Thursday, December 4, 2008

For the last time...The Wii is more powerful than the Xbox


Two years later and this is still a debate? Do the people arguing the xbox's superiority over the Wii even understand the tech of which they speak? Short answer...hell no. The fact that most developers are putting forth subpar efforts on Wii has nothing to do with the power of the system.

Here is a funny fact for you all. The gamecube was more powerful than the Xbox. Did you miss that? I said... THE GAMECUBE IS MORE POWERFUL THAN THE XBOX. The tech wizards at Factor 5 even stated that the GC had the most powerful general purpose cpu ever in a console in 2002. They stated that the Gamcube CPU was every bit as fast as a 733mhz pentium III(an Xbox) and even exceeded it in key areas.

http://cube.ign.com/articles/086/086984p1.html

The Gamcube was a beast in 2002.

Perception and bottlenecks kept the Gamecube from being the monster it could have been. There was this perception that the GC was even less powerful than even the PS2 because of the conservative spec numbers released by Nintendo as opposed to what Sony and Microsoft were touting with the PS2 and Xbox respectively. Nintendo stated the Gamecube was capable of 6-12 million polygons per second which was easily attainable on the system and perhaps a little to conservative considering a launch game for the system made in a mere 9 months were running at 12-15 million at 60 frames per second. Sony claimed the ps2 was capable 75 million which was actually 75 million "Raw" meaning it could not be achieved in-game and were essentially fake numbers that failed to calulate textures, lighting,framerate, colors...you know...things that make up a game lol. Microsoft did the same, claiming the original Xbox could do 120 million when that was a raw number as well. Which is even funnier is that if you look at the spec shet for the Xbox 360 you'll see that 120 million poly number back again except this time it's real time and not made up unrealistic raw number bs.

The truth is that for its' time, the Gamecube was a polygon monster. Didn't any of you find it odd that Rogue Leader a 2003 Gamecube title is running at double the amount of polys and double the amount of framerate of the best looking Xbox titles? It can be your opinion that Xbox had the best looking games of last generation but they certainly were not the most hardware taxing. Rogue leader could not run on the Xbox in it's current current form. F-zero GX could not run on Xbox in it's current form.

The best looking games on Xbox either:

-ran at 30 frames or less
-had very limited geometry
-limited color pallete

or most time... all of the above.

There is a reason for that. The GC could display more on screen at a time and at a better framerate to boot. This is why Xbox developers had to rely on shaders and normal maps to make things appear more detailed than they really were. A game like Metriod Prime has far more detailed well...everything than a game like Halo 2 and if you believe otherwise is because you don't understand the purpose of a normal map. Developers use normal mapping and shaders so that they can use less polygons in their models...not more. That is part of what makes games like Metriod Prime 3 and Super Mario Galaxy so impressive is because they use next to no normal mapping or shader effects and still look excellent.

Shader effects are possible on the Wii as evident in games like the up and coming The Conduit. However, unlike on systems like the xbox and xbox 360, these effects must be built from scratch and add a large hit to the systems performance. The Wii uses the TEV Unit for it's texture combining "shader" effects and the more stages they use the more it eats into hardware performance. The use of shader effects on the xbox and xbox 360 come at pretty much a zero hit on performance on those systems. They basically get shader effetcs "for free" so to speak. The fact that The Conduit has been known to pass for a 360 title at first glance, all while taking a huge performance hit because of the mandantory custom shader effects is a testiment to howe powerful the little white box is. The xbox cannot handle the visuals the way Wii the Wii is forced to (custom).

The Wii also has no harddive to help with texture streaming it wouldn't otherwise be capabale of.( I'm looking at you doom 3 and halflife2 on xbox). The GC's lack of disk space also put a damper on what could have been regarding the gamecube's graphics potential. Developers were forced to compress textures resulting in lesser quality. Wii however does not have this problem. It is more powerful than the Xbox is every area. It may be easier for the Xbox to create shaders but that doesn't change the fact that the Wii is a more powerful system and also doesn't change the fact that pixel and vertex shader effetcs are possible on the Wii platform if developers simply take the time.

