Topic: Nintendo Talks Hardware in Newest Iwata Asks

[Ceric]

Hello All,

I'm a little disappointed to not see this come up during the Night Shift but, here we are.

There is an interesting Iwata Ask over Wii U Hardware with some good shots.

Here is the actually Iwata Ask.
Here is a good post someone made about it summarizing some interesting points an another forum.

Sounds like they've done a lot of different testing especially on the Heat side of the equation.  From what I gather from this it looks like the GPU and CPU are actually made separate and then married together to become the system on a chip.  They say the Heat Shield is for protect against electric interference I've never seen that done before.  Talk about how when they started this it was "we should get into this HD Stuff." 

With as much as we're back and forthing on Hardware its interesting to hear the philosophies.

[Soren]

I know nothing about hardware.  But the article is very interesting nonetheless, specially with all the discussion we've had here about hardware.

A comment on the eurogamer.net article of this "Iwata Asks" caught my eye and kind of aligns with what I think could be the full legacy of the Wii U.  Bolded for emphasis by me.

Wii U's elegant design is a sign of a machine that while not cutting edge technologically, it IS a capable, energy efficient step up from what's already on the market. Let's not forget the GameCube, let's not buy into implausible rumours because they suit an 'under-powered Nintendo hardware' narrative, and let's try a little harder to present a more objective view of this device. There's enough tech there to provide new experiences in a reliable, energy efficient box, and I'd wager there's plenty of room to move on price in future, should Nintendo need to.

 

[Adrock]

I've been reading up on rumors, speculation, and possible leaks of the specs over the last couple days. From what I gather, Wii U is a good amount more powerful than the current generation. I know, I know... "It better be" so on and and so forth. I've read the GPGPU is something like 2-3 times better than the 360 GPU. Regarding the CPU, the Wii U is slower than the one in the 360. We've heard this before and it became a major point of contention. It's only "worse" when taken at face value. The 360's CPU has more raw power, but it apparently does "everything" including sound, I/O, OS etc. Meanwhile, (if this is even remotely correct) the Wii U may be separating sound/music to a DSP and I/O to a separate processor (more than 1 interweb page said it's an ARM processor) from the main CPU. The GPGPU can also handle some of the processing burden. There's also talk that the Wii U has a CPU with out-of-order execution which is supposedly thoroughly good. I'll have to take their word for it. I only have a basic understanding of that gathered from The Google. In conclusion, the Wii U CPU may have fewer threads and a lower clock speed, but it's doing fewer processes than the 360 CPU and doing them more efficiently.

I'm not a tech guy, but what it sounds like is that straight porting to the Wii U without optimization is where the whole "the CPU is a a little bit less" is coming from. Many of us here already figured that out, but the explanation above seems plausible. You can't port a game without doing some work. This is true on every piece of hardware. Wii U launch window titles are going to suffer because developers are still learning the hardware.

Considering how much thought was put into the Wii U judging by the latest Iwata Asks, I wouldn't be surprised by any of this being true. The front cover folding under the console is something a welcome addition yet something most people probably wouldn't think twice about.

[Ceric]

I agree.  Nintendo normally thinks through their hardware.  Especially on paper.  Gamecube is actually a good example.  On Paper it wasn't super fast but, Nintendo took out a lot of the bottle necks in the system so you could use the full potential more consistantly.  They talk about that philosophy in the Iwata Ask.

I would not be surprised in the least if IO, Sound, and Network are handled by their own efficient specialized chip.  Its not an uncommon architecture and it makes sense.  This freeing up the CPU to do the uncommon tasks.  Like in a PC.

This site has some pics of the Gamecubes Board.  You can see in this that the GPU is Larger than the CPU which was mentioned as odd in the Eurogamer article I believe.  Also mentions that while still on the same die the Sound was handled by its own area.  I'm failing to bring up whether the Wii had one but consider the Gamecube did I would assume that be a safe bet.

And Hey Everyone Loves Faster Interconnects.

