Wii U GPU Type CONFIRMED! Custom AMD E6760!

[Mazty]

Viper1 said:

Mazty said:

Viper1 said:

See that line I bolded?  Read it again.

A re-release is not a sucessor, it's, well...you said it, a re-release.

"You have to be a successor to your previous iteration whilst being better then the current gen competition"

Let's analyse this statement, shall we?

Is the Wii U the sucessor to the Wii?  Yes.
Is the Wuu U better (subjective...I suppose you meant stronger) than the current gen compeition (what an arbitrary requirement)?   Yes, it is.
Therefore, under your very own logic and reasoning, Wii U = next gen.

Apparently it's hardware isn't better though...Look at the claims of the CPU. 

But yeah, your definition is a good one although I'd insist that hardware has to be notiably better as generation should include a technological advance over the last generation as a whole, not just from the previous companies console interation. It's not arbitrary because gaming is ultimately based on technology which is linked to hardware. As consoles develop, so should the hardware. 

The only claims we have on the CPU is that it appears to be clocked slower.   And that makes sense.    But being clocked slower does not make it weaker.  Just compare AMD to Intel back in the late 90's or Intel against AMD since mid 2000's.   

If a dev is using brute clock speed to handle AI routines or the number of enemies on the screen, then yes, a slower clock may be an issue.  But it's not about how high your clock rate is but how much you can do with each clock cycle.   If a dev isn't yet familiar with working with the CPU, they may not yet be able to squeeze out that extra performance.

For example.   Say a CPU runs at 1 Ghz and can perform 100 operations per clock cycle.   That's 100 billion operations per second.   Say a second CPU runs at just 600 Mhz but can perform 200 operations per clock cycle.  That second CPU is actually capable of 120 billion operations per second.   See how the second CPU is actually more powerful than the one with the faster clock rate?  

As for the GPU, well, we already know it's more powerful.  That's been stated by several developers.

So again, your own definition still grants the Wii U "next gen" status.

Notably better is subjective.   Notably to you, me and notably to everyone else simply won't be the same.   You'd need a defined specification increase.   The problem is that's a damn hard thing to actually calculate.    Total system Flops is one way.   But even that doesn't work because the PS3 is a Flops beast but can't use them all in game.  Flop for Flop, the PS3 crushes the X360 but you can't see that in game at all.

Since you really can't define a parameter, that can be amicably agreed upon, to denote next generation, the predecessor/successor relationship of flagship consoles has been the indsutry accepted definition for a long while now.

Low clock speeds, low power consumption, tiny heat sink. 
The CPU will suck.

The WiiU doesn't show any sizeable improvement in technology. It's not running anything close to something like even the 5870 or even the 5770. I have a GTX560 Ti that's almost now 2 years old. It wasn't a just released card when I bought it and yet my PC will still be considerably more powerful in everyway then a "next-gen" console. Should that be the case? I don't think so.