The power is there. It's up to developers to make use of it. Let's hope that High Voltage Software and Factor 5 aren't the only dev teams interested in the potential of the Wii's while not bleeding edge...very capable hardware which happens to be quite a bit more powerful than the Xbox.

18 comments:

Anonymous said...

similar to xbox 1 wait a second BASIC MATH never mind superior architecture…..

xbox front side bus 133mhz = 1gb bandwidth

wii frontside bus 243mhz plus peak 4to1 compression = 7.7 gb bandwidth

xbox main ram old ass sdram

wi main ram 1tsram-r plus gddr3

Pentium 3:
Bus Interface Unit to System Bus = 32 bit * 133 mhz = 1.0 GB/s
Bus Interface Unit from chip: 23 + 2.9 = 25.9 GB/s
L2 Data cache to L1 Data cache: 256 bit * 733 mhz = 23 GB/s
L2 Instruction cache to L1 instruction cache = 32 bit * 733 mhz = 2.9 GB/s

Gekko:
Bus Interface Unit to System Bus = 64 bit * 167 mhz = 1.3 GB/s
Bus Interface Unit from chip = 11.6 GB/s
L2 Data cache to fill buffer 64 bit * 485 mhz = 3.8 GB/s
L2 Instruction cache to L1 instruction cahe = 32 bit * 485 mhz = 3.8 GB/s
DMA controller to fill buffer 64 bit * 485 mhz = 3.8 GB/s
Fill buffer to L1 Data cache 256 bit * 485 mhz = 15.5 GB/s
Write Gather Pipe from Load/Store Unit 64 bit * 485 = 3.8 GB/s

*with data compression of 3.8:1 average data compression:
Bus Interface Unit to System Bus = 64 bit * 167 mhz = 1.3 GB/s * 4 = 5.2 GB/s
Bus Interface Unit from chip = 11.6 GB/s * 4 = 46.4 GB/s
L2 Data cache to fill buffer 64 bit * 485 mhz = 3.8 GB/s * 4 = 15.2 GB/s
L2 Instruction cache to L1 instruction cahe = 32 bit * 485 mhz = 3.8 GB/s
DMA controller to fill buffer 64 bit * 485 mhz = 3.8 GB/s * 4 = 15.2 GB/s
Fill buffer to L1 Data cache 256 bit * 485 mhz = 15.5 GB/s * 4 = 62.2 Gb/s.
Write Gather Pipe from Load/Store Unit 64 bit * 485 = 3.8 GB/s * 4 = 15.2 GB/s

The Gekko architecture is suited much more for streaming a large amount of data then the Pentium 3.

Broadway is Wii’s CPU.

PowerPC 750cxe FX/GX @ 729 MHz
Front Side Bus: 243 MHz, 64 bits @ 1.944 GB’s/sec
256 KB L1 instruction cache
256 KB L1 data cache (can set up 16-kilobyte data scratch pad).
This leads to 512 KB L1 Cache total

Normal Broadway interface:
Bus Interface Unit to System Bus = 64 bit * 243 MHz = 1.944 GB/s
Bus Interface Unit from chip = 17 GB/s
L2 Data cache to fill buffer 64 bit * 729 MHz = 5.832 GB/s
L2 Instruction cache to L1 instruction cache = 32 bit * 729 MHz = 2.916 GB/s
DMA controller to fill buffer 64 bit * 729 MHz = 5.832 GB/s
Fill buffer to L1 Data cache 256 bit * 729 MHz = 23.328 GB/s
Write Gather Pipe from Load/Store Unit 64 bit * 729 MHz = 5.832 GB/s