[MrPhishfood]

That heat sink cover was kinda weird. If you've ever built your own PC or looked inside of one you'll know that the heatsinks on CPUs and GPUs don't have anything like that.

They said they had to trap the electric waves inside. Could it be there is too much Wifi in one box? Having to connect to the Internet wirelessly, to the Wii U pad, and up to 3x 3DS systems (Monster Hunter 3 Ultimate).

Its also interesting how they incorporated backwards compatibility by reusing some of the Wii U's circuitry. I'm wondering if Wii games will be using the Wii U's CPU or its own to maintain accurate playback. One of the reasons the first batch of PS3s were so costly for Sony was because to get backwards compatibility on it they included the entire PS2 system on a single chip. Sony then removed the PS2 chip later on to save on costs and opted for software emulation.

[BlackNMild2k1]

@ Adrock

You're right about the DSP chip, OoO CPU and i believe the ARM chip in Wii U. I've posted about all of that before, but Your post summed it all up pretty well.

Just like I've said before, to all those that think the Wii U is barely a step above PS360 and is a late addition to current gen instead of the first comment of  the next, you haven't been paying attention.

[Adrock]

I'm wondering if Wii games will be using the Wii U's CPU or its own to maintain accurate playback.

There's speculation that each of the Wii U's cores is based on the Wii's Broadway processor. Similar to how the Wii went into GameCube mode for backwards compatibility, the Wii U enters Wii mode and runs the legacy software flawlessly.

@ Adrock

You're right about the DSP chip, OoO CPU and i believe the ARM chip in Wii U. I've posted about all of that before, but Your post summed it all up pretty well.

Yay! My understanding is that the ARM processor is the Wii U's equivalent to the Wii's "Starlet" ARM core which probably helps with backwards compatibility.

Oh and I remember your posts, but I looked it all up for my own edification. It's been a slow work week.

[Adrock]

Some additional thoughts:

1. We know that the Wii U has 2GB of RAM, 1GB of which is reserved for the operating system. Most of us figured that was egregious. For some perspective, currently, 360 uses 32MB and PS3 uses 50MB out of their 512MB. Apparently, the PS3 at launch reserved 100MB for the OS which was considered an anti-boner. So, the Wii U reserving 10 times that amount should raise a few eyebrows. Unless the GamePad needs that much RAM for some reason, I've read that most of that 1GB reserved for the operating system should be unlocked in a firmware update at some point. Nintendo Network, voice chat, Miiverse and whatever else Nintendo has in there won't need a whole 1GB to run properly. There was a rumor last year that Nintendo unlocked the 3DS'sesses 2nd CPU so if that was true, this wouldn't be the first time Nintendo "unlocked" hardware after launch.

2. I went back and re-read some of the older Iwata Asks regarding hardware. The care that was taken in making the 3DS XL is impressive. I really appreciate Nintendo's dedication and focus on improving things we take for granted or sometimes flat-out do not notice. There have been some issues in the past like the stress crack on the DS Lite, but I don't think Nintendo would ever run into a problem like the Red Ring of Death. It took something like that to get Microsoft to put some thought into designing a motherboard in a way that won't cause the console to shart itself. I look at the Wii U Substrate and it's so clean looking. Reading about how Nintendo designed it and took things like heat dissipation so seriously is reassuring and always welcome.

[Ceric]

I think over time Nintendo has learned that taking the time to fully think through the hardware pays off in the long run as a business.  Though they have lapsed different times and the hand of the free market has slapped them for it.

[ShyGuy]

I think the Wii U will eventually have 1.5gb of RAM available for games. Either that, or it will eventually support simultaneous things like Watch Netflix on the TV and play Super mario on the pad at the same time.

[Ceric]

I think the Wii U will eventually have 1.5gb of RAM available for games. Either that, or it will eventually support simultaneous things like Watch Netflix on the TV and play Super mario on the pad at the same time.

