Clearing up a major misconception about PowerPC

[captain carot]

@Curl: There is no integer SIMD. That is why i set it in brackets. As well as limited FP SIMD.

@Alby da Wolf: IBM shifted its focus with Power architecture. And at that time Apple was the only customer left that needed refreshs on an at least yearly basis. At the same time Apple did not sell enough to justify the cost of those new designs. They where as well just one of many customers IBM had. So yes, from IBM's perspective they where a minor customer with very high demands.
Intel already built their chips for anyone who bought them, in terms of PC-market that meant something like 3 to 4% Mac with IBM Power and the rest being x86 with a major part of it being Intel.
IBM's major customers all where to be found in high performance computing and buying complete systems.
The rest was like stying with one design for several years.
I as well dont believe Macs would be as successful as they are today if they still had IBM Power instead of x86. Apples switch made it easier for many devs to make Apple versions of their software.

As for Jaguar, that is quite enough for such 'slow' GPU's to have balanced systems.
Wii U is a little different. More CPU power, meaning more cores and clock, would have made ports easier. Let's just once take AC IV as example. That game is very likely CPU-limited on Wii U. And i am pretty sure it could have been optimized better. But the version as is might have run with rock solid 30fps if Wii U had a 1.6GHz quadcore instead of the 1.24GHz triple core.