Wii console specs unvelied

Lost in space
Banned
💻 Oldtimer
Joined
Dec 21, 2003
Messages
3,608
Best answers
0
http://www.theinquirer.net/default.aspx?article=33394
The Inquirer said:
CPU (Broadway)

* Superscalar microprocessor with six execution units (floating-point unit, branching unit, system register unit, load/store unit, two integer units)
* Operating speed of 729 MHz
* Bus to main memory: 243 MHz, 64 bits (maximum bandwidth: 1.9 gigabytes/sec)
* 32-kilobyte 8-way set-associative L1 data cache (can set up 16-kilobyte data scratch pad)
* Onboard 256-kilobyte 2-way set-associative L2 integrated cache
* Supports three L2 cache fetch modes: 32, 64, and 128-Byte
* DMA unit (15-entry DMA request queue) used by 16-kilobyte data scratch pad
* Write-gather buffer for writing graphics command lists to the graphics chip


GPU (Hollywood )

* Operating speed of 243 MHz
* 3 megabytes of *****ded graphics memory
* 24 megabytes of internal main memory
* Internal main memory operates at 486 MHz
* Maximum bandwidth between GPU and main memory: 3.9 gigabytes per second
* The GPU of the Wii is identical to the GC's but it is on average 1.5X faster


Other details

* 64megabytes of GDDR3 external main memory
* Internal non-removable 512MB flash memory used as storage for game save data and downloadable content
* The following interfaces are included with the Wii: SD card slot, Wireless controller, two USB 2.0 ports, wireless LAN, 4x GC controller ports, 2x GC memory card slots and an AV multi output jack (analogue only)
* Two main disc types supported the single sided 12cm single sided 4.7gb and the double sided 8.51 GB. Nintendo GC discs also supported. The maximum read speed is the equivalent of a 6 speed DVD
We already knew that some of the specs were going to be the same as the gamecube, but it seems a few additions and improvements are being made here and there.
 
New Member
Joined
Apr 23, 2005
Messages
462
Best answers
0
Your source is the inquirer....
I'm sorry but I won't believe that anyone has the specs until it actually comes out/a nintendo representative shows them.
 
New Member
💻 Oldtimer
Joined
Jun 8, 2004
Messages
5,216
Best answers
0
It's not really 'next-gen' is it? Not having a jab at Nintendo but those specs seem close to the original Xbox.
 
Lost in space
Banned
💻 Oldtimer
Joined
Dec 21, 2003
Messages
3,608
Best answers
0
clen said:
Your source is the inquirer....
The Inquirer likes to speculate on rumours and actual happenings through out the tech industry, apart from other things.
 
Force Pit Member
Joined
Nov 14, 2002
Messages
767
Best answers
0
well if you look at specs on paper they don't really tell the whole story. On paper the GC was probably the weakest of the 3 systems this generation, but if you craft a game just for it using every inch of it's power of tools (re4) you can get something that looks really amazing. I think the same will happen for the Wii.
 
New Member
Joined
Apr 23, 2005
Messages
462
Best answers
0
Wasn't the gamecube the second strongest in with the ps2 being last?
 
New Member
💻 Oldtimer
Joined
Jun 8, 2004
Messages
5,216
Best answers
0
Yeah, the PS2 was technologically the weakest. It also sold 5x more than the Gamecube and 4x more than the Xbox. Proof that hardware isn't everything. I get the feeling Nintendo now believe that to be true.
 
brainfeeder
💻 Oldtimer
Joined
May 29, 2002
Messages
5,179
Best answers
0
Well is this next gen (PS3, 360) really a huge leap, performance wise?
 
Active Member
💻 Oldtimer
Joined
Jun 18, 2003
Messages
5,935
Best answers
0
Ravendust said:
It's not really 'next-gen' is it? Not having a jab at Nintendo but those specs seem close to the original Xbox.
Spec wise, it seems similar, but the GC was built for gaming where as the XBOX was basically just PC parts in a box. In terms of performace, I believe the Wii should be noticably better than the xbox.
 
New Member
💻 Oldtimer
Joined
Dec 3, 2002
Messages
2,490
Best answers
0
All I'm going to say is that there is a whole host of games already slated to come out "multiplatform" for the next gen and almost universally none of them are slated for the Wii.

