Eurogamer says WiiU has a single Gigabyte of RAM.

[Stavros Dimou]

Eurogamer claims it have developer sources that say that the WiiU will have 1GB of RAM.
http://www.eurogamer.net/articles/2012-08-30-how-powerful-is-the-wii-u-really

My comment: Really ? The retail price for 4GB of RAM nowdays is about 30 Euros,half a game,and they didn't bothered to put some more than a single gigabyte in to it ?


Other than that,we don't have a solid idea of what WiiU's processor or graphics card can do, because the information Eurogamer posts is so general it doesn't mean anything.

"Processor is PowerPC from IBM"
Well since 1991 IBM name all their processors PowerPC processors,genius! What differentiate the performance of each processor is its generation. e.g. POWER5,POWER6,POWER7

"Graphics Card is from the 7XXX series of AMD"
The models of the 7XXX vary too much in performance. From not able to play modern console games,to be able to play Crysis 2 with texture pack from the modder's community on multi-monitor 7680x1440 resolution.

"The Graphics card supports DirectX 10"
Probably the dudes on Eurogamer doesn't know that DirectX is a Microsoft exclusive API,and that WiiU isn't going to support it.

 

[Jimmy T. Malice]

Cry some more. Nintendo have already shown with the Wii that they don't care about pixel-shaders, normal-mapping, mega-textures and terabytes of RAM. They just want the console to be affordable and popular.

 

[ToastiestZombie]

The Xbox 360 only has 512mb of RAM. Just putting stuff into perspective. And really, who cares if the Wii U won't be able to run the most demanding games on ultra settings, it's trying something different and it's actually doing more than just a simple tech upgrade like the Nextbox and the PS4 will most likely do.

 

[Dandark]

*Checks computer specs*
I have 8GB of RAM...................

The xbox only had 512 MBs? I had no idea my computer had that much more power in it

 

[Cabisco]

No one buys a Wii for graphics and it's not a market they want to bother spending millions fighting with Microsoft and Sony for.

Their primary markets are casual/family/children none of which will really care about this and it's worked for them so far so why change it up for a massive cost?

 

[yuval152]

No one buys a Wii for graphics and it's not a market they want to bother spending millions fighting with Microsoft and Sony for.

Their primary markets are casual/family/children none of which will really care about this and it's worked for them so far so why change it up for a massive cost?

This, why spend money on a console that is mainly used by kids and casuals? and I think that when the xbox 720 & the PS4 will launch they will be better than the wii u.

 

[Stavros Dimou]

Cry some more. Nintendo have already shown with the Wii that they don't care about pixel-shaders, normal-mapping, mega-textures and terabytes of RAM. They just want the console to be affordable and popular.

3 more gigs of ram wouldn't suddenly turn the console from affordable to not affordable.

The Xbox 360 only has 512mb of RAM. Just putting stuff into perspective. And really, who cares if the Wii U won't be able to run the most demanding games on ultra settings, it's trying something different and it's actually doing more than just a simple tech upgrade like the Nextbox and the PS4 will most likely do.

Yeah but RAM is so cheap nowdays. :/ 512mb is a big limitation on xbox360,Bioware said they removed the weapon holster animation from Mass Effect 3 because of xbox360's RAM... And while 1gb is double that,thinking that 4gb will cost them less than the retail price which is just 30$,makes at least me thinks that an opportunity is missed.

No one buys a Wii for graphics and it's not a market they want to bother spending millions fighting with Microsoft and Sony for.

Their primary markets are casual/family/children none of which will really care about this and it's worked for them so far so why change it up for a massive cost?

True that's how Nintendo has been for the last 10 years. But they said that they where also targeting hardcore gamers this time. :/

I'm pretty sure Eurogamer also released an article claiming an anonymous source told them that the Wii U was less powerful than the 360 or PS3, and didn't have as many shaders. Which doesn't really make much sense, when you analyse the statement.

Anyways, this is all just rumour. Maybe it's true. Another rumour I've heard is that the Wii U has 1.5GB of RAM, with 500MB kept for the operating system. If either rumour is true, it's still a step up from what the current generation offers.

Regarding the article'c comments about the CPU: from the rumours I've heard, the Wii U will have a tri-core Power7 CPU, but each core will have far more cache memory than anything in the 360 or PS3. If I remember rightly, the 360 and PS3 have roughly 256-512KB of cache memory per core, whereas the Wii U's CPU is rumoured to have 3-4MB. Again, if it's true, that's a significant step up.

It is worth mentioning that Ubisoft have confirmed that Assassin's Creed III will run at full 1080p and at 60 frames per second on the Wii U, something neither the 360 or PS3 could even dream of doing.

No, the Wii U is not going to match or better any high-end PC rig on release. That would be stupid. Nintendo is not like Microsoft or Sony. They deal only in videogames. Therefore, they cannot sell at a loss. They need to make a profit from day one to keep their company going. To be honest, from what I've heard, Sony and Microsoft are thinking of going the same route next gen. Both have sunk billions into this generation, and apparently shareholders aren't happy. Sony had to fire 10,000 staff a while ago because of company losses. I'd be very surprised if either company releases a tech-heavy console that loses them hundreds of dollars per model. The economy isn't the same as it was when this generation began. Gamers do not have the same amount of money to throw at consoles as they did when the 360 came out. I imagine all three companies will want to play it a little more conservative if they want to appeal to cash-strapped gamers.

