bit-gamer.net

Project Cafe system specs leaked

Project Cafe system specs leaked

Possible system specs have leaked online following Nintendo's announcment of a new console.

Possible system specifications for Nintendo's just-confirmed successor to the Nintendo Wii have leaked online from anonymous sources close to the company.

IGN spoke to sources close to the company, who revealed that the new console, currently known only as Project Cafe, will be built around AMD's R700 GPU architecture.

The sources also said that rumours about the console's graphical power were true, with Project Cafe set to outperform even the PlayStation 3's NVIDIA 7800GTX-based processor.

Project Cafe will output at 1080p, with stereoscopic 3D an unconfirmed possibility, according to the sources.

The CPU for Project Cafe is said to be a custom-made triple-core IBM PowerPC chipset which is fundamentally similar to the Xbox 360's CPU, albeit with faster clock speeds.

Foxconn is said to be manafacturing the console, which will be roughly similar in size to the Xbox 360 and may be designed similarly to the classic NES. Like Nintendo, Foxconn has yet to comment on any aspect of the leak.

A price tag of between $350 (£212) and $400 (£242) is suggested for the console.

Let us know your thoughts in the forums.

82 Comments

Discuss in the forums Reply
Phalanx 25th April 2011, 11:19 Quote
OMG REALLY? It will outperform a 7800GTX? Run for the hills!

Boring... (Or is it just me?) I'm sure the rehashes of Mario will look great! *rolls eyes*
r3loaded 25th April 2011, 11:22 Quote
Oh wow, a last-last-generation GPU? Holy graphical processing power, Batman!
jayg1169 25th April 2011, 11:31 Quote
@ previous comments: Thats the trouble with Nintendo, there poor business ethic has got them nowhere!
Fordy 25th April 2011, 11:33 Quote
wow...

Microsoft should really release a console with a replaceable (upgradeable) graphics card in a standard PCI-e x16 slot.

Never happen though - talk about fragmentation for the games developers...
bowman 25th April 2011, 11:33 Quote
Just a shame all the Nintendo properties suck.

Mario and Pokemon only needs to look so good.
Flanananagan 25th April 2011, 11:34 Quote
Unless they come up with some new IP, count me out.
DriftCarl 25th April 2011, 11:35 Quote
my previous PC to this one out performed a 7800 GTX, and the one before that was only just under it.

I think nintendo got lucky with the wii. I dont think they can compete with the next gen sony and microsoft consoles.
GeorgeStorm 25th April 2011, 11:37 Quote
Well considering the ps3 is based around the 7800GTX, and it still looks pretty good
I don't think it's hopeless for nintendo, the price is just about right (little lower I would have thought)
I look forward to hearing more about it
Bindibadgi 25th April 2011, 11:37 Quote
R700? You'd have thought they would have gone for the more efficient VLIW-4 not 5 arch, which has been around since 2900-era.

That will be IBM fabbing it then, which means it'll probably be 32nm class = nice, small, cheap and low power for Ninty. (low power = less power hardware, less heat, less heatsink cost, less shipping cost and smaller/cheaper power brick).

At that price it'll get 512MB of mid-range GDDR5 only, and probably an 8GB NAND block for a few dollars.

It'll still be DVD too, but it'll have SD/flash space upgrade, not the hard drive route (lower failure, cheaper and can charge users for official Ninty flash upgrades). I wonder if it'll still be WiFi as standard with no Ethernet... depends who they go to for IO: MS went to SIS but the Wii used IBM (which would be more expensive).
Krikkit 25th April 2011, 12:03 Quote
Filthy double-posting there bindi. :p
brave758 25th April 2011, 12:31 Quote
sounds good,
cgthomas 25th April 2011, 12:35 Quote
Quite useless console then since it only intends to outperform a PS3. because soon MS and Sony will reveal the next gen console which, I guess, will have graphical power equivalent to a GTX 260 or GTX 460
and thus Nintendo will be pretty much a console for fake sports, again.
fuus 25th April 2011, 12:41 Quote
maybe the power to handle closer to par COD graphics?
r4tch3t 25th April 2011, 12:44 Quote
Quote:
Originally Posted by Fordy
wow...

Microsoft should really release a console with a replaceable (upgradeable) graphics card in a standard PCI-e x16 slot.

Never happen though - talk about fragmentation for the games developers...
If they had console specific cards it wouldn't fragment too much, a card released every 3 years by the console manufacturer as an upgrade for the system. That way there are specific cards that would be available and only 3-5 different cards to code for making it much easier than the PC side. And just like having low, medium and high textures in PC games, you could upgrade the gfx on your console.
eddtox 25th April 2011, 13:12 Quote
The wii was in dire need of a hd refresh, but as others have already said, that is only one aspect of its problems. An arguably bigger problem is its lack of compelling (read non-casual) titles. This console is going to be more expensive than the slim 360, so it better bring more than hd graphics to the table.
Skiddywinks 25th April 2011, 13:23 Quote
Quote:
Originally Posted by r4tch3t
Quote:
Originally Posted by Fordy
wow...

Microsoft should really release a console with a replaceable (upgradeable) graphics card in a standard PCI-e x16 slot.

Never happen though - talk about fragmentation for the games developers...
If they had console specific cards it wouldn't fragment too much, a card released every 3 years by the console manufacturer as an upgrade for the system. That way there are specific cards that would be available and only 3-5 different cards to code for making it much easier than the PC side. And just like having low, medium and high textures in PC games, you could upgrade the gfx on your console.