I agree here.  I think Nintendo isn't sure which one will be the larger draw.  If the Wii U shows to be another Wii then it will go to the Netflix side.  If the Wii U become a 360 then it will go to the games side.

[Ian Sane]

An one hand I enjoy the excitement Nintendo seems to have for HD in this article.  But on the other hand, they're excited about something that the rest of the industry did six years ago.  Hooray for being conventional!

The issue is always "can this compete with Sony's and Microsoft's next consoles?"  I would feel so much more confident in the Wii U hardware if Nintendo ever acknowledged that this is important and that they took this into account when they did the design.  This should say "we needed to make sure we had hardware that would suit the needs of developers today and five or six years from now, and that would be able to hold its own against future competing products."  I don't know if Nintendo knows that that matters or even cares.  Even if they did they might not think it's important to mention it.  But that's what I need to hear at this point.

The technical stuff they talk about here is very interesting, though.  It's a fun read, it just doesn't tell me what I want to know.

[MrPhishfood]

"can this compete with Sony's and Microsoft's next consoles?" I think its only a small part of a much broader question like "Can we maintain a healthy business using our strategy"

To view it like a race where the winner is the one with the fastest horse would be wrong. Frankly I think developers will use whatever they have to work with just as long as the platform is profitable. Having the most beastly machine but without the install base to drive sales will certainly lose 3rd party support and spell the doom for any console (PS Vita).

I think Microsoft understands this quite well because they've been driving to turn the 360 in to an entertainment hub so they can say "Hey buy this, you can do all this great entertainment viewing on it with this futuristic Kinect thing and oh look it plays all these great games too". So even if they don't have a console that is as great as the PS4, they can still garner 3rd party support with a bigger install base. Nintendo have caught on to this idea too, hence TVii and Miiverse. Nintendo have also gone 2 steps further by making it easier for indies to develop on the platform and their licensing of the Unity engine.

[MegaByte]

"can this compete with Sony's and Microsoft's next consoles?" I think its only a small part of a much broader question like "Can we maintain a healthy business using our strategy"

And neither of these are the kinds of questions to expect from an Iwata Asks with the engineering team.

[NWR_insanolord]

Even if it weren't off topic for the people there, it's also an impossible question to answer until we see a full unveiling of Microsoft and Sony's consoles. I wouldn't expect anyone, let alone Iwata, to blindly speculate.

[BlackNMild2k1]

Some additional thoughts:

1. We know that the Wii U has 2GB of RAM, 1GB of which is reserved for the operating system. Most of us figured that was egregious. For some perspective, currently, 360 uses 32MB and PS3 uses 50MB out of their 512MB. Apparently, the PS3 at launch reserved 100MB for the OS which was considered an anti-boner. So, the Wii U reserving 10 times that amount should raise a few eyebrows. Unless the GamePad needs that much RAM for some reason, I've read that most of that 1GB reserved for the operating system should be unlocked in a firmware update at some point. Nintendo Network, voice chat, Miiverse and whatever else Nintendo has in there won't need a whole 1GB to run properly. There was a rumor last year that Nintendo unlocked the 3DS'sesses 2nd CPU so if that was true, this wouldn't be the first time Nintendo "unlocked" hardware after launch.

I don't think the bolded was a rumor as I'm pretty sure it was stated as fact from a developer wasn't it?

But I am very hopeful that with the OS setup that Wii U has, Nintendo will be able to go in and allow multi-tasking, Netflix on the TV while VC'ing on the tablet and many other features we've all wondered about, and even some we haven't thought about yet, all the while shrinking the footprint of the OS on the RAM releasing some of it to whatever software is running at the time.

