Nintendo Wii Specs Revealed

[corruptrelic]

Took this from Teamxbox.com:

The Wii Hardware

Nintendo Wii’s ‘Broadway’ CPU operates at 729MHZ with a maximum bandwith of 1.9gbyte/sec.
Nintendo Wii’s ‘HollyWood’ GPU is clocked at 243MHZ, the internal memory of it includes 3mb of embedded graphics memory and 24megabytes of high speed main memory.
64megabytes of GDDR3 (MEM2) as the external main memory. Just like the internal memory, it can be accessed from the CPU and GPU with a maximum bandwidth of 4gbytes/sec and can also store programs in the MEM2.
The GPU of the Wii is identical to the GC’s but it is on average 1.5X faster.

Source: http://news.teamxbox.com/xbox/11459/Nintendo-Wii-Specs-Revealed/

It has a lot more info on there, and I didn't see anything about a DVD drive on it.
Recently Microsoft Europe called the Wii "almost a gamecube with a dvd player" (some critism, obviously) yet, I dont even see a dvd player here.

Personally I never had much of an interest in the "Wii" (WTF kind of name is that) I'm fine with my xbox 360 for the next-gen, but looking at those underpowered specs it makes me even less interested. Maybe for the "kids" but for us mature gamers, I think Xbox 360 (and PS3) are the future of gaming.
But hey, that's just my opinion.

[Tebunker]

team xbox got this information from a Blogger, who intern cobbled a lot of this information from various websites.

It's a shame really, unfortunately none of this is confirmed. The actual Blog report has information on the DVD player and more, but there are also big chunks missing.

Nintendo will never release a spec sheet, so we won't truly know until the thing actually comes out.

Neogaf has a pretty good discussion going on, but the general consensus is that the machine is really like Xbox 1.5 or so in terms of raw power.

And we've all known from day one that this machine wasn't going to be about raw power. Dissapointing, yes, but some of the ideas coming out of the wii-mote seem exciting to say the least.

[Destructor]

And we've all known from day one that this machine wasn't going to be about raw power. Dissapointing, yes, but some of the ideas coming out of the wii-mote seem exciting to say the least.

Once again - to those developers who know how to program for the console (see Resident Evil 4 on the Gamecube, or any of the Ratchet and Clank games on the PS2) will be able to truly show off the power of said console.

I'm perfectly happy with the Gamecube 1.5. The games I bought and played were fun as hell, and assuming they keep that tradition up with the Wii, I'll be just fine with the 'low end' graphics.

[CeeKay]

Count me in for the Wii!  At first I rolled my eyes at the concept of the controller, but then someone mentioned 'Star Wars Game using the controller' and I stopped, re-evaluated it, and decided to get it.  Now if only the stores would start taking pre-orders.  Plus, at the pricepoint they are talking about, it'd probably end up being an impulse buy for me anyways.

[Dafones]

Gameplay's going to decide the failure or success of the Wii. This isn't new.

Clock speed is always deceptive too - you can't compare Intel CPUs and Apple CPUs by numbers alone, for instance.

[Laner]

Clock speed is always deceptive too - you can't compare Intel CPUs and Apple CPUs by numbers alone, for instance.

Actually, you can

[Darren8r]

I like the Wii, the names dumb, I don't find the controller all that cool.

But, you will be able to download all those older games that were out on NES and SNES and N64.

I want that feature for sure, I can't wait.

I don't care about raw power in a game console, as long as they have good games.

[Jumangi]

Wow someone ragging of the Wii because of its specs...blah blah blah.

Yea and the PSP is gonna smoke the DS because its such a slick, powerful, cool device compared to the underpowered gimmicky DS.

[jimmyorr99]

Gameplay's going to decide the failure or success of the Wii. This isn't new.

Clock speed is always deceptive too - you can't compare Intel CPUs and Apple CPUs by numbers alone, for instance.

You certianly make a good point, it's always been kinda wierd comparing AMD and Intel chips becuase they run processes in a different way, thust speed is less and more effective, depending on what you are doing.

[Dafones]

And I don't mean to be a prick about it, but this thread already feels like deja vu. We've gotten into these conversations before.

[Destructor]

thust speed is less and more effective, depending on what you are doing.

Taken out of contex, man does this sound nasty.

[EddieA]

From the front page, regarding Free Radical's upcoming game -
"There are currently no plans for a Wii version of Haze. Sadly, the cutting-edge technology we're using requires more power than the Wii has available. If we could, we would."