Upgradable consoles is a retarded idea. There is a reason it has never happened. Consoles are so ridiculously finely tuned it would be suicide. Upgrading the graphics card (or any component for that matter) is going to leave you CPU bound, since no console manufacturer in their right mind would ship a console with a CPU that performs faster than it needs to be to match the other components. That would just add needless cost on a prodcut that they usually lose money on in the first place (bar Ninty up until now at least).

So you can either launch a console with some components more powerful than they need to be, so you can upgrade the others in the future (a truly "Wtf?" strategy if ever I saw one), or you can basically ship a PC that needs all components upgraded when any one of them is upgraded. In which case just buy a PC.

Plus, the reason console games can look so awesome considering the hardware specs is because there is no fragmentation. Any fragmentation at all is a killer, it doesn't matter how low you make it. You would end up having the same issues the PC is facing now, i.e coding for the lowest common denominator.

As for the topic at hand, I can imagine the Wii 2 being a lot closer to the Xbox 720 and PS4 than the Wii is to the 360 and PS3. Outperforming the PS3 is a big step up compared to the essentially overclocked Gamecube of the Wii. AFAIK, it hardly beats the original Xbox. The step up to R700 is quite significant and telling of Nintendo really. Clearly they look to be taking graphics more seriously.

I have no doubt the 720 and PS4 will launch with considerably more graphics power than the Wii 2, don't get me wrong, but with the baseline of the Wii 2 being relatively high, there is less room to wiggle for Sony and MS before they start hitting heat and cost issues.

@cgthomas;
A GTX 460's worth of power? Are you serious? Assuming a rough average TDP of 150W, that is already more than the XCGPU in the latest S line of Xbox 360s. And that is the CPU and GPU in one core. No way are they going to spend that much money on just the GPU, and have the issue of heat and power draw (and, like Bindi says, have to spend so much extra money on cooling solutiongs and power bricks etc).

There is the argument of a more current node (like 32nm as, again, mentioned by Bindi), but that only gets you so much improvement in power draw and heat. It doesn't magically make the chip run cool and sip power.

Lastly, there is no need for something as poswerful as a GTX 260 or 460. The 460 at least can play modern games with jacked up settings and high resolutions. I know the consoles will never match a PC in terms of sheer IQ, but look at what they are achieving with the stupidly outdated and weak hardware they are running. MS and Sony have the advantage of silly levels of optimisation. Anything too powerful brings far too many headaches when they can get away with much, much less.

Sorry for the massive rant. I have just gotten home from a 2200 - 1200 shift and despite wanting nothing more than a nap, my ****ing dog has pissed on my ****ing bed.
StoneyMahoney 25th April 2011, 13:23 Quote
Since when has any console ever come with a graphics chip comparable to the current generation of PC hardware? It's never happened and it never will. Just the fact someone even mentioned the idiotic notion of having an upgradable graphics card in a console shows that Nintendo aren't aiming it anywhere near any of the haters here. Scoff all you like, no-one who cares is listening.
Evildead666 25th April 2011, 13:28 Quote
I'm quite confident Nintendo has what it takes to bring out a good console.

The next gen MS and Sony consoles will be fighting each other. Nintendo has decided to take a back seat, and not spend loads on cutting edge hardware, and RMA's.
I suspect the Wii was just a placeholder until this next console comes out. The innovative controller stole the limelight though, and propelled the Wii to great success.

Mario Kart has always been great, no matter which version. 4-player is awesome.
Skiddywinks 25th April 2011, 13:37 Quote
I see two good things possibly coming from this;

1) MS and Sony are pressured in to releasing consoles earlier than they would have liked (hey, can only help the PC gamers, right?). However, with the recent launch of the Move and Kinect, I do not see this happening as soon as I would like, since they want to milk said add ons for as much as possible, and want to avoid the backlash they would get for releasing a new console so soon after the early adopters forked out so much money.

2) Nintendo actual take core gaming seriously, and start making some impressive looking (even if they aren't as good as the new Xbox and PS will be, they will be much closer) games that appeal to the hardcore audience, rather than just one offs that try too hard to be "mature" and end up ****. Maybe I will see the need to own one of their consoles again. I just hope they get rid of the stupid motion gimmick. Real gamers generally enjoy or desire the accuracy of a controller (sure, it's no M/KB, but it's a damn sight better than waving your arm around). Just the option would be nice, in every game.
mucgoo 25th April 2011, 13:53 Quote
I think a gtx 460 power or higher is perfectly reasonable for the 720/ps4.
Assuming a 2013/14 Q4 release they'll still be using 3/4 year old tech which even at launch was mid range.
mrbens 25th April 2011, 14:26 Quote
Quote:
Originally Posted by Skiddywinks
my ****ing dog has pissed on my ****ing bed.

hahaha classic!
Hustler 25th April 2011, 14:31 Quote
Quote:
Originally Posted by GeorgeStorm
Well considering the ps3 is based around the 7800GTX

Its not even that, remember the GPU in the PS3 has a crippled 128bit Memory interface, compared to the full fat 256bit of the 7800GTX...
Rsaeire 25th April 2011, 14:31 Quote
I still don't understand why people are so fixated on the graphical and CPU performance of consoles. Nintendo played that strategy to death with their consoles prior to Wii and where did that get them? The N64 was more powerful the Playstation, yet it wasn't as successful as Sony's console. The GameCube was also more powerful than the PS2, yet, again, wasn't as successful as Sony's console. Nintendo released Wii, which is far less powerful than either the PS3 or Xbox 360, and has sold almost 50% more than both consoles. Clearly Nintendo's strategy paid off and they're hoping it will again. Given that we've been playing Mario, Zelda etc games for decades doesn't negate the fact that they're almost always some of the best, if not the best, games to come out on a Nintendo console. With that said, they do release other games too, but rely more on 3rd party developers to make up the rest of the available games.

