Information

Did you know you could become an X-bit labs fan on Facebook or follow us on Twitter?



Discussion

Discussion on Article:
Detailed Specifications of Nintendo Wii U Revealed by Technology Enthusiasts.

Started by: Martian | Date 11/29/12 10:24:33 AM
Comments: 12 | Last Comment:  12/02/12 01:25:41 PM

Expand all threads | Collapse all threads

[1-4]

1. 
Another article restating the very same information we had before... clock speed means nothing in itself.
2 0 [Posted by: Martian  | Date: 11/29/12 10:24:33 AM]
Reply
2. 
to compete against multi-GHz chips inside Microsoft Xbox 360 and Sony PlayStation 3.


So they brought out a new console that is 7 years newer then the xbox 360 cpu just to compete against it? Well looks like there is the answer to why it is “horribly slow" for todays standards. I don't get why Nintendo would come out with a new console just to compete against the 360 and ps3 when it should be beating it in every category hands down.
3 2 [Posted by: SteelCity1981  | Date: 11/29/12 10:27:16 AM]
Reply
- collapse thread

 
It all comes down to the price. If they inserted more expensive hardware of course the price would of been higher for the Wii U. As we all remember Wii had very successful sales despite the fact that the hardware were not as good as the rest of the consoles.
4 0 [Posted by: BulletProof  | Date: 11/29/12 01:58:04 PM]
Reply
 
Because it had a unique controller. They just tried to do the same thing again, unfortunately this time the creative team was out of town.
2 0 [Posted by: Martian  | Date: 11/29/12 08:07:37 PM]
Reply
 
but the thing is there isn't nothing exciting to the Wii-U that will give it the same appeal as the Wii did with the wand. The wand made the Wii highly sucessful, because it was something new and refreshing and hadn't been done before, the Wii-U has nothing exicting like that. it has a portable handled as a controller that's it. They could have exchanged that portable handled controller and put it towards a more powerful cpu instead and have ot cost the same.
0 2 [Posted by: SteelCity1981  | Date: 11/29/12 11:50:37 PM]
Reply
3. 
show the post
0 6 [Posted by: qubit  | Date: 11/29/12 01:11:23 PM]
Reply
- collapse thread

 
AMD owns ATI so who do you think gets the money ?
3 1 [Posted by: p3ngwin  | Date: 11/29/12 04:26:08 PM]
Reply
 
show the post
1 5 [Posted by: Avon4Balls  | Date: 11/29/12 06:04:14 PM]
Reply
 
You do realize that AMD has owned ATI since 2006 but were just using the ATI name as a division of AMD until AMD decided to change the ATI name to AMD in 2010.
1 2 [Posted by: SteelCity1981  | Date: 11/29/12 11:56:45 PM]
Reply
 
Yes I know. I thought it would be interesting if they signed a contract earlier like, with the 1st Wii and decided to use ATI for the next generation console too. Though technologies can change a lot within a few years so it would be unwise to have a multi-year contract like Pixar does- hardware prices are a lot more volatile I guess.
0 0 [Posted by: qubit  | Date: 11/30/12 09:34:18 AM]
Reply
 
Even then, I guess it depends on the term of the contact- a lump sum at the time of the signing to the ATI sellers in exchange for all profits hitherto being redirected to AMD. Surely there are other contracts where royalties prior to a date or product (if sold) go to the original owner. Just food for thought.
0 0 [Posted by: qubit  | Date: 11/30/12 09:38:42 AM]
Reply
4. 
Xbox 360 and Playstation 3 are horribly slow by today's standards already. I am not in the gaming console business so I do not claim I unerstand the dynamics there very well but for me it does not sound like a smart move to build a console in 2012 that hardly competes with those old consoles.
1 0 [Posted by: juergenonly  | Date: 12/02/12 01:25:41 PM]
Reply

[1-4]

Back to the Article

Add your Comment


Our Sponsors

Crucial.com Western Digital G.Skill