HolyPaladin
12-31-2006, 06:28 AM
Someone on the GameFAQs board posted a thread about the Wii supposedly being able to produce graphics that are almost on par with the 360 and referenced an article on a site by the name of How Stuff Works.
http://electronics.howstuffworks.com/nintendo-revolution1.htm
I don't know how old the article is, as I couldn't find a post date on it anywhere. I thought it must have been pretty old since the document is named "nintendo-revolution.htm" but in the article itself it refers to the system as the Wii.
Anyway, it references the old IGN article (http://wii.ign.com/articles/699/699118p1.html) about the Wii specs, but then goes on to say "It might also have 32 shader pipelines -- 16 fewer than the Xbox 360. However, the Nintendo GPU is rumored to run at 500 million triangles per second (100 million sustained) -- roughly equivalent to the Xbox 360. It will also be able to handle 50 billion shader operations per second, which is about the same as the 360 as well." None of the quoted text was suggested on IGN's article that they sited as their source for the specs. In fact, the IGN article says much the opposite, saying "Sources we spoke with suggest that it is unlikely the GPU will feature any added shaders, as has been speculated."
Further on down it compares the Wii's specs to the GameCube's and doesn't even get the well-known GameCube specs right. It says that "The GameCube has 24 MB of RAM. The Wii will have 88 MB of RAM." We all know that the GameCube actually had 43 MB of total RAM (including the 3MB on-board the GPU), not 24 MB.
This crap is coming from a website by the name of How Stuff Works? Shouldn't they at least try to understand how stuff works before trying to explain it to the rest of us?
http://electronics.howstuffworks.com/nintendo-revolution1.htm
I don't know how old the article is, as I couldn't find a post date on it anywhere. I thought it must have been pretty old since the document is named "nintendo-revolution.htm" but in the article itself it refers to the system as the Wii.
Anyway, it references the old IGN article (http://wii.ign.com/articles/699/699118p1.html) about the Wii specs, but then goes on to say "It might also have 32 shader pipelines -- 16 fewer than the Xbox 360. However, the Nintendo GPU is rumored to run at 500 million triangles per second (100 million sustained) -- roughly equivalent to the Xbox 360. It will also be able to handle 50 billion shader operations per second, which is about the same as the 360 as well." None of the quoted text was suggested on IGN's article that they sited as their source for the specs. In fact, the IGN article says much the opposite, saying "Sources we spoke with suggest that it is unlikely the GPU will feature any added shaders, as has been speculated."
Further on down it compares the Wii's specs to the GameCube's and doesn't even get the well-known GameCube specs right. It says that "The GameCube has 24 MB of RAM. The Wii will have 88 MB of RAM." We all know that the GameCube actually had 43 MB of total RAM (including the 3MB on-board the GPU), not 24 MB.
This crap is coming from a website by the name of How Stuff Works? Shouldn't they at least try to understand how stuff works before trying to explain it to the rest of us?