I'm not trying to bash the game but it just doesn't look impressive at all to showcase the WII U's power and plus there will be better titles than this in the WII U's lifetime. I don't know why your bringing ubisoft in this when this developer hasn't showcased anything much better themselves.

I agree that we will see much better in the system's life; it's a 82MB launch title made by 5 people, after all. But for the reasons I outlined in my last post, I think it makes better use of the hardware than Ubisoft's games so far.

It's slim pickings on Wii U as far as showcases go, as it's still early daysn for the system, so it's less a matter of "which is the best showcase" and more a matter of "what's the best we've seen so far, even if it's not exactly a showcase".

As for the bet, I'll put in my sig for 3 months: "fatslob-:O correctly predicted that Watch Dogs would be graphically better on Wii U than 360/PS3. He was right and I was wrong."
Deal?

No, it doesn't.

GoW has more attention lavished on its lighting and a more coherent artistic style, but it never presents the kind of expansive backdrops Bayonetta 2's cityscape showcases. Kinda impossible for it to do so, given PS3 has less than half as much RAM as Wii U.

@Bold here's where your wrong, Jaguar features wider SIMD units as evidenced by its AVX extension while also having wayyy more than 2cores.

Can I like also get some source on how those cores are based off of a G5 please ?

Developers probably have strip some workloads for the wii u processor to get it running. How do you think developers got games running on older consoles ?  BTW the CPU isn't all important for purposes of of rendering today. 

can you like show some evidence as to the figures for JAGUAR AND NOT BOBCAT are close to the espresso.

BTW those were comparisons Whether you like it or not I can still accept the fact that it has a weak cpu plus I'm seriously worred about the WII U in the future unless ofcourse nintendo drops support easily.

You havent seen Tartarus part then, or the Cronos battle. Cronos was like a small city himself.

Oh, also Poseidon

Jaguar is a 4-core CPU, with 2MB of cache and performance enhancements with new instructions added from Bobcat, that's it. Obviously a Jaguar CPU alone would best a Bobcat CPU since there are more cores, and they have 15% higher IPC, 128-bit SIMD instead of 64-bit, and new instruction sets, but this is NOT going to do much to increase overall performance per-core the way you think. You will not see anything near double the performance out of this because it's only the SIMD width that increased by 2. Real world performance (factoring everything in), will be a bit over 50% more powerful than Bobcat. Again, I'm talking about "per core". 

And an 8-core Jaguar goes at 102.4GFLOPS. 2 cores are reserved for the OS in PS4/X1. 8 FLOPS per cycle, per core. 8 x 1.6ghz = 12.8 GFLOPS per core. 6 usable cores = 76.8 GFLOPS for PS4 CPU, 84 GFLOPS for the X1 CPU (8 x 1.75ghz x 6)

Xenon is based on PPE, which is a PowerPC970, which is a G5. The PPE in Cell is a PowerPC970, which is a G5. G5s were designed to have high clocks, not so high IPC, improved SIMD performances, but they are in-order processors. Here's a link with a good explanation for both:

http://lowendmac.com/ed/bashur/12db/g5-gaming.html

No I can't, because no one has tested Jaguar yet. But if we look at this:

http://semiaccurate.com/assets/uploads/2012/08/slide-1-728.jpg

We can take into account the enhancements from Bobcat, and easily make the calculations from the test blu made in NeoGaf. Those numbers I gave you for Jaguar aren't going to change much (they are probably higher, but likely only about 15-20sh % higher due to the 128-bit SIMD, newer instructions and increased cache). You can also add a bit to the numbers on Espresso as well, considering how there is more cache in it compared to Broadway and it's lower-latency cache eDRAM (I based the Espresso numbers on a 256KB Broadway. Remember that 2 Espresso cores have 512KB of cache, and one has 2MB of cache (as much cache as one Jaguar CPU), that will also add a bit to performance, probably around 5%+/-). But still, the fact that it's that close to Jaguar core-for-core says a lot about how efficient Espresso is. Of course, the advantage the PS4/X1 CPUs will have over Espresso is obviously core count, newer instructions and a 128-bit floating point unit, but core-for-core, it's not goint to blow Espresso away. 

But anyway, this isn't a thread to discuss the CPUs in PS4/X1, this is about Wii U, so I'm gonna stop here. 

Sure but how do I add sigs if I lose LOL.

I've seen the whole game.

Cronos, as a single large character rather than a cluster of buildings each with their own geometry, would have less polygons.

Yeah you got a problem that riddick is more technically impressive than either okami or shadow of the colossus.