Broadways data compression
Data compression of 4:1 average data compression:
Bus Interface Unit to System Bus 4:1 = 7.78 GB/s
Bus Interface Unit from chip 4:1 = 68 GB/s
L2 Data cache to fill buffer 4:1 = 23.328 GB/s
L2 Instruction cache to L1 instruction cache 4:1 = 11.664 GB/s
DMA controller to fill buffer 4:1 = 23.328GB/s
Fill buffer to L1 Data cache 4:1 = 93.312 GB/s.
Write Gather Pipe from Load/Store Unit 4:1 = 23.328 GB/s

gamecubes internal gpu cpu bandwidths are 2.5 x xbox 1 and wii is easy 4 x plus

xbox celeron 733mhz = cisc 9 million transistors

wii broadway 729mhz = risc copper-wire silicon on insulator micro embedded tight small efficient design 20+ million transistors

hollywood gpu 3mb EDram 1tsram-r graphics buffer catch 28gb bandwidth not counting compression

xgpu xbox 1 128k graphics catch

hollywood texture stages 16 texture layers 8 8×8 real time lighting (plus custom cpu lighting)

xgpu 4 texture stages 4 texture layers 8×4 realtime lighting

hollywood also supports virtual texturing/tile rendering

2.5 x a gamecube/xbox is not a xbox

highest polygon count xbox 1 @ 30 frames 12 milion polygons

highest polygon count gamecube @ 60(not 30) frames 20 milion polygons

near x360 @ 480p

XBOX MY ASS

Anonymous said...

wiis front side bus is 4to8 times more bandwidth than xbox fsb

wiis cpu has 4to8 times the internal bandwidth of xbox celeron

wiis gpu external and internal bandwidths are easy 4to8 times xbox

wiis 1tsram-r and edram 1tsram are 10 times faster in latency than xbox dram

wiis effective main ram bandwidth is easy 2.5 times that of xbox

xgpu has 128k of texture catch all gpu functions and buffers are handled in the 64mb main ram with low bandwidth and shiity latency theres no edram or real time decompression like wii has with its 3mb edram catch plus real time decompression and a huge 28gb bandwidth

3mb vs 128k no contest

add to this 24mb 1tsram on gpu die if dedicated to gpu thats 3mb edram plus 24mb 1tsram-r dedicated to gpu before hitting external main gddr3 ram

plus compression 27mb fast ram vs 128k gpu xgpu catch IM GIGGLING AT YOU XBOX FANBOYS

27MB 1TSRAM FAST RAM DEDICATED TO FAST GPU EFFECTS/INSTRUCTIONS BEFORE HITTING 64MB MAIN RAM

better compression decompression than xbox 1

better disc drive loadspeed and compression and storage space

fast flash drive to access like a access memory

disc /flash drive/gddr3/1tsram all faster than the xbox counterpart

1tsram rapes sdram gddr3 rapes sdram flash drive rapes harddrive and wiis custom disc set up rapes xbox dvd at streaming data

plus better compression and bigger catches AKA MUCH BIGGER PERFORMANCE

BROADWAY CPU PLUS ARM WORK CPU (DUBBED STARLET) VS XBOX CELERON NO CONTEST

HOLLYWOOD GPU HAS EASY PLUS 2X FILLRATE OF XBOX 1 GPU AND RUNS BOTTLENECK FREE WITH HUGE BANDWIDTH

64MB OF MAIN RAM PLUS COMPRESSION DEDICATED TO GRAPHICS PLUS THE 3MB EDRAM VS XBOX WITCH COULD USE SAY 32MB OF MAIN RAM TO GRAPHICS AND NO EDRAM


WII = 2.5 X A XBOX 1 OR GAMECUBE LEVEL MACHINE @ 480P

2X TRI FORSE ARCADE BOARD=WII

DROP THE MY XBOX WAS THIS POWERFUL FISHERMANS TAILS PLEASE

Anonymous said...

hollywood gpu 1mb EDram texture catch @ 16GB plus 6to1 compression =6mb and virtual 6x16gb bandwidth =96gb bandwidth..
plus virtual texturing 50% increase in bandwidth and texture space effectiveness