I for one am eagerly anticipating Project Cafe and will most likely buy it as soon as it's released. Nintendo knows games and therefore knows what matters most when it comes to a console.
azazel1024 25th April 2011, 14:34 Quote
I think more comparably since a 2013/2014 release has been just about announce from both Sony and MS (they want to milk the current crowd for another couple of years before incurring hardware losses on a new generation), I think you'd probably be looking at more like a 6670 going with an AMD equivelent GPU for a moment or possibly whatever the 6670 equivelent is at 28nm. At every console release the GPU tends to be about the equivelent of the lowest "mid grade" GPU of current or just previous generation of PC hardware around.

That said they can get a lot out of it because you can code to a really low level with identical hardware sets.
Boogle 25th April 2011, 14:38 Quote
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bindibadgi
R700? You'd have thought they would have gone for the more efficient VLIW-4 not 5 arch, which has been around since 2900-era.

Not more efficient, just different. It depends entirely on the shaders' instructions as to which is more efficient.
Hustler 25th April 2011, 14:39 Quote
Quote:
Originally Posted by Rsaeire
I still don't understand why people are so fixated on the graphical and CPU performance of consoles..

Errr, because that's what determines what you see on the screen, if everybody thought like you, we would all still have Megadrive and SNES consoles under our TV's.
GoodBytes 25th April 2011, 15:01 Quote
Fancy specs. What people forget here, is that Nintendo don't like to lose money on their console, this makes games 10$ cheaper, and more money for the studio's, as money is not sent to pay back the console. Another thing, is that as the console is a locked down environment, they are a lot of security layers that can be removed, allowing a more direct hardware communication level, which provide a big boost in performance, not to mention be able, for developer, to perform massive optimizing on the games, as it's only 1 system configuration possible. So a slight bump in speed, is big improvement to games unlike PC's.

In addition, as demonstrated time and time again with Nintendo, which never was the king in graphics (except maybe on the NES), if we rule out the PC. Yet Nintendo is here, and very successful. Nintendo knows how to make games. They use the same IP's, and sometimes looks similar, but the game play is different. People who actually play Zelda, Mario, Donkey Kong, etc.. knows that. If you check screen shots only.. you have no idea what you are talking about so stop talking.

Another strength of Nintendo these days, is backward compatibly. I check out Dolphin emulation (Game Cube/Wii emulator), and re-playing a Wii game I have, graphic upscaling is excellent.. and seeing you tube videos, it almost look like the textures are in HD since the starts. Example (and this is just 720p on this video):
eXEwDsssA94

I wont' be surprised if this console will play perfectly well Wii games with upscalling.
tristanperry 25th April 2011, 15:06 Quote
To be fair, it doesn't need to be much better than PS3. As long as it:

1) Is released before PS4 and the new x-box
2) Has 'good' console-level graphics at 1080p HD
3) Offers some more core gaming titles

It'll do very well.

Sounds like another good business move from Nintendo.
SaNdCrAwLeR 25th April 2011, 15:13 Quote
I seriously think the posts here are hilarious...
look at the Wii... it didn't outperform any of the other consoles...
in fact it's just an upgraded cube...
and yet it was an outstanding marketing success... with... the crappy hardware it had back then...
I believe Nintendo might as well have another hit with this one :P
cgthomas 25th April 2011, 15:16 Quote
Quote:
Originally Posted by mucgoo
I think a gtx 460 power or higher is perfectly reasonable for the 720/ps4.
Assuming a 2013/14 Q4 release they'll still be using 3/4 year old tech which even at launch was mid range.

Thanks for getting the point - at least someone has a well-formed response.
In two years time the TDP of a reengineered GTX 260 or 460 will probably be at 95W or even less.
jrs77 25th April 2011, 15:27 Quote
The people in these forums are not casual gamers, but hardcore-gamers and let's face it...

We are the minority in the whole gaming-industry, while the Wii adresses the vast majority!

The biggest question, that most of the tech-savvy people don't understand is, that the vast majority of players aren't interested in the best graphics possible, but in good and fun gameplay for an hour or two now and then.

The Wii is a big success as it adresses those casual family and party gamers and offers games which are simply fun to play, especially when hanging around with some friends in the evening.
jrs77 25th April 2011, 15:32 Quote
Quote:
Originally Posted by cgthomas
Thanks for getting the point - at least someone has a well-formed response.
In two years time the TDP of a reengineered GTX 260 or 460 will probably be at 95W or even less.

Even that is way too much for a console. The PS3 slim uses 110W alltogether while playing a game and the aim is to hit the sub 100W mark in the future for the whole system under load. So we're more looking for GPUs running at around 50W paired with a CPU running at 35W + BluRay 10W + HDD 5W.
tad2008 25th April 2011, 15:35 Quote
Quote:
Originally Posted by mucgoo
I think a gtx 460 power or higher is perfectly reasonable for the 720/ps4.
Assuming a 2013/14 Q4 release they'll still be using 3/4 year old tech which even at launch was mid range.