[Kairon]

Some additional thoughts:

1. We know that the Wii U has 2GB of RAM, 1GB of which is reserved for the operating system. Most of us figured that was egregious. For some perspective, currently, 360 uses 32MB and PS3 uses 50MB out of their 512MB. Apparently, the PS3 at launch reserved 100MB for the OS which was considered an anti-boner. So, the Wii U reserving 10 times that amount should raise a few eyebrows. Unless the GamePad needs that much RAM for some reason, I've read that most of that 1GB reserved for the operating system should be unlocked in a firmware update at some point. Nintendo Network, voice chat, Miiverse and whatever else Nintendo has in there won't need a whole 1GB to run properly. There was a rumor last year that Nintendo unlocked the 3DS'sesses 2nd CPU so if that was true, this wouldn't be the first time Nintendo "unlocked" hardware after launch.

I don't think the bolded was a rumor as I'm pretty sure it was stated as fact from a developer wasn't it?

But I am very hopeful that with the OS setup that Wii U has, Nintendo will be able to go in and allow multi-tasking, Netflix on the TV while VC'ing on the tablet and many other features we've all wondered about, and even some we haven't thought about yet, all the while shrinking the footprint of the OS on the RAM releasing some of it to whatever software is running at the time.

You're pretty hopeful there BNM.

[BlackNMild2k1]

I try to remain optimistic.

[Ian Sane]

Frankly I think developers will use whatever they have to work with just as long as the platform is profitable.

Except that this did not happen with the Wii.  The Wii was both profitable and the best selling system and that did nothing for its third party support.  What would be different about this gen that would change that outcome?

[Louieturkey]

Frankly I think developers will use whatever they have to work with just as long as the platform is profitable.

Except that this did not happen with the Wii.  The Wii was both profitable and the best selling system and that did nothing for its third party support.  What would be different about this gen that would change that outcome?

The idea that the hardware will be a lot closer to the other two this time around.  At this point, it's definitely all speculation and the ultimate answer cannot be made until the PS4 and 720 are actually revealed and some form of specs are released.  Your question is just unanswerable until the PS4 and 720 are revealed.

[Adrock]

Except that this did not happen with the Wii.  The Wii was both profitable and the best selling system and that did nothing for its third party support.  What would be different about this gen that would change that outcome?

1. Nintendo isn't coming off of last place, the exact opposite in fact.

2. Less radical controller. In fact, Nintendo change the GamePad's design for them so they're at least listening this time.

3. The Wii U is launching between their competitors machines, not alongside them. Wii U is capable of getting ports which should inspire a bit more confidence in the platform.

4. Nintendo Network actually sounds competent.

5. The industry took a major hit over the last 5-6 years and studios have closed left and right. A metric **** ton of money was left on the table with the Wii, money that could have really, really helped many companies. No one really believed in the Wii in part because GameCube underperformed. Times are different. Right now, we'll be seeing a lot of ports because it's easier and cheaper to do so. Supporting one more player on the market dramatically improves (but doesn't guarantee) the chances of a game succeeding in the market.

6. The future is a toss up. How much more powerful will Orbis/Durango be? Sony and Microsoft lost a lot of money jumping into the HD era. They outclassed the Wii in performance yet Nintendo dominated them in sales and profits. I have my doubts that they'll take losses anywhere close to that again, especially with costs rising and the economy still struggling. They could potentially launch consoles that ask way too much from 3rd parties. Look at the Vita. Sony admitted that it was a hard sell to 3rd parties all while 3DS continued to gain momentum.

7. From what I've read, Wii U is quite a bit more advanced and modern than the current gen though we won't see it right away because of porting and the fact that launch games rarely ever push the hardware while companies learn the ins and outs. It's in the realm of possibility that in terms of hardware performance, it'll probably be closer to Dreamcast vs. Xbox than Wii vs. 360. How much will it cost companies to take advantage of dramatically better hardware? What if Wii U becomes the lead platform moving forward? Then, it's the Xbox all over again where the extra hardware performance meant next to nothing since many of the games were PS2 titles ported over and almost always played better on the PS2.

It's too early to call especially since PSFour and Nextbox don't officially exist yet. However, there's more than enough reason why it won't end the same way.