1mb is now more like 9mb texture catch and 16gb bandwidth is 96gb bandwidth effective with compression

VS

xgpu of xbox 1 = 128k gpu catch no compression read and decompress ability at all

hollywood gpu frame/zbuffer 2mb EDram 12GB bandwidth plus compression

xgpu no such buffer at all its done in main ram with slow ram and shit bandwidth and a waste of main ram space...

hollywood gpu then has an additional 24mb 1tsram-r fast ram plus compression to tap into at HIGH SPEED

add tile rendering ultra efficient design and tight integrated chips/ram IT SHEER KILLS XBOX 1

motion blur /heat haze/realtime lighting/texturing/colour/AA/filtering will all clear shit on xbox 1

broadway cpu fully supports gpu co-processing custom -lighting geometry and shaders

wii should near match x360 version - HD

WII IS A XBOX 1 DREAM ON GUYS

Anonymous said...

effective bandwidth/effective fill rate/effective compression decompresion/effective ram speed/effective loading/streaming speeds ALL TOTALLY SHIT ON XBOX 1

WIIS FILLRATE DESTROYS XBOX NOT ONLY IS IT HIGHER CLOCKED GPU ITS GOT VERY VERY FAST RAM AND EMBEDDED EDRAM AND ITS VERY VERY EFICENT PER CLOCK AND ON TOP OF ALL THAT ITS A CUSTOM TILE RENDERING CHIP SO ITS FILL RATES ARE ACCELERATED LIKE DREAMCASTS AND THERES ALSO VIRTUAL TEXTURING 50% INCREASE IN TEXEL FILLRATES AND BANDWIDTHS JUST LIKE TILE RENDERING OFFERS

WIIS BANDWIDTH-FILLRATE OVERALL PERFORMANCE AT 480I/P UTTERLY SHITS ON XBOX 1 AND BROADWAY CPU OFFERS CUSTOM FULLY PROGRAMMABLE GRAPHICS AND DESTROYS A INTEL 1GHZ AT PHYSICS

GROW UP X FANS

Anonymous said...

XBOX FRONT SIDE BUS = 133MHZ 1GB


WII FRONT SIDE BUS = 243MHZ PLUS CUSTOM COMPRESSION PEAK 4TO1 = 7.7GB

2TO1 COMPRESSION =3.8PLUS GB

NO COMPRESSION = 1.9GB

CAN YOU SEE JUST HPOW MUCH BANDWIDTH WII PLAYS WITH

XGPU 128K GPU CATCH

WII HOLLYWOOD GPU 3MB EDRAM 28GB BANDWIDTH NOT COUNTING COMPRESSION

IT DESTROYS XBOX

Anonymous said...

XBOX GPU DIE = 128K GPU CATCH NO ABILITY TO READ AND DECOMPRESS DATA/TEXTURES........

WIIS GPU DIE 3MB EDRAM-1TSRAM ON GPU 28GB BANDWIDTH

GPU DIE 24MB 1TSRAM AT 4GB

27MB 1TSRAM 32GB BANDWIDTH PLUS COMPRESSION VS 128K ON THE XGPU


YOUR HAVING A GIGGLE BOYS X TARDS WII IS A 480I/P MONSTER

XBOX WAS A BOTTLE NECKED JOKE WITH LONG LOADING TIMES

Anonymous said...

