All three will have a GPGPU with the same basic technologies. The difference will be in raw speed and memory available.

This is the same in the PC world and that is why you have a very wide range of specs for PCs and then the engines/games have the capability to turn stuff on or off depending on where your specs fall in line.

I wouldn't think it will be much different here. WiiU will be a low-medium setting and PS4/neXtbox will be high while PC will be a max. Of course this also depends on many other factors like what the base platform for 3rd parties becomes and/or if they simply decide to not work with Nintendo.

Also, the specs for the others are still moving. The newer specs are getting to the point where even my optimism is going away. I mean logically its hard to overcome 1GB to 6GB of RAM and a GPU that is almost 3x the GFLOPS, etc. While I'd think the scaling engines would still be fine... if the max differences between them become true, well then WiiU could very well be without AAA 3rd party titles in 2014 and beyond.

Yeah, I am conceding that the Wii U will get it's ass handed to them (specs wise) by 720/PS4 if the rumors are true.  Still I think that given the GPU and CPU(despite lower clock speed) the Wii U is still superior to the current gen systems; albeit not by much.  The Wii U difference to the PS360 is becoming more clearer...the Wii U's advantage is akin to Wii vs GCN, or PSP vs 3DS, instead of PS2 to PS3.  I am still happy to see Nintendo enter the HD arena with a slightly better hardware than my X360 (in some ways) but for next gen I am sure to be gaming on both 720 and Wii U for me.

But you can also do that.

Besides (after looking the specs) the Vita uses, to call it somehow, cell phone tech with an ARM CPU and the GPU is also used in cell phones.

And you know what? I have not a f***ing clue about that. I have enough trobule trying to understand what's what in desktop PCs to try to understand that. lol

It must be deja vu - haven't I answered you this in the other thread ;)

1) Redwood based (400:20:8 config, 104mm^2@40nm)
Pixel (GP/s): 4.4
Texel (GT/s): 11
Shader (GO/s): 220
GFLOPS: 440

2) Turks based (480:24:8, 118mm^2@40nm)
Pixel (GP/s): 4.4
Texel (GT/s): 13.2
Shader (GO/s): 264
GFLOPS: 528

Xbox360
Pixel (GP/s): 4.0
Texel (GT/s): 8.0
Shader (GO/s): 96
GFLOPS: 240

PS3
Pixel (GP/s): 4.4
Texel (GT/s): 13.6
Shader (GO/s): 74.8
GFLOPS: 255.2 (400.4 theoretical)

In Shader performance some 2-3x as expected from rumours. In Pixel and Texel throughoutput, slightly over 360, and about the same as PS3. PS3 does have some extra GFLOPS juice in Cell though (179.2 for 1PPE+6SPEs), but not sure how much can be actually squeezed out for graphic related tasks (or how much 3rd parties actually know how to use).

LOL pretty much

but no mhz info?

Um, that's for 550MHz - when you see someting like 480:24:8 config, it means - 480 Shaders, 24 TMUs (Texture Mapping Units), 8 ROPs (Render Output Unit). So you take the clock, divide it by 1000 (to get to giga instead of mega) and multiply with config - 24*.55GHz gives 13.2 GTexels/s; 8*.55GHz gives 4.4GPixels/s; 480*.55GHz gives 264 GOperations/s - now for the GFLOPS part - each AMD's shader can do multiply + add at the same time, which in this case gives 264*2 = 528 GFLOPS (single presicion). Notice how 360's and PS3's Shader operations per second are not related in same manner to their GFLOPS numbers - this is due to different Shaders, so math is bit different (specially for RSX inside PS3).

Updated OP with more general info on pricing and release date rumors.

....

That combined with your avatar is perfect.

ok thanks for the info, now i understand it a lil bit better how it works

so its just basically the shaders that push the WiiU GPU beyond current gen consoles