[Ian Sane]

Frankly I think developers will use whatever they have to work with just as long as the platform is profitable.

Except that this did not happen with the Wii.  The Wii was both profitable and the best selling system and that did nothing for its third party support.  What would be different about this gen that would change that outcome?

The idea that the hardware will be a lot closer to the other two this time around.  At this point, it's definitely all speculation and the ultimate answer cannot be made until the PS4 and 720 are actually revealed and some form of specs are released.  Your question is just unanswerable until the PS4 and 720 are revealed.

Nintendo has to speculate.  If those new systems are revealed and they just squash the Wii U in terms of hardware Nintendo can't just throw their hands in the air and go "well we didn't know".  That's not an acceptable excuse.  Obviously they know that Sony and MS will release new consoles and that those consoles will be in direct competition with the Wii U.  So they have to make an educated guess on what level of specs they have to go with.  I'm not asking them to say "yeah this will match the PS4" because there is no way to know it.  That's why in an earlier post I suggested a statement to the effect of "we needed to make sure we had hardware that would suit the needs of developers today and five or six years from now, and that would be able to hold its own against future competing products."  They can't confirm the future but they can confirm that this was something that took into account and that they're confident that the product they made will have legs.

Sony managed to make the PS2 a system that could compete with a hypothetical Nintendo console they, at that point, knew nothing about and a console that came from a company that was not even in the console business until after the PS2 specs would have been finalized.  Being the first console of a new generation isn't some crapshoot.  In the past companies have been able to successful speculate on what sort of guts they needed to last.

When Nintendo said that HDTVs were not common enough on the Wii they came across as complete tools because anyone could see that while that might have been the case for the next year or so, the writing was on the wall with HD and it was clear that they were going to be the expected standard years before the next Nintendo console was going to come out (which at the time we assumed would be 2011).  A console is typically a five year product but Nintendo designed the Wii to be a product of the very specific time and place that it was released.  The Wii U is not to be a 2012 product.  It has to be a 2014 product and a 2016 product and maybe even further than that.  Of course if the Wii was designed to be as future proof as literally every other Nintendo console prior to it then we wouldn't even ask.  But they went from the norm last time and need to clarify if that's going to be the case this time.

In the Wii's case they INTENTIONALLY went with low tech hardware.  Could they at least tell us their intentions this time?  Of course if they said "hey we're skimping again on purpose" it might cost them sales (it WILL cost them mine) so I can see why they wouldn't say that.  But then to not confirm the opposite of that gives me justifiable reason to be suspicious.

[Kairon]

Ian Sane, is there anything that suggests your suspicions are wrong? I mean, I'm a pretty staunch Nintendo fan, but if I had your stance on future-proofing the console, I wouldn't be holding out much hope right now. It's pretty clear from this Iwata Asks that Nintendo had some other priorities in hardware design that might've prevented them having as much focus on hardware brute strength as some would like.

[Spak-Spang]

Personally, I have always appreciated Nintendo's more conservative approach to hardware.  Because, when you buy Nintendo it usually lasts.  I know people who have owned their original Nintendo systems for an incredibly long time with no problems.  Their machines are just well built.  And they tend to understand the idea that these machines are toys and need to last for people. 

Now, I also am curious about the RAM, and I think Nintendo is being wise to reserve more RAM than needed.  I am sure this is because they want to make sure things run smoothly and properly.  Once the machine is in the wild, and they can run more efficiency tests and optimize the OS and further examine RAM usage by the OS, then Nintendo will decide what to do with the system ram. 

Remember speed of the OS and getting players into the game has always been important to Nintendo.  They have always stressed that gamers should be playing their games as quickly as possible, and with as little load times and down times as possible. 

In the end, it sounds like Nintendo did not go for cutting edge, but instead went for perfecting the optimization of the system...and this is the best thing in my opinion for a gaming system.

[Soren]

Put me among those who believe we won't see quite a dramatic techological divide this next generation than the one we had with Wii to PS3 this gen.