Mobile parts are expanding rapidly in power though.
Apple's A8 processor is fairly close to the PS3 in raw performance, if you put two A8 processors into a small box and called it a day, you'd likely have a system that's a good deal more powerful than the Wii U which would be small enough to fit into your pocket IMO.
By 2016 Nintendo could have something quite powerful using mobile components if they really wanted to go this route.
Lets not forget the new iPad driven by the A8 processor has to drive a display with a whopping 2480x1536 resolution too.
To be honest too, outside of console warrior nonsense and getting into a pissing match for third parties that will never really back Nintendo above the other two guys ... does Nintendo really need to go the super powerful route?
Unlike the Wii, I'm quite content with Wii U's visuals. Like I don't play Mario Kart 8 or Pikmin 3 or Captain Toad and wonder how much better they'd look on a PS4, because they look pretty darn good as is. Even games that aren't going for a cartoony asthetic like Bayonetta 2 and Xenoblade look terrific too.
The jump to HD makes all the difference in the world, with the Wii it was jarring to go to the PS3/360 and back to the Wii. But I don't really ever get that sense jumping between the PS4/X1 and Wii U.
If Nintendo can make their games look great using mobile parts and it means a cheaper console that's easier for them to make money off of ... maybe it isn't as bad of a play as some people are stamping their feet about. Especially one that maybe can amass a large library of killer games quickly in its life cycle thanks to all of Nintendo's teams being able to work on just one platform and some of the portable third party support like Monster Hunter coming over too. The Wii being barely an upgrade over the GameCube and being sold for $150 more with just a controller being the main difference just as many were switching over to HDTVs was a far more of an egregious tech decision yet many Nintendo fans made it through that era.