Now we know why.
 
New Member
💻 Oldtimer
Joined
Sep 11, 2005
Messages
3,746
Best answers
0
People wont be wondering what specs for the Wii are because they will be too busy playing Twilight Princess.
 
New Member
💻 Oldtimer
Joined
Apr 14, 2005
Messages
4,022
Best answers
0
I don't give a **** what the specs are.

All I know is, from all the ingame footage I've seen so far, it's a very noticeable improvement over the Gamecube's graphics, and that's all I wanted to see.

So **** everything else. Some people just ***** about things too much. =/

I've seen what a 360 can do at full res. and on a HD-capable monitor. But you don't hear me whining about how 'weak' the Wii is going to be.

Ingrates. It's about how much fun the games are and how immersive the gameplay is.
 
New Member
💻 Oldtimer
Joined
Feb 28, 2004
Messages
1,392
Best answers
0
Gameplay > Graphics. Anyone that disagrees is an idiot.
 
Super Moderator
💻 Oldtimer
Discord Linked
Joined
Dec 1, 2001
Messages
3,125
Best answers
0
~*Logan*~ said:
Gameplay > Graphics. Anyone that disagrees is an idiot.
If that were true, they'd still be retailing the NES. Every generation of consoles sets a new standard in the graphics department, if consoles were to take a step back, people would have a ****-fit.

The fact that there are always going to be next-gen consoles blatantly shows the natural progression of the importance of better graphics in the video gaming industry.
 
New Member
💻 Oldtimer
Joined
Dec 3, 2002
Messages
2,490
Best answers
0
People wont be wondering what specs for the Wii are because they will be too busy playing Twilight Princess.
...on the Gamecube.
Ingrates. It's about how much fun the games are and how immersive the gameplay is.
...it doesn't bother you at all that 80% of the multiplatform releases are excluded from the Wii due to hardware limitations?

Either way, it's weak. Nintendo doesn't have the third party support required to keep it afloat in this scenario. It will be dead last in sales and quality for the third generation in a row, I think.

I'm trying to look on the bright side, though--Maybe someday they will deteriorate enough that Sega can usurp power and return to the world of gaming!

Maybe graphics aren't important but I think technological advancements are. Multiple controllers, wireless setups, internet technology, voice chat, physics development, bigger better and faster storage mediums (longer, more in depth games), these are all part of the cycle too. So it's not just 'better graphics' that the more technologically advanced systems are offering. The shortcomings will be universal for any who lag behind, as they have always been in the past. That's just the way history is.
 
New Member
Joined
Apr 23, 2005
Messages
462
Best answers
0
Optimus Prime said:
If that were true, they'd still be retailing the NES. Every generation of consoles sets a new standard in the graphics department, if consoles were to take a step back, people would have a ****-fit.

The fact that there are always going to be next-gen consoles blatantly shows the natural progression of the importance of better graphics in the video gaming industry.
If that were true than nobody would play old games on emulators o_o .

Oh and Pride, which multiplatform is the wii excluded from?
 
New Member
💻 Oldtimer
Joined
Dec 21, 2004
Messages
2,417
Best answers
0
if they werent making a new zelda and a new smash brothers no1 would buy the wii.

and not having smash brothers be a launch title is going to effect sales alot too.
 
New Member
Joined
Jul 23, 2005
Messages
423
Best answers
0
...on the Gamecube.
So i guess your implying that people won't be buying the Wii version i suppose. :rolleyes:


...it doesn't bother you at all that 80% of the multiplatform releases are excluded from the Wii due to hardware limitations?
Does it bother you that 80% of the games coming for Wii probably won't be available for the Playstation 3 or Xbox 360 as well ? Does that also mean that the Playstation 3 and Xbox 360 will fail ?-- no, i don't think so. It's more then likely that the Wii will get it's own exclusives, rather then ports(Example: Resident Evil Wii). This is more reason to own it. I really prefer exclusives over multiplatform titles either way, so this all a matter of preference, and making note of that, as if it will actually hinder the Wii itself, is completely bias if your not planning to acknowledge that it applies both ways. Also, if you want to talk about the Wii missing out on multiplatform gaming titles, what about the fact that the Playstation 3 is begining to lose some support all toghter.