Lastly, it's worth remembering that raw power counts for very little in sales. The last three console generations have been won by the weakest machine. The Wii dominated this generation. Before that, the PS2 shat all over the Gamecube and Xbox, despite being a quantum leap behind in technology terms. And before that, The PS1 crapped all over the N64, despite being a far weaker, 32-bit machine. Every console that has focused on pure power and graphical capability, from the N64 to the Xbox to the PS3, has ended up trailing behind while another console takes all the sales and glory. Sony or Microsoft may surprise me, and may have an eight-core 12GB RAM monster they're waiting to unleash on the world. But if it retails at $599 and has fuck-all games, then that's not going to help them.

You are right the consoles with the weakest hardware are ending up first in sales since playstation/Nintendo 64/Saturn.
But still,I wished WiiU was a little more beefed.
I'm a Nintendo fan.. Whatever.I mean I like Nintendo's software,but dislike their hardware decisions. And I'm also a PC gamer,and I see so many PC games already ask for 4gb to be played, and some already started taking advantage of 64bit OSs and 4+ gigabytes of RAM.
Crysis and Metro 2033 already use more than 4gb of RAM,and the 4gb restriction in Skyrim limits the amount of mods you can add to it already. Considering that in the next 2 years a native PC game will make use of like 8gb of RAM,seeing a new console coming with just 1gb of RAM aches me,both as a Nintendo software fan,and a PC gamer.

It hurts me as a Nintendo fan because the limits will limit game design and fewer things will be able to be accomplished in Nintendo's games I love. (I want friggin Mario with tesselation!)

It hurts me as a PC gamer,because if the rest consoles follow that trend,then for another 5 years all the multiplatform games that will come out will be staying far behind in comparison with what PCs will be able to do,and all the extra power will go to waste.

 

[DJ_DEnM]

Cry some more. Nintendo have already shown with the Wii that they don't care about pixel-shaders, normal-mapping, mega-textures and terabytes of RAM. They just want the console to be affordable and popular.

And family based, don't forget family based.

 

[ResonanceSD]

Doesn't bother the audience, doesn't bother developers, doesn't make a difference. The Wii series doesn't compete on specs, it competes on fun! (and wins)

 

[Lunar Templar]

and anyone buying a WiiU will care, why? exactly?

sides, we still have yet to hear any kinda line up for this thing so it may not matter at all

 

[Owyn_Merrilin]

snip

$30 is still significant to the average person when we're talking about a product in the low $100s, which is where pretty much every successful console in history has been priced. Also, a gig is a significant amount, especially if that's system RAM separate from the video RAM. The 360 only has 512 megs of ram if you add the V-RAM to the regular RAM. Otherwise, it's got 256 megs. Heck, two gigs would still be sufficient for PC gaming if it weren't for Windows Vista/7, which essentially doubles the RAM requirement over XP. Consoles have extremely light OSs, so I have a feeling one gig will be used even more efficiently on the WiiU than it is on an XP machine.

Now, do I still think it's a low amount? Yes. Do I think it's going to prevent the system from doing well? Not at all.

 

[ServebotFrank]

I love how everyone has ignored the fact that the 360 only has 512 mega bytes. So this is a significant upgrade.

 

[zehydra]

*Checks computer specs*
I have 8GB of RAM...................

The xbox only had 512 MBs? I had no idea my computer had that much more power in it

And this, gentlemen, in a nutshell, is why consoles are so popular.

 

[RhombusHatesYou]

Consoles have extremely light OSs

With all the non-gaming crap they apparently want to shovel into the next gen consoles, don't expect that to remain true.

Unless you've got a stripped out Linux distribution running exclusively on your PC - unlikely if you're a heavy gamer - about 500MB will be taken up by the operating system and the windowing environment alone.

If you've got 4GB or less, Windows OSs pretty much fence off half your RAM for OS usage... there are ways around that but they tend to do nasty things for system stability.

Windows OSs are bloatastic.

 

[Owyn_Merrilin]

Consoles have extremely light OSs

With all the non-gaming crap they apparently want to shovel into the next gen consoles, don't expect that to remain true.

Unless you've got a stripped out Linux distribution running exclusively on your PC - unlikely if you're a heavy gamer - about 500MB will be taken up by the operating system and the windowing environment alone.

If you've got 4GB or less, Windows OSs pretty much fence off half your RAM for OS usage... there are ways around that but they tend to do nasty things for system stability.

Windows OSs are bloatastic.

That's the difference between console OSs and Windows OSs, though; all that extra crap is shut down on a console when you start up a game. In Windows (and PC OSs in general) that's all still running in the background. It's basically like the old Amiga and DOS games where you could use a boot disk to bypass the OS, running something with the bare minimum of features needed to support the game.

 

[The White Hunter]

*Checks computer specs*
I have 8GB of RAM...................

The xbox only had 512 MBs? I had no idea my computer had that much more power in it

Yeah, PS3 is also 512Mb but split in two for diff purposes.
It's because consoles need less because the hardware has a lot less multitasking to do, whereas a PC needs more for operating systems, anti-virus, etc all the time.

Though the current console gen is aging badly now.

 

[Les Awesome]

So Just Download Some More RAM