So Wii U weak point is local multiplayer? Never thought i'd hear that

I must not be getting it.  I never said anything about a blank screen.  I said, with concrete reasons that, that a "single processor" operating on a 2x larger screen of equal complexity will not require twice the work.  It simply doesn't work that way.  My estimate is that it would probably take about 30-40% more time (ie work) to process a screen double the size and of equal complexity, provided that the rendering isn't being synced to the screen refresh rate.  If it is already running at 60 FPS, its possible you will see zero slowdown.

The bolded part MAY be true for some architectures, but not all, and who cares.  "Fragment shader" is much simpler than "computation unit programmed to run fragment shader operations"

Takashi has severe issues says WiiU supporter...

WiiU has more power than the PS360, but uses that power to boost two awesome gamepads that can be used as portable devices, remote controller...etc. instead of boosting grafix

whats the problem?
your answer is grafix, grafix, grafix, gtafix....
i say f....k you!

It does take 2x the time because nothing is shared, not loading, triangles, shaders. It's like virtualising two GPUs on one physical board. Obviously if you start sharing the data between two screens it will reduce but I was never referring to that. Your "estimates" are unsubstantiated.

The architecture of the Wii U is known, it's post-R600 AMD and hence unified-shader.

All of which is irrelevant to the point that one GPU > two, always.

I imagine they're referring to Wii U's singular multi-core processor.

OT: This isn't surprising, really. Nintendo are doing something that hasn't been done on home consoles yet: displaying the game on more than simply the main screen. Unless they go with an unconventionally powerful system to do HD Twins level of graphical fidelity on the two tablet screens and TV, Nintendo and the third party developers will have to drastically undershoot the single display requirements to accomodate this.

I'd imagine Wii U would have to be at least three times as powerful as the HD Twins just to match the visuals of this generation...

EDIT: To clarify, I am using the notion of displaying unique scenes on each screen.

He means the Wii U CPU. Although it is a quad-core, that is irrelevant since the CPU has to do so much more work than the 360/PS3. Essentially multi-platform games will end up looking the same or worse.(this might change later in the Wii U's lifecycle)

My point is that the GPU processing is only a portion of the total processing that needs to be done for each frame.  Even worst case scenario (each screen is exactly equal in complexity and resolution, but render no portion of the same resources, and use no similar textures, highly unlikely) there will still be portions of the frame time interval which only have to be run once, regardless of how many screens you have.

So worst case scenario, the GPU processing COULD take twice as long, but the total frame time will not be

This is nonsense as the CPU's load will be minimally more on multiplat games, the GPU is what will be hit harder by complex rendering on 2 screens.  Multi-plats with minimal second screen usage (eg AC:3) could always look better on wii u than the other two.

By that logic, or lack thereof, WiiU is weaker than PS3/Xbox360.

Since the Wii is weaker and dead, the WiiU is naturally dead, too. Dead before conception.