GAMECUBES PEAK IN GAME POLYGON COUNT LAST GEN AT 60 FRAMES = 20 MILLION POLYGONS

XBOX 1 PEAK IN GAME POLYGON COUNT AT ONLY 30 FRAMES WAS 12 PLUS MILLION

THATS GAMECUBE NOT EVEN WII

WII IS ABOVE 40 MILLION POLYGONS IN GAME SO HOW IS A 2MILLION POLYGON PSP GAME PORTED WII GRAPHICS

Anonymous said...

wouldn't wiis graphics ram be more effective than ps2 gamecube and xbox combined at the same peak resolution...

ps2 main ram to graphics indirectly,, bandwidth/latency bottlenecks poor compresion say 16mb slow ram

xbox after gpu buffers and sound etc cpu... say 32mb better than ps2 compresion but huhe lack of gpu bandwidth and slow ram

wii say 64mb ram mixed 1tsram and gddr3 plus its all dam fast and operates directly to gpu with realtime decompresion of compressed data textures and feeds of a very fast disc drive system

wiis graphics ram in terms of size and bandwidth is like ps2 xbox and gamecube combined EASY

Anonymous said...

XGPU INTERNAL RENDERING BANDWIDTH = 10GB

FLIPPER GPU INTERNAL RENDERING BANDWIDTHS= 25GB

HOLLYWOOD GPU INTERNAL BANDWIDTHS = AROUND 37GB GOING BY THE CLOCKSPEEDS

BUT HOLLYWOOD IS VASTLY MORE EFFICIENT EFFECTIVE THAN XGPU DUE TO TILE RENDERING/FAST RAM/BALANCED SYSTEM/EFFICIENT GPU AND WHOLE SYSTEM

VS XBOX BOTTLE NECKED CRAP

Anonymous said...

So um.. Why doesn't "The Conduit", widely touted as the finest example of Wii graphics, not look much, if at all, better than Halo 2, or any of the XBox Splinter Cell games?

Is it because "developers suck" and you're the sole megagenious who truly understands the Wii?

Why are you comparing simplistic, lightly-textured space games like F5's GameCube stuff, which lack everything from skinned meshes to animationed, to the kinds of games on the X360 that actually require skinning, animation, etc?

Why are you taking F5's "word" that the "GameCube is more powerful than the XBox", when their competition disagrees, and F5 is.. well.. out of business thanks to their "brilliant" work?

I will agree that the Wii is "more powerful" (abstract, and minimal, as that is), than the XBox 1, but comparing it to the X360 is downright ludicrous. Enjoy your TEV.

Anonymous said...

XBOX 1: 115M vertices/sec. Basically means free geometry calculations.
XBOX 1: programmable shader. Means more flexibility implementing visual effects.
XBOX 1: 2 texture units per pipeline. Means texture blending in a single GPU cycle.
XBOX 1: supports stencil operations

Wii: 80M vertices/sec (unless they doubled the T&L throughput compared to GC). May lead to unused pixel operations when tesselation becomes too high... which is a bad thing
Wii: TEV+indirect unit. Less flexibility though very easy to implement REAL normal mapping on it. See my WII normalmapping demo page on beyond3D.
Wii: single texunit per pipeline. Thus, requires two cycles to blend a texture.
Wii: no stencil buf. Pain in the ass to implement shadow volumes (still possible though)
Wii: higher fillrate, bandwith, CPU throughput, so overal the better machine.

And WIIBOY, again, the word is CACHE memory, not CATCH memory, the Wii isn't near X360 (think about the number of pixel operations per cycle you can perform on a X360. The Wii is FAR from that) and XBOX most likely has ARB compression (can't tell from my own experience).

Anonymous said...

"Why are you taking F5's "word" that the "GameCube is more powerful than the XBox", when their competition disagrees, and F5 is.. well.. out of business thanks to their "brilliant" work?"

Simple asnwer: how many developers that claim the Wii is no good actually released a technically advanced game with tons of visual effects such as normalmapping? None! So who is more likely to tell the truth? F5!

Phange 2 said...

The Xbox supported many shaders that the Gamecube simply did not. ATI did not enhance in any way the support for new graphical modes in the Wii. And, might I add, "the proof is in the pudding". No offense, but I have yet to see a Wii game that even matches Halo 1 (an Xbox launch game) in graphical performance. Certainly not Dead or Alive 3.

Anonymous said...

