPU of choice. Nothing in it for ARM either - looks like they'll either go w/ POWER, or MIPS.
Spoken like a true PC gamer. Keep in mind that the Xbox 360 has *only* 512 MiB RAM and yet performs well. How much RAM did your laptop have at the launch of the Xbox 360 back in November 2005? Probably more than 512 MiB.
... the Nintendo model is to achieve the highest fun/$ ratio and to provide entertainment.
I think you hit the nail on the head here. Absolutely.
It sure looked to me like Sony and Microsoft were busy off in a pissing match about which system had better graphics. Meanwhile, Nintendo was busy making thingsfun.
I've watched friends play some of the most successful FPS games, and frankly the game play is monotonous and boring. They sit intent with their thumbs flying and not much else going on, largely isolated. If they're communicating it's with mostly unknowns on a headset (yes there have been a few WoW marriages, I know). The "Level too easy? Make everything darker" design mocks the past generations' attention to level complexity. They hire big-name actors to attach videos to the game when the story lines make Sierra games look like Hamlet. I really don't get this, since a well-constructed game ought to have quite a market advantage.
Conversely, I've watched other friends play, say, Wi Bowling, and they were legitimately having a fun time. The game was kind of stupid, but it was an enabler of social interaction, not a substitute for it. This becomes a much richer experience because the game is just a focal point, not the entirety of the experience. Not entirely unlike a dart-board in tavern in that way.
Mario Kart Wii, for instance, might be kinda simple, but it's an absolute blast to play with a bunch of friends and a few beers. And my wife and I have had a lot of fun playing co-op Donkey Kong Country Returns. And we've had good laughs watching neighbors and nephews and nieces playing Super Mario Wii, at one moment cooperatively where they help each other through hard parts, in the next moment competitively where they pick each other up and throw each other into lava pits. But we're all in the same room -- instead of spread out across the interwebs, communicating only via headsets, we're jostling each other as we round difficult corners, whomping each other with sofa cushions to distract attention as Bowser attacks. The social element is just a lot stronger with Nintendo games than pretty much any other I've played, and at least part of that is thanks to the console design.
Cheers,
"What in the name of Fats Waller is that?"
"A four-foot prune."
Just look how badly Minecraft did on the PC without an established publisher.
You make a good point. Please allow me to amend my statement:
Just "a game that's fun to play" will get you nowhere. If your game isn't in one of the genres traditionally associated with PCs, you also need an established publisher.
In every generation, some retard makes this statement...
I haven't thought of anything clever to put here, but then again most of you haven't either.
The claim is that it uses the same technology as the Power7 chip. It could very well be an overclocked triple core Wii chip made in 45nm SOI with eDRAM. Hint hint.