Developers who are staying away from the PS3:
Atari
SNK

Currently Cancelled games:
Endless Saga
WWE Smackdown vs Raw 2007 -- Possible continuation in 2007

Lost exclusives:
GTA4
Unreal Tournament 2007
Assassin's Creed
DragonQuest will probably move to the Wii

Not to mention, developers like EA and Ubisoft have far more games in developement for the Wii than the PS3. If Sony flops at TGS like they did at E3, more developers will be pulling out. Sony will also lose a majority of their fanbase with their $600 pricetag.
The Xbox 360 also has a few cancelled games as well, but no dropped support which Sony does have at the moment. I wonder what's sounding more impressive right now ? Who's really at the disadvantage here ?-- because it surely isn't Nintendo with the Wii, once you get over the tired graphics argument, and when you acknowledge the fact that it's more of a secondary gaming console then a primary one either way.


The Wii has been getting a lot of support since E3. Developers are flocking to it. When you look at the facts, just about every developer in the industry is interested in developing games for the Wii-- even Will Wright is hinting at porting Spore to the Wii before even attempting the other two. The fact that the other two are more powerful, certainly doesn't necessarily mean more and better games. The Wii launch lineup consist of 31 gaming titles right now-- the launch lineup consist of alot variety, and could possibly be the best launch lineup in gaming history.


Maybe graphics aren't important but I think technological advancements are. Multiple controllers, wireless setups, internet technology, voice chat, physics development, bigger better and faster storage mediums (longer, more in depth games), these are all part of the cycle too. So it's not just 'better graphics' that the more technologically advanced systems are offering. The shortcomings will be universal for any who lag behind, as they have always been in the past. That's just the way history is.
All of these things the Wii has (storage medium over the GC), apart from voice-chat, but even that seems likely. The Wii is only lacking in powerful and new technology, but the games still look great-- they have more power than an Xbox squeezed into a machine a 5th of the size, with Wireless Controllers, a Brand-New Input System, a Dual Disc-Type Slot Loading Drive, a Built in Internet Browser (something 360 and PS3 lack), always(automatic) Internet Service Enabled, and Full(True) Backwards Compatibility. The only area where the machine has not taken the same strides forward as Sony and Microsoft is in graphics, and I think it has taken several greater leaps in other areas. All without forcing anything on the consumers.

It will be dead last in sales and quality for the third generation in a row, I think.
Nintendo was never dead last in terms of quality, so you can eliminate that argument right now. That applies to both gaming titles and hardware. They might have been third this generation in overall sales numbers, but i seriously doubt that will happen again. The success they've been experiencing with the Nintendo DS has been extraordinary, and that same success, in my opinion, will most likely carry over to the Nintendo Wii. It's the cheapest, it's highly affordable, the actual gaming titles cost will most likely be cheaper then the other two, and it's gaining major appeal to non-gamers as well as casuals, who are the people that will ultimately, determine the overall success to begin with of the (new)next-gen gaming consoles-- the Xbox 360 can't even push $6 million sells right now, nor can they get a grip on Japan which will only get worst when the other two are finally released. The Wii and is guaranteed to sell out $4 million by launch-- whereas the PS3 will only sell out $2 million.

That automatically puts them in second or first place during the initial stages of the next(new) generation battle. If there are only two things known as this point about the next-gen battle, it has to be the fact, that the the Playstation 3 won't be nearly as successful as the Playstation 2-- the Wii won't sale nearly as bad as the Nintendo Gamecube. I don't see why you feel that their going to be dead last again, when the evidence agasint it shows that the Wii is at an all time low-disadvantage, when you compare it to the other two.

if they werent making a new zelda and a new smash brothers no1 would buy the wii.

and not having smash brothers be a launch title is going to effect sales alot too.
No, it gives 3rd-party some breathing room. Nintendo is it's own worst enemy and if they released that title at launch, then their 3rd-party support will drop faster then an elevator on a 2 story building. It's a smart move. Also, going by that logic, if MGS and FF wasn't on the Playstation 3, no one would buy that either. Who cares, every gaming console has their titles that sell consoles, and pointing out two games in reference, to a matter of hindrance, is just making you seem bias to one of the other two or PC gaming.
 

Users Who Are Viewing This Thread (Users: 0, Guests: 1)

Top