IM BACK CANNOT BELIEVE THIS IS STILL HERE

COD REFLEX RUNNING ON A XBOX 1 (DONT MAKE ME CRY WITH THE GIGGLES)

MONSTER HUNTER TRI RUNNING ON XBOX 1 (DONT GUYS ILL PISS MY SELF WITH THE GIGGLES)

MARIO GALAXY AND GALAXY 2 RUNNING ON XBOX 1(SERIOUSLY NOW DONT ILL PII MYSELF)

COD BLACK OPS I BET ITS THE BEST LOOKING WII COD YET (AGIAN PLEASE STOP X FANNING MY GUTS ARE HURTING I CANNY STOP GIGGLING AT YOU)


GAMECUBE MAXED OUT AT SAY 16 MB OF RAM OUT SIDE THE GPU FOR GRAPHICS WITH SAY 1.6 GB BANDWIDTH DEDICATED TO THE GPU


WII HAS EASILY OUT SIDE THE GPU 24MB 1TSRAM @ 4 GB BANDWIDTH AND SAY 32MB OF THE 64MB GDDR3 @ SAY HALF ITS BANDWIDTH 2 GB ALL DEDICATED TO GPU

THATS 32+24=56MB RAM VS SAY 16MB OF GAMECUBE

AND 6GB BANDWIDTH VS SAY 1.6GB TO 2 GB FOR GAMECUBE

WE ARE LOOKING AT 4X RAM 4XBANDWIDTH MAIN MEMORY FEEDING GPU COMPARED TO GAMECUBE

GAMECUBE AND XBOX WERE ABOUT THE SAME BUT GAMECUBE A BETTER DESIGN AND FASTER LOADER

HOW CAN Wii BE LIKE XBOX THE BASIC MATH AND DESIGN UNDERSTANDING IS CLEARLY PROOF OF OTHERWISE

XBOX 1 SAY 32MB SDRAM TO GPU AND NO EDRAM

Wii CAN HANDLE UPTO SAY 64MB OF RAM MIXED 1TSRAM,DRAM PLUS THE 3MB EDRAM THE RAM WOULD OFFER SAY 6GB BANDWIDTH PLUS COMPRESSION AND THE EDRAM WOULD OFFER 28GB BANDWIDTH PLUS COMPRESSION COMPARED TO SAY 4/5 GB OF BANDWIDTH TOTAL FOR THE XBOX

ITS CLEAR @ 480P WIDESCREEN 30/60 FPS THE WII OFFERS FAR MORE RAM AND RAM EFFICENCIE AND FAR MORE BANDWIDTH AND BANDWIDTH EFFICENCIE ADD THE BIGGER AND FASTER DISC LOADING STREAMING AND THE LOW LATENCY BALANCED MEMORY SPEED THAT IN ITS SELF PROVES WII A XBOX DESTROYER

FACTOR 5 WENT BUST SUPORTING PS3 THEY HAD A WII ENGINE BASED ON THE LAIR PS3 ENGINE IN THE WORKS AND STATED IT CAN DO EVERYTHING THE PS3 ENGINE COULD -HD

COD 4 ENGINE IS RUNNING ON Wii

MONSTER HUNTER TRI METROID OTHER M GALAXY 2,RES EVIL DARKSIDE CRONICALS ETC HAVE ALL PUSHED UP THE Wii VISUAL LEVEL YET NO ONE YET HAS MAXED OUT THE CONSOLE THE COUGH STUPID INDUSTRY IS STILL PLAYING ANTI Wii GAMES WITH US AS NINTENDO DISRUPTS THEM AWAY AND TAKES OVER THE GAMES INDUSTRY ONCE AND FOR ALL....