I think this is going to be Nintendo's biggest problem.  They can't simply port games made for other systems without seriously downgrading the graphics.  I can see a lot of companies, especially smaller ones, thinking that it's just not worth the trouble, especially when you add in changing the control scheme.  Are Nintendo's first-party and the third party Wii-exclusives going to be enough to give them a big enough install base for developers to be willing to port games to the Wii?

[Jumangi]

If that logic were true then a system like the DS should be a failure, since if you want to take advantage of it you have to make the game just for it. Yet there is plenty of support for it and sales have been very impressive. As much as the lack of uber tech may turn off some developers the fact that they could make a game that doesn't cost $20 million could be a inticement too.

[Tebunker]

The fact that a Wii game could cost from 5 to 12 million to develop is a huge plus for developers, considering that is roughly 1/4th the cost of average 360/PS3 development depending on game.

I think someone already said it in this thread, if companies take the time and figure out how to get RE4 level graphics or better out of games and I think it's doable, the Wii won't have much issues in the visual/power department.

[Knightshade Dragon]

The fact that a Wii game could cost from 5 to 12 million to develop is a huge plus for developers, considering that is roughly 1/4th the cost of average 360/PS3 development depending on game.

I think someone already said it in this thread, if companies take the time and figure out how to get RE4 level graphics or better out of games and I think it's doable, the Wii won't have much issues in the visual/power department.

I really don't think that'll be a big challenge as it supposedly uses the same graphic system as the Cube.  If that is the case, they've already spent the last few years learning how to use it leaner and better.

[Kevin Grey]

Are Nintendo's first-party and the third party Wii-exclusives going to be enough to give them a big enough install base for developers to be willing to port games to the Wii?

I think this is Nintendo's specific plan- they are intending Wii as either the second console for those who have a 360 or PS3 or as the only console for those with little love for the types of games represented on those platforms and their whole philosophy, down to the price, seems focused on that.  No one is going to buy the Wii just because it has a substandard port of Splinter Cell: Double Agent.  Wii will live or die based on the quality of their exclusive content which seems a lot less risky now for Nintendo after the success of the DS using a very similar approach.

[The Grue]

Hopefully this stuff isn't a surprise to anyone as Nintendo has repeatedly said that Wii is not about graphics.  I have my 360 for that.  I want a Wii for playing unique games in a unique way and I think it will deliver on that beautifully.  It's the very reason I got my DS on launch and it hasn't failed me at all.  If you're a strict graphics whore, I think this isn't the system for you.

It's interesting that lots of people say they will get Wii as a secondary system to 360 (Wii60) or PS3.  As has been said before, if everyone gets Wii as their secondary machine, doesn't that make Wii the number one console?  Not sure that that will happen, but I think they are in a good position to do something very positive this gen.

[Farscry]

My thoughts are exactly in line with what The Grue said.  This is not a surprise to anyone (or at least, anyone who's been paying attention up until now).  No, the Wii won't run the games with high-end graphics that the 360 and PS3 will.  However, Nintendo is gunning to hit a different library of games than what the 360 and PS3 will feature.

Could they make another system just like the other big two if they wanted?  Sure.  But they're taking a risk and throwing in with a different system with a different aim.  Might work, might not.  We won't know until it's had time to either succeed or fail.  Just like so many expected the PSP to totally thrash the DS by virtue of its higher-powered hardware and higher-resolution screen, but yet the DS has succeeded through a library of games that take advantage of its unique capabilities.

[Tebunker]

I also think that Wii sports is a good indicator of the attitude that Nintendo is cultivating.

And if wii get multiple games that are on the simpler side, packaged as so and marketed as so and sold at that reasonable price, then I am all for it.

Because like the DS, we'll get our normal games like Hunters and New Super Mario Bros. and then we get the New Nintendo type games like Brain Age and the other Touch Generations games.

[-Lord Ebonstone-]

I've seen abaci with more processing power than that.

[Dimmona]

Are people really that worried about the power?  I mean the DS has much, much less horsepower than the PSP, yet it is succeeding (and beating the PSP saleswise) thanks to its unqiue interface and unique gameplay experiences.  I don't see how the Wii will be any different...

[Destructor]

Are people really that worried about the power?  I mean the DS has much, much less horsepower than the PSP, yet it is succeeding (and beating the PSP saleswise) thanks to its unqiue interface and unique gameplay experiences.  I don't see how the Wii will be any different...

That is my thought exactly. Gameplay is far more important than pretty graphics. Why GT double rates that field in all reviews.

Graphics help, don't get me wrong, but I'll live with 1.5 times what the Gamecube could do.