As mentioned on the other Nintendo article, they are looking at a 2012 release, so they probably started working on things back in 2009/2010 and would explain there choice of hardware since AMD's R700 architecture was released back in 2008, though onwould have thought that the R800 released in 2009 would have been a better and more current choice and would only have been 1 step behind todays current architecture.

By the time the new Wii is released graphics cards will have moved on another iteration and we'll likely have 24nm process CPU's then too, all making Nintendos next gen nothing more than another customised old gen console.
FelixTech 25th April 2011, 15:50 Quote
Quote:
Originally Posted by Skiddywinks
Upgradable consoles is a retarded idea. There is a reason it has never happened.

I feel obliged to point out the RAM upgrade on the N64 which was required to play games such as Donkey Kong 64...(if I remember correctly)

I'm sure nintendo have something up their sleeve. They are talking about 'changing the way people experience games' again, so there must be something more important than a graphics upgrade. I will reserve my judgement on the graphics until there are more details. TVs haven't come quite as far as graphics cards have over the past few years anyway.
Omnituens 25th April 2011, 15:57 Quote
Perfect Dark required the upgrade or entire modes were unaccessible
tad2008 25th April 2011, 15:58 Quote
Quote:
Originally Posted by GoodBytes
Fancy specs. What people forget here, is that Nintendo like to lose money on their console,

Nintendo don't loose money on their consoles, they make a small amount, something like $6 per console...
GoodBytes 25th April 2011, 16:00 Quote
Quote:
Originally Posted by FelixTech
I feel obliged to point out the RAM upgrade on the N64 which was required to play games such as Donkey Kong 64...(if I remember correctly)
Yes, and that was a big mess. Many people did not get this concept. I don't see Nintendo or anyone else doing this.
GoodBytes 25th April 2011, 16:01 Quote
Quote:
Originally Posted by tad2008
Nintendo don't loose money on their consoles, they make a small amount, something like $6 per console...

Arrggg.. I meant "..don't like to lose money". I skipped a word while typing. Now everything I said makes sense :)
mucgoo 25th April 2011, 16:03 Quote
Quote:
Originally Posted by jrs77
Quote:
Originally Posted by cgthomas
Thanks for getting the point - at least someone has a well-formed response.
In two years time the TDP of a reengineered GTX 260 or 460 will probably be at 95W or even less.

Even that is way too much for a console. The PS3 slim uses 110W alltogether while playing a game and the aim is to hit the sub 100W mark in the future for the whole system under load. So we're more looking for GPUs running at around 50W paired with a CPU running at 35W + BluRay 10W + HDD 5W.

Just had a quick check and the original 360/ps3 draw 185W and 193W average respectively during gaming.
The later versions much lower draws is only possible due too die shrinks.
How many consumer check power consumtion when purchasing as long as it doesn't gain a reputation like the old xbox cooling fan noise.
Getting a console below 100W would come at vast expense at graphical fidelity per £ which would lose costumer while you won't lose them to 50W more power use.


http://www.hardcoreware.net/reviews/review-356-2.htm
Psy-UK 25th April 2011, 16:09 Quote
To be honest, I'm far more interested with how the controller is going to turn out. :o
DwarfKiller 25th April 2011, 16:10 Quote
I see this as nothing but good news for Nintendo. Getting their foot in the door of peoples homes before Sony and Microsoft would lead to wider adoption, especially if they start focusing more on Kinect and Move.
All they need is to keep rolling out decent titles.
Anything regarding competition from the 'PS4' or '720' is purely speculation. No doubt they'd have more grunt but will people really be willing to shell out the same money they did for the early PS3?
Quote:
Originally Posted by Skiddywinks


Upgradable consoles is a retarded idea. There is a reason it has never happened

I'm fairly certain you had that RAM upgrade for the N64. Talk about terrible memory.
dyzophoria 25th April 2011, 16:14 Quote
I think I'll just wait first and judge later this decision of nintendo :p, the Wii though proven to be less powerful than the 360 and ps3, almost had a level of success (if not better on other areas) to the 360, and maybe we are having a similar case with their new console, the reason, most of the games where fun.yeah high-end graphics would really give you a second of two of awe-inspiring moment. but Id still put my bets on good gameplay. nintendo can cram in alot of power there but if a majority of developers would produce crap games but with high fidelity graphics. I dont think that is a win-win situation,lol
glaeken 25th April 2011, 16:26 Quote
When the 360/PS3 released they were using GPUs on par with what was out at the time for the PC in 2005/2006. I would expect both the 720/PS4 to have the same level of hardware when they are released. So something much better than a GTX460.
Skiddywinks 25th April 2011, 16:53 Quote
Quote:
Originally Posted by DwarfKiller
I'm fairly certain you had that RAM upgrade for the N64. Talk about terrible memory.

Correct. I did indeed have it. It's less bad memory and more throwing out words faster than I actually think about them. I meant to say that there is a reason it has never become a business model, rather than no one has ever tried it. The only game I even remember it mattering for for PD, and to be fair, with out it you got some serious cuts from the full game. Didn't realise DK needed it too.

I wish there were some numbers around for how well it did, and for how many developers actually used it. The fact that the only cases of it actually happening that anyone remembers involve a second party developer kind of speaks volumes about the idea.

I would also be interested to know if the extra RAM ever made a difference to any other games, or whether games had to be developed to use it as a seperate RAM source, rather than just a bigger unified pool. I never noticed a difference, but I wasn't really looking.
Fordy 25th April 2011, 16:59 Quote
Quote:
Originally Posted by StoneyMahoney
Just the fact someone even mentioned the idiotic notion of having an upgradable graphics card in a console shows that Nintendo aren't aiming it anywhere near any of the haters here. Scoff all you like, no-one who cares is listening.


