Everybody knows that Wii has much less horsepower than PS3 or Xbox 360, but a new Splitfish press release has gone further, asserting that Nintendo Wii is inferior to the original Xbox.
It's a surprising claim, no doubt. The full text of the (incredibly biased towards Sony) release follows.
Sounds like a load of crap to me. MP3 is supposed to look better than the Halo 2 on the Xbox so where do they get this logic?
Source
must have been a bunch of halo fanboys righting that statement
that site is obviously made by a bunch of ps3 and 360 fans that think graphics are everything and dont want to say wii is better in any ways even though its selling better than both systems.the graphics on wii arent even that bad. they arent amazing but they most games do have decent detail. ex.look at zelda, its gamecube graphics and for gamecube id say it has amazing detail.
I remember the PS2 could handle an insane amount of polygons and the GC could handle more textures but I don't remember what the XBox did well. I know the Wii is better than both the PS2 and GC, but since I don't quite remember what the XBox was great at, they could just be going off whatever that is.
It's partially incorrect. It's true that the xbox has a slightly faster CPU @ 733 MHz, compared to the wii (excepet the two, like in all hardware, have different architecture, so the difference of the two might differ). The GPU of the xbox is also slightly faster, it has 250MHz, while the wii has 243 MHz.
Where the two greatly differ is in the RAM. The wii wins by having a faster type of RAM (GDDR3 SDRAM) and 88 MB main memory AND the 3MB GPU texture memory (which allows the wii to render 3D images faster).
While the xbox has 64MB DDR of RAM.
But remember that you can't compare 2 different types of architecture and excpect that to be 100% accurate. In this case number don't matter, efficiency of the hardware is what matters.
Feel free to correct me if you think I am wrong/missing something.
im pretty sure theyre just looking at the amount of horsepower the original xbox had. ps2 has 294mhz, GCN has 485mhz, and xbox has 733mhz. also at the time it came with built in online capabilities.
Its being stated that MP3 looks better than Halo 2.
Their opinions phail.
I personally don't think that all of these "analyst" claims are going to make the difference. IN terms of graphical processing power, the Wii and the original XBOX are about the same. Yet, the Wii has a very revolutionary controller, next-gen features like Wi-Fi, a Bluetooth controller, memory card support, which obviously makes it better.
Nintendo's goal has really never been to bring out all the 1080p and 1.7GHz crap of graphical processing power. Their goal has been to make lovable games from the start. This is something Microsoft will never do--besides Halo, maybe.
I don't agree with what they're saying, but let's remember that the Xbox could produce 7209/1080i and also put on dolby digital and DTS and the Wii can't. I think nintendo should have at least allowed us to play games in Dolby Digital and that the damn pro logic 2.
I sometimes have to laugh at all of the talk about how good graphics of this system are or that system. Let's say you have a computer capable of putting out X graphics. Do you think every game made will take full advantage of that fact? Does anyone believe that every game that is being produced/will be produced for these three systems will push them to the max? Some games will look mindblowing but not every single game will. Will it kill a game not to look so great? Not at all. Take Wario Ware for example, with great graphics the game might not even be as fun as it is. In Japan, Wii Sports is the number one selling game and you can see how the graphics look on that. When you play SSBM do you think wow this game is great because of the graphics? Hell no. Gameplay trumps graphics any day period. Graphics help but not every game needs or will have the best. Just one guy's opinion.
Its being stated that MP3 looks better than Halo 2.
Their opinions phail.
I personally think the graphics are a little better than Halo 2. You don't agree? That's fine. Your opinion...
OK! I don't think the we have seen what the wii can really do! I think that nintendo will surprize everybody with what it can really do! it might not have the best but I think nintendo will rock out. look at zelda TP that's aa gamecube game and it looks good most people don't know it was a port!
and they haven't even warmed up! nintendo will show you what up!
OK! I don't think the we have seen what the wii can really do! I think that nintendo will surprize everybody with what it can really do! it might not have the best but I think nintendo will rock out. look at zelda TP that's aa gamecube game and it looks good most people don't know it was a port!
and they haven't even warmed up! nintendo will show you what up!
exactly man, think about how the next zelda will look like. it'll be a zelda actually intended for wii, and im sure they will most likely push the wii graphics with a zelda game. either it was the zelda director or producer i remember hearing them say the next one will also include more puzzles in teh game that use the remote more.
aww, man. the link doesnt work.
I don't agree with what they're saying, but let's remember that the Xbox could produce 7209/1080i and also put on dolby digital and DTS and the Wii can't. I think nintendo should have at least allowed us to play games in Dolby Digital and that the damn pro logic 2.
where'd you learn that? it was limited at 480p.
and the wii has a better GPU, in this day and age, MHz don't mean anything, it's all about performance and features
It's partially incorrect. It's true that the xbox has a slightly faster CPU @ 733 MHz, compared to the wii (excepet the two, like in all hardware, have different architecture, so the difference of the two might differ). The GPU of the xbox is also slightly faster, it has 250MHz, while the wii has 243 MHz.
Where the two greatly differ is in the RAM. The wii wins by having a faster type of RAM (GDDR3 SDRAM) and 88 MB main memory AND the 3MB GPU texture memory (which allows the wii to render 3D images faster).
While the xbox has 64MB DDR of RAM.
But remember that you can't compare 2 different types of architecture and excpect that to be 100% accurate. In this case number don't matter, efficiency of the hardware is what matters.
Feel free to correct me if you think I am wrong/missing something.
where the heck are you getting these facts? Nintendo or ATI have not released any tech specs like this!
where'd you learn that? it was limited at 480p.
and the wii has a better GPU, in this day and age, MHz don't mean anything, it's all about performance and features
nope. the xbox can handle 480p and 1080i. i dont know about DTS, but it did have dolby digital 5.1.