Another thought - you know all the issues with some games on the 360 having drastic frame rate issues when being displayed at 1080i? That's because the console doesn't have the horsepower to run it. At 480p, you don't need even a third of the horsies to update the screen at 60fps.

[Wolves]

Despite this 'news', the Wii is still the only next generation (or is it now 'this' generation) system I currently plan on getting. Microsoft has abandoned LAN players and Sony is charging too much.

Although I'm not 100% sold yet, as long as things pan out they way they seem to be, I think I'll be picking one up. X-Box 1 graphics are just fine for me, so 'X-box 1.5' graphics will be more than adequate for my tastes... and my wallet. Plus, that game with the sword in feudal Japan looks like it will be insanely fun. Still, time will tell.......

[Dafones]

I thought the Wii was going to wind up being three times as powerful as a GameCube? Is it only 1.5x now?

[Tebunker]

Just a note, Mosys just had a Meeting of the Board, and they made a little mention of the Wii, specifically the ram type they mentioned being in the system, and it completelycontradicts what this side by side states.

[Destructor]

I thought the Wii was going to wind up being three times as powerful as a GameCube? Is it only 1.5x now?

1.5x, 3x, whatever. All I know for sure is that it's more powerful than the Gamecube is, but doesn't compare to what the 360 can do.

And you can't flat compare specs either, as stated above.

[corruptrelic]

If that logic were true then a system like the DS should be a failure, since if you want to take advantage of it you have to make the game just for it.

Well that's certainly true. A good example is the new starwars lego game coming out for DS, PSP, 360, Xbox and PS2.
Apparently the DS version had to be built from the ground up due to the DS's hardware, while the other's were just ports of eachother.

I dont buy the argument "its all about gameplay" though because if that were true, we'd still be playing away on our Atari 2600's because after all, it's all about the games and not the graphics!
I don't see why a game can't have both good graphics and gameplay. Just about every game out there has at least dozens of people working on it, some of them are working on the graphics, others the online portion, some the AI, others the storyline and gameplay,etc.. so there's no reaosn to think that graphics can't be just as top notch as the gameplay is. (Halo 2 and Unreal Tournament 2004 as an example)

I've been through two DS's and I really tried to like it but just coudn't get into the graphics. From the "grainy" madden 06 to the 1990s looking age of empires 2, it just didn't compare to what the PSP can do.

Right now I'm happy with my 360 and know it'll be producing games the Wii can never handle. (Lets see Gears of War on the Wiiiii!!)
If I end up getting another console, it'll probably be the PS3 when the price goes down, but supporting the "Wii" I don't see ever happening.. The gamecube is the only console I never supported.
This latest information from Free Radical about the Wii not being powerful enough to handle next-gen games only further proves the point the Wii is too far behind the times. Look at how long it took nintendo to finally embrace online gaming (and it's still in it's infancy stages) while everyone else has had it around for years.

As a side note, how are you going to ask for your "Wii" when it comes out? "Excuse me mam, but I want a Wii.." you can hear her already "Sir please, the bathroom is in the back!"
Yeah yeah I could overlook the stupid name if it had some decent power to back it up.. but it doesn't and if it debuts at a $250 price tag, $50 more will get you a real console (the 360) not to mention by then, the 360 might be seeing it's first price drop by then anyway.

[Farscry]

I don't see why a game can't have both good graphics and gameplay.

And I don't see why a game has to have good graphics in order to be able to enjoy great gameplay.

This latest information from Free Radical about the Wii not being powerful enough to handle next-gen games only further proves the point the Wii is too far behind the times.

That must be why it's getting so much support from 3rd parties with ports and original titles, such as Ubisoft.

Of course the Wii won't run everything the PS3 and 360 will.  Not a big deal to a lot of people, though yes, it's a deterrent to others.

Are you saying that current-gen consoles don't have good graphics?  Because the Wii will surpass that, even if it doesn't quite hit the level that the 360 does or the PS3 allegedly will.

[The Grue]

I dont buy the argument "its all about gameplay" though because if that were true, we'd still be playing away on our Atari 2600's because after all, it's all about the games and not the graphics!

That's because the gameplay of most Atari games is crap by today's standards.  Notice I said "most" because there are still some games that stand the test of time and I will play them despite the fact that the graphics are ancient.  Pitfall is a perfect example.

[Farscry]

Notice I said "most" because there are still some games that stand the test of time and I will play them despite the fact that the graphics are ancient.  Pitfall is a perfect example.

And "Combat" and "Snafu"!  Those are awesome.    Nothing beat using invisible tanks with ricocheting shots in Combat, and Snafu was just a ton of fun.