You think it's idiotic?

I said it'd never happen - but it's not idiotic.


It's the very reason we all (most) buy and build PCs - we can upgrade, get more performance, nicer images. So what part of it is idiotic?

As I said originally, it'd never happen - far too much fragmentation for developers - but if it worked, it would be good.
Eiffie 25th April 2011, 17:20 Quote
I wonder if it will play gamecube and wii games? The whole reason I bought a wii was to have the option to play my older gamecube games which I love to death. If it can't I will probably have to hold onto my Wii for a while and my ps3 and PC will have to keep me happy on the side. I don't think the Wii is really such a bad system, it's limited by the hardware for sure when you compare it to the other systems out on the market now, only 480p output but I think the real thing holding it back is the lack of good games. I hope it doesn't become an issue for the next Nintendo system as well. Like others have said before, there will probably be a new mario and zelda game, hopefully another super smash brothers, banking on a new metroid game to make me forget how dull metroid: other m was but what else can we really look forward too? Wii sports HD!!!! *bangs head on desk*
Skiddywinks 25th April 2011, 17:23 Quote
Quote:
Originally Posted by Fordy
Quote:
Originally Posted by StoneyMahoney
Just the fact someone even mentioned the idiotic notion of having an upgradable graphics card in a console shows that Nintendo aren't aiming it anywhere near any of the haters here. Scoff all you like, no-one who cares is listening.


You think it's idiotic?

I said it'd never happen - but it's not idiotic.


It's the very reason we all (most) buy and build PCs - we can upgrade, get more performance, nicer images. So what part of it is idiotic?

As I said originally, it'd never happen - far too much fragmentation for developers - but if it worked, it would be good.

It is idiotic in regards to consoles. It defeats the purpose of a console.
HourBeforeDawn 25th April 2011, 17:24 Quote
at $400 it should play blu-rays and pretty much be a PS3 ~_~
earlydoors 25th April 2011, 17:28 Quote
Wow, goes to show PC gamer hardware is never going to be stretched at this rate...we're about 2 generations down the line from the PS3
sub routine 25th April 2011, 18:06 Quote
Quote:
Originally Posted by earlydoors
Wow, goes to show PC gamer hardware is never going to be stretched at this rate...we're about 2 generations down the line from the PS3

especially with no top end next gen on the horizon. >.>

consoles have infused and brought vast money into games, now they`re wringing the life out of it with business models.
Jedibeeftrix 25th April 2011, 18:31 Quote
seems to me that an AMD Llano Fusion would do the job very nicely.

the 400 shader HD 5650 had twice the transistors of the old nvidia 7800GT, and runs at twice the speed so should be much faster.

it occurs to me that AMD will have four Llano products with duff cores that they do not currently plan to sell as specifics SKU's, what will they do with them?

a three core Llano sku would be cheaper for nintendo to buy, being a single integrated SoC produced on 32nm, and thus should be affordable to to use.
Thedarkrage 25th April 2011, 18:59 Quote
Well don for get the 360 and ps3 had old hard ware in them from day one.

The only really radical change was the Cpu's with the ps3 Gpu being cut down relying of the extra power of its Cell processor to keep it ahead of the 360 hence why its been reported to be difficult to program for.

So the Wii 2 should be very powerful in console terms with a more powerful Cpu and much more powerful Gpu (almost 3 gen's ahead of the 360) I just hope they put more memory in it then has been reported 2 gig min would be so much better.
OWNED66 25th April 2011, 21:54 Quote
let me set you guys straight
the wii was great because of the games it had
most of its games were made for the wii and looked great
while xbox and ps3 games were ported to pc
and u guessed it . most of the games released from about 2009 to now had low res textures because of the very low amount of ram it had and slow gpus which also caused pc games to look bad cod bc2 ( look at the ground) reminds me of 007 golden eye ......
im not saying graphics are important it just annoys me when everything looks amazing while the ground looks very low res - everything should be equal
news suggest that the ps4 and the next xbox will be released in 2014
so basically games wont evolve until that time comes
im still using hardware from 2007 (when the ps3 was released)
qx6700 and a 9800gtx ( had a 8800GTX but was too hot)
currently i can play every game out there at medium - high on 2560x1600 on that system i have no reason what so ever to upgrade but i might change the gpu when Battlefield 3 comes
and for u guys saying ( consoles should have the ability to be upgraded ) remember u could upgrade the n64's ram
that should be an option for all consoles today
l3v1ck 26th April 2011, 00:07 Quote
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ph4lanx
OMG REALLY? It will outperform a 7800GTX? Run for the hills!

Boring... (Or is it just me?) I'm sure the rehashes of Mario will look great! *rolls eyes*
+1
Given that it's not being launch for another year, I'd expect the performance of a current mid generation GPU. Why they're using a design that is already out of date is beyond me. It's not as if they'll be using up stock. I can only assume the design has been finalised for a while now.
GoodBytes 26th April 2011, 00:11 Quote
Quote:
Originally Posted by l3v1ck
+1
Given that it's not being launch for another year, I'd expect the performance of a current mid generation GPU. Why they're using a design that is already out of date is beyond me. It's not as if they'll be using up stock. I can only assume the design has been finalised for a while now.

Yes it is finalized now, or polishing drivers stage, and about E3, check out feedback in the case of any problem to be solved, and start mass produce it in the case everything is fine, ready for a global release in 2012 with lunch title.

