Assuming the resolution is the same as the DS, the 3DS would have either 1/10th or 1/5th the number of pixels to render as the HD consoles. (depending on whether 3D doubles the number resolution required). In the former case its only a little under 100k pixels. They could simply mean the 3DS can perform many of the same effects on the HD consoles because it simply has far fewer pixels to display and process various effects on.

Nobody talk smack about the 3DS. It's the next big thing.

SPARTA!!!!

Sorry, I couldn't help myself. :P

Any machine rendering an image twice in real time at the same time has to be quite powerful, and unfortunately you'll be dealing with less for the actual image.  I doubt the "3DS" will be able to give current level graphics from consoles cause of that handicap, but it has to be quite powerful regardless.  I fully expect PSP graphics, should be cheap enough to produce hardware of that quality with two images simultaneously and keep the price down.

I certainly believe the part about the Tegra. It's nowhere near as special as it's made out to be, people just expect it to be amazing because of Nvidia's brand.

I'm sure Nintendo would consider the part, but they're just as likely to find a better price/performance/efficiency combo in somebody else's chip.

Interesting I will have to wait and see what is said at E3

Damn. This is the WiiHD!!! Pachter was right...twice!

Doubt it.  More likely it'll be GC/Wii class, but with a more standardized pixel shader architecture than TEV.

Also, Sharp's 3D screens are 854 x 480, so the 3DS top screen will likely be that.  Which is actually a big step up from PSP even (480 x 272) nevermind DS (256 x 192).

That is good enough! More than, really.

To the resolution: that, uh. That's pretty enormous for a handheld. I hope they don't do a thing and end up overshooting their potential customers.

I personally don't trust IGN, so I'll wait until Nintendo's E3 conference to see how powerful the 3DS really is.