HDR RENDERING,DISPLACMENT MAPPING,CUSTOM MAPING,BUMP MAPING,HIGH FILL RATE,POST EFFECTS ETC ARE ALL GETTING BETTER AND BETTER ON Wii

ALL Wii COD GAMES WOULDNT RUN ON A XBOX ITS MINDLESS TO COMPARE A XBOX TO Wii

maxed out gamecube plus maxed out xbox @ 60 fps @ 480p in widescreen is wii power CLEARLY WAY ABOVE XBOX.....

im guessing 3DS is a hollywod gpu and arm cpus system on chip and it will be amassing with games built from scratch for a 4 inch screen and 3D

the little gpu artX made for nintendo was and still is a fantastic little chip i wouldnt be supprsed if it was the bases of the wii 2 hardware yet again evolved and mated to high end arm cpus like a high clockspeed 2/4 core ARM A9

big hot chips and pc boxes and loud fans are the past

Anonymous said...

xbvox had more shader than gamecube HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA gamecube 16 texture stages and 8 texture layers per rendering pass

xbox 1 4 texture layers and gen 1 old fashioned shaders that had to suport all the basic stuff like bump mapping

the wii can mimick ps3 level shader effects in sd resolutions

the effects in galaxy 2 like bump maping reflxtions custom maps normal maps imence smoke and fog blenders shaders high qoulity color etc blow the xbox 1 out of the water

the xbox had more shaders than gamecube NO IT DID NOT YOU BORN LYAR

and it was bandwidth starved you GOOSE

6.4gb bamdwidth from crappy sdram shared whole system

gamecubes gpu had around 14 gb bamdwidth plus compression on the gpu before it even hit main ram

xbox relied on its main ram for gpu buffers etc gamecube had high bandwidth edram

wii has the same at higher clock speed and new gpu tweeks

plus vastly more ram and bandwidth from main ram


try running fill rate and shaders with out bandwidth = fail

xbox 1 was starved of bandwidth

wii is blessed with bundles of it and it uses it vastly more efficently than xbox due to a better smoother design and custom texture trick and tile rendering

heres another way of looking at it

x360 has edram (dram) @ 10 mb and a read speed of 32gb bandwidth

wii has 3mb edram (1tsram better) embedded into the gpu at 28gb bamdwidth read plus compression and no HD to suport

clearly wen programmed correctly and data streamed thru the system wii has a huge bandwidth and memory advatage to xbox/ps2/psp/gamecube

wii is like gamecube/ps2/psp conbined running smoothly and quickly with the same peak resolution as the last gen machines

wii is exacly as it was discribed 2.5 x plus a gamecube @ 480p thats clearly 2.5 x xbox

its called commonsense the word """shader"" doesnt mean diddly sqot and it doesnt change the fact x-fans are lying fucks

Anonymous said...

TEV= texture blender shader trick hardware thats PROGRAMMABLE add insanly efficent hard wired fixed function gpu effects THAT CAN BE HACKED clearly the wii """shades"" your fanboying the word shader tev is called tev it shades it doesnt need to be called a SHADER in order to do it

STOP WINDOWS FANBOYING

X360= DIRECTX WTF EVER

Wii= opengl open gx and custom to the metal micro code


stop aplying pc bill gates fan talk to a differant machine =DUMB FUCKER

Anonymous said...

mario galaxy 1 would not run on a xbox powered machine and galaxy 2 looks even better so how is wii = or lower than a xbox the list of games with genuine next gen looking visuals on wii is always growing like monster hunter tri,galaxy 2,cod reflex,resident evil darkside cronicals etc......

peak fsb xbox 1GB bandwidth
peak fsb wii 7.7GB bandwidth
peak bandwidth total ram of xbox offers shared cpu,gpu,sound processor 6.4gb bandwidth

peak bandwidth wii offers its gpu alone 28gb on edram and at least 6gb main ram plus all the clever compression

DO THE MATH

spanking fetish stories said...

I knew she was leaving but it worked right into my plans. To marry someone is to become one with.
true bondage stories
free incest porn pics and stories
gay stories high school
janes sex stories
male submisison stories nifty
I knew she was leaving but it worked right into my plans. To marry someone is to become one with.