If you guys can build a computer (with case, wireless, and optical drive) for under 350$ US/Canadian using only new parts of descent quality, that will provide as good as the PS3 performance, you can start complaining about Nintendo decisions Until then, Nintendo decisions was well studied.

If you say: "Yea but online stores makes money on every parts + the manufacture + it's not a massive order etc...", consider that on the 300-350$ price tag of Nintendo next console, you need to include Nintendo engineering to make everything possible, optimizing team, documentation makers (for consumers and developers), tools for developers, the controllers provided, marketing, testing, and store shelf space cost, retail profit margin, and demo stands space rant of stores to show the console. And let's not format some level of profit.
Puzzu 26th April 2011, 01:11 Quote
To be honest if the new Wii can push to 1080p and support the new 3D TVs it will sell.
The current Wii's 480p would had a better shelf life if the HD tv explosion did not happen.

So unless the Super Hi 4320p TVs start showing up in our living rooms anytime soon, why would it need anything faster?
Bindibadgi 26th April 2011, 03:08 Quote
Quote:
Originally Posted by Boogle
Not more efficient, just different. It depends entirely on the shaders' instructions as to which is more efficient.

OK unless you're going to code the **** out of every graphics scene to make sure all the instructions are used in the 1-5 ratio, all of the time, VLIW-4 with its uniform shaders and better scheduling works better, more often. Also, with AMD moving to VLIW-4 - what will future games be optimised for? ;)

And for those poo-pooing specs talk: if we didn't like that stuff we'd be on a gaming forums discussing the merits of Mario in HD. YOU WILL SEE THE COTTON STRANDS IN HIS CAP OMFG! I WONDER IF THE SHELLS WILL BE SCRATCHED DYNAMICALLY?? I HOPE THEY RE-RELEASE ALL THE OLD GAMES IN HD! I'D LOVE TO GIVE NINTENDO EVEN MORE MONEY FOR REHASHED IDEAS!

(yes, everyone shouts on gaming forums).
xaser04 26th April 2011, 08:52 Quote
Quote:
Originally Posted by Jedibeeftrix
seems to me that an AMD Llano Fusion would do the job very nicely.

the 400 shader HD 5650 had twice the transistors of the old nvidia 7800GT, and runs at twice the speed so should be much faster.

Using the HD5650m as a proxy (400SP with 650Mhz core) we can see that thanks to efficiency (through coding for a closed platform) both the 360 and PS3 can offer similar graphical quality at 720p.

Whilst a HD5650 level GPU with increased efficiency would be an improvement over the current gen consoles I would prefer to see something along the lines of the HD6870m (800SP) being used in the next gen consoles.

Of course in the end both designs will be either completely custom (Xenos R500 GPU*) or a modified and tweaked version of a mid range GPU (G70(1) RSX).

*It can be argued that the Xenos GPU shares alot in common with the later R600 GPU although it was a custom GPU at the time.
Doctor Hades 26th April 2011, 09:10 Quote
The hardware specs of the Wii's successor are irrelevant in my book since it is games that maketh a console not tech specs. And as a Wii owner since its launch I have to say it has been the most underwhelming console I've ever owned in terms of quality games with the decent exclusives being few and far between.

It is hard to get excited about a new Nintendo console when I keep hearing that they again are not prioritising for their core fanbase but to the casual masses again. I think that is a huge mistake as casual gamers are fickle and will tire of gaming sooner rather than later. They aren't the ones who buy lots of games and this is why the Wii, outside selected exclusives and third-party titles, has such poor software sales considering its huge user base. Even I only buy one or two games per year for my Wii as their literally is very little else of interest to me on the platform.
stoff3r 26th April 2011, 09:39 Quote
I'm Glad Nintendo starts the push towards next gen consoles so early. Maybe we'll see some other more potent consoles soon too.
Blademrk 26th April 2011, 10:26 Quote
Quote:
Originally Posted by Eiffie
banking on a new metroid game to make me forget how dull metroid: other m was
Picked that up about a month back, I've enjoyed what I've played of it so far (haven't got too far yet (heading towards Section 2), the wii is set up on the main TV so I don't get to use it that often).
Jedibeeftrix 26th April 2011, 10:33 Quote
Quote:
Originally Posted by xaser04

Using the HD5650m as a proxy (400SP with 650Mhz core) we can see that thanks to efficiency (through coding for a closed platform) both the 360 and PS3 can offer similar graphical quality at 720p.

Whilst a HD5650 level GPU with increased efficiency would be an improvement over the current gen consoles I would prefer to see something along the lines of the HD6870m (800SP) being used in the next gen consoles.

Of course in the end both designs will be either completely custom (Xenos R500 GPU*) or a modified and tweaked version of a mid range GPU (G70(1) RSX).

*It can be argued that the Xenos GPU shares alot in common with the later R600 GPU although it was a custom GPU at the time.

but surely any nintendo console using an ATI chip would be running close to the metal too?

i doubt an 800 shader part based off current tech will be possible as even the mobile parts use 50 watts:

http://www.notebookcheck.net/ATI-Mobility-Radeon-HD-5870.23073.0.html

it makes more sense to me to go for an all-in-one integrated SoC manufactured on 32nm that pulls no more than 65 watts in total. http://bit.ly/h7wO7P
Guinevere 26th April 2011, 12:20 Quote
So many of you are forgetting the facts:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Console_wars#Worldwide_sales_figures_5

Nintendo sell more consoles than either Sony or Microsoft, and it's highly likely that while Sony & MS make a loss on each unit sold, Nintendo don't.

When you factor in the DS, you're probably talking about Nintendo taking over 50% of the home bound & mobile console market.

So for Nintendo now, MS & Sony are just part of their competition. The real threat big threat that's sucking money out of the traditional path?

iOS & Android

All Apple have to do is do an incremental refresh into the Apple TV to bring it up to iPad 2 spec and they could seriously wipe the floor with Nintendo.
SMIFFYDUDE 26th April 2011, 12:21 Quote
What are Wii game sales like against the other consoles?
tristanperry 26th April 2011, 12:59 Quote
Quote:
Originally Posted by SMIFFYDUDE
What are Wii game sales like against the other consoles?
A lot better.

http://www.vgchartz.com/ - 4 out of the top 10 (weekly?) sales are Wii, 2 out of the top 10 are DS. 2 out of the top 10 are xbox 360 and just 1 out of the top 10 are PS3. This pattern occurs historically too. As for overall sales:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_best-selling_video_games gives:

Overall Wii games sold: 695.37 million
Overall PS3 games sold: 315.3 million
Overall 360 games sold: 353.8 million

Plus as mentioned above, the Wii made money from the offset with the console, whereas the PS3 and 360 lots money from the off.

And I do think this pattern will continue too - whilst Wii 2 probably won't be great for core gamers, I do think it'll do a lot better than the other two nonetheless.
nilesfoundglory 26th April 2011, 15:09 Quote
Wait, let me get this straight:

Triple core PPC CPU
An unspecified R700 GPU
Similar in size to the XBox 360
Costs more than the collective hardware components are worth

...So Nintendo is making an XBox 360. And calling it their next generation console.

Riiiight... no.
StoneyMahoney 26th April 2011, 19:52 Quote
Quote:
Originally Posted by Fordy
Quote:
Originally Posted by StoneyMahoney
Just the fact someone even mentioned the idiotic notion of having an upgradable graphics card in a console shows that Nintendo aren't aiming it anywhere near any of the haters here. Scoff all you like, no-one who cares is listening.

You think it's idiotic?

I said it'd never happen - but it's not idiotic.

It's the very reason we all (most) buy and build PCs - we can upgrade, get more performance, nicer images. So what part of it is idiotic?

As I said originally, it'd never happen - far too much fragmentation for developers - but if it worked, it would be good.

Look up Sega's 32X. Nuff said.
Nexxo 26th April 2011, 19:57 Quote
You know it has to be asked:

But will it run Crysis?
Eiffie 26th April 2011, 21:08 Quote
Quote:
Originally Posted by Blademrk
Picked that up about a month back, I've enjoyed what I've played of it so far (haven't got too far yet (heading towards Section 2), the wii is set up on the main TV so I don't get to use it that often).

Well I wouldn't want to give you the impression that it's a bad game, just a sub-par metroid game when I compare it to the others that I have beaten, metroid prime 1-3, fusion, zero mission, super metroid, metroid 2, metroid:hunters. It did a lot of things right, the combat was well done, controls worked really well and I thought the graphics for a wii game were quite good. The unskippable videos really drag on though once you've played through the game(or died over and over at certain parts) and with only 1 bonus area there isn't much to go back for and replay the game after your 2nd or 3rd time through unless you crave getting each and every missle/energy tank. I don't regret my purchase but I do hope that the next metroid game takes what was done with other m and makes it a smoother more enjoyable experience for the player if the series is going to move in the same direction that other m took.
GoodBytes 26th April 2011, 21:15 Quote
Retro Studios should be the one doing Metroid. Or at least Team Ninja for the animations Retro Studio for everything else.

Every game from Retro Studios kicks ass beyond belief. While I do enjoy platformer gamer, I am unable to get attached to Mario games anymore. But For some reason Donkey King Returns (by Retro Studios), made it play the games like crazy, I got hooked on it. Replayed the game twice and getting everything twice. I never been able to do this before.
Lazarus Dark 26th April 2011, 23:17 Quote
Obviously most of Bit-Tech's readers are not the Nintendo audience.
Nintendo had the best console from NES to SNES to N64.
N64 graphics were kickass and they did well. But not as well as the new Sony Playstation. Not because the P(o)S had better hardware or even better games, N64 had both. PS was cheaper, used cheaper cd media (which made for horrid load times that N64 users laughed at), and it had ten thousand cheap 3rd party titles, 3 of which were good.
Nintendo soldiered on to the Gamecube, but it was seen as more kiddie, especially because of Mario Sunshine and Zelda Windwaker, which the hardcore Nintendo fans did not like (even though I understand they were actually quite good games). So many, including me, were lured to the darkside by PS2 and (for me) the xbox. And I totally regretted it. I gave my xbox away to my little brother within a year as I just didnt care for most of the games.
So when the Wii was coming, with promises of a more Ocarina-like Zelda, despite the lower graphic ability (which don't get me wrong, I was disappointed with, mostly with the lack of AA, which was horribly noticeable to a pc gamer), I beat up 3 old ladies to get one at launch. And have not regretted it once. Now, it seems the Wii took a note from the Playstation 1 playbook. It had lesser graphics and cheaper media (no bluray or hd-dvd... or even dvd playback) and a thousand crappy 3rd party titles. But it didn't matter because the first party titles still give you your monies worth for the console and so they sold double all thier competition combined. I finally tried an xbox 360 when the slim came out, as I got a "fat" 360 for $100 then. And I played it a couple times and then regretted it. Every game on 360 I would want to play... I can get on pc and would prefer to get it that way. 360 is redundant to pc for me, but the Wii provided an experience I couldn't get on pc.

I think Nintendo has learned a lot: most notably innovative gameplay and affordability trumps superior graphics in the console market.

Lets not even get started on the fact that if Nintendo launches two years before Sony and MS, this will still be the BEST graphics any non-pc gamer has ever seen. Remember, they will have a limit of 1080p. Top level graphics at 1080p is not that hard to do on current graphics chips. If they can keep that price at $300 and maybe 225-250 in a year or so when xbox720 and ps4 come out, they will win the market again. Hopefully good 3rd party developers will come this time, as with the Wii, no one thought it would sell, so 3rd party developers were caught off guard when it became the largest market, and I feel they never caught up.
Eiffie 26th April 2011, 23:53 Quote
Quote:
Originally Posted by GoodBytes
Retro Studios should be the one doing Metroid. Or at least Team Ninja for the animations Retro Studio for everything else.

Every game from Retro Studios kicks ass beyond belief. While I do enjoy platformer gamer, I am unable to get attached to Mario games anymore. But For some reason Donkey King Returns (by Retro Studios), made it play the games like crazy, I got hooked on it. Replayed the game twice and getting everything twice. I never been able to do this before.

I totally agree, the new donkey kong country game for wii kicks ass, I would have loved for them to continue making metroid games.
Scroome 27th April 2011, 12:39 Quote
One thing I would find interesting to see, is if any developers make a more proactive move towards the console. Developers obviously had major limits with the Wii in terms of graphics, but considering the other two won't have their next gen units out for a couple of years after Nintendo, It may offer the opportunity to create some decent looking games. I'm sure they would want to take advantage of the newer tech.
maverik-sg1 27th April 2011, 14:30 Quote
The very least one should be expecting from this console is DX11 compatable graphics, and depending on when Sony and MS release their next gen consoles, they will (or should be) targetting DX12 or beyond.

Else for 85% of PC games for rhe next 5-10yrs will end up developed on DX11 thanks to the cross migration of releases across all platforms.
GoodBytes 27th April 2011, 14:35 Quote
The only console that will use DirectX is the XBox. Because DirectX is a Microsoft product. Sony and Nintendo uses OpenGL.
maverik-sg1 27th April 2011, 15:16 Quote
Quote:
Originally Posted by GoodBytes
The only console that will use DirectX is the XBox. Because DirectX is a Microsoft product. Sony and Nintendo uses OpenGL.

Even OpenGL gets updated though to suit the hardware - so if we are at openGL4 now and the new cards are developed around openGL4, when OpenGL 5, 6 and 7 are released, none of the cross platform releases will go much beyond that spec for the PC for the duration of the life of the next gen consoles - the principal is the same for both DirectX and OpenGL platforms.

So if the Wii is only OpenGL4, the new consoles are OpenGL5, the PC will become capable of processing OpenGL6, 7 and 8 during the life of the new consoles and again the PC will remain under-utilised because of it - in fact if I recall in DirectX10 was released shortly after the DX9 xbox360, the only saving grace was that DX10 was crap and Vista only.

It probably means Nvidia and AMD should really just focus on making the fastest DX11/12 cards they can for the next 10yrs :)

Heck they probably code everything at the lowest common denominator already and then just add a few 'bells and whistles', not really developing a platform using the latest and greatest edition of the API - which is probably why we see less multi platform releases covering the Wii and it looks like that will continue.
GoodBytes 27th April 2011, 15:41 Quote
Ah that is what you mean.
Yea well it's the same for PC.I still have my GTX 260, why upgrade a perfectly fine GPU?

Most games on the PC are still DirectX9 even.. why bother. When DirectX 10/11/12 or OpenGL 5/6/7 FULL support made games (GOOD games), not some silly effects here and there just to say it supports OpenGL wtv or DirectX wtv, then we will talk. So far I think Crysis, Flight Simulator X and maybe 1 or 2 other games supports fully DirectX10 or more.
UrbanSmooth 27th April 2011, 16:37 Quote
Methinks there's another Zelda game on the horizon!

It would be great--and I mean GREAT--if Nintendo would announce, ready for it...

KILLER INSTINCT 3!!!!
TheBoyBest 27th April 2011, 18:43 Quote
Personally - I thought that the Gamecube had awesome graphics - which is now going back a fair few years. Its not what they have, its how the developers utilise the hardware. I've just got myself a new 570 GTX for £230 from OCUk - bargaintastic I know. Trouble is, how many PC developers are really going to make the most out of my hardware? Very few, due to the shear variation of PC users.

Fair game I say to Nintendo - they've got some smart people working for them, I'm sure it will be a success.
Lazy_Amp 28th April 2011, 04:09 Quote
I'm going to call that the first year of the new system will involve ports of all the PS3/360 games Wii owners missed out on.
GoodBytes 28th April 2011, 04:28 Quote
missing out on what?
Most XBox 360 and PS3 content are on the PC.

PC does not have Wii controls. But PC has XBox 360 controller, and many other gaming controllers.
Eiffie 28th April 2011, 05:31 Quote
Quote:
Originally Posted by UrbanSmooth
Methinks there's another Zelda game on the horizon!

Zelda and the Skyward Sword is coming out but it's only gonna be on Wii as of right now.
Log in

You are not logged in, please login with your forum account below. If you don't already have an account please register to start contributing.



Discuss in the forums