the gpu on the wiiu most likely has only 160 shaders.

I'm actually quoting you to ask where you got that GFlops number for WiiU. Last time I was reading the GAF thread nearly everyone was saying it is the value I have in my OP. 

It's always been my understanding that outside of the GamePad tech itself, the GPU was the one bit of the Wii U's hardware that actually was at least reasonably impressive, and that the gap between it and the new consoles wouldn't be AS huge this generations.

Hmmmm been trying to research about the 2 cpus. I keep coming back to many articles saying ps4 4 permclock cycle, and The One 6 per clock cycle. People are scratching their heads at how microsoft achieved this.

Some tech guys saying also that ddr3 should outperform ddr5 for all generalmpurpose tasks for cpu.

You're absolutely right.

WiiU is 4x to 6x lower in power than PS4 (strongest console).

Wii was 15x to 20x lower in power to PS3 (arguably strongest console).

Additionally, WiiU can utilize all the same graphical technoligies the others will be able to do where as Wii missed quite a few.

There is no technical reason for WiiU to be skipped this gen. The new engines are designed to be greatly scalable and it really should be a difference of "low" PC settings vs "high" while still being the identical game overall.

What the hell is a permclock cycle? I've never heard that term used.

Regardless, to put performance into perspective though, Anandtech did a run down of Kabini/Jaguar and it works out that a Quad Core Kabini chip is half the speed of a Dual Core Core i3/i5 at the same clock.
So, an 8 Core 1.6ghz Jaguar CPU that's found in the consoles should be relatively similar in performance to a Dual Core 1.6Ghz Core i3/i5. (Actually it should be less, scaling beyond multiple cores isn't a linear increase, it's a theoretical scenario.)

Poor performance? You bet, the PS4 and Xbox One are identical in this regard with their respective CPU's.

As for the DDR3, it will outperform GDDR5 in general purpose tasks because of latency, it will loose out in high-bandwidth hungry tasks like graphics. - However this is where the SRAM will provide assistance.

I'm *very* dissapointed in the Xbox One's GPU, even more so than the PS4's as it's only a Radeon 7770/7790 class in terms of compute. :(

Exactly, why is people always leaving out of the equation those high band 32mb Sdram?

LOL. Damn tablet typing.

Meant to say PS4 4 operations per clock cycle. And Microsoft claim their CPU is doing 6 operations per clock cycle. Many tech heads on forums like Beyond3d are stating that Microsoft have actually done wonders with the CPU as its not supposed to be possible on the Jaguar/Kabini chipset. Going onto saying that makes the power of PS4 and Xbox One significantly blurred as to what is more powerful overall. They state that PS4 should have the edge in visuals but not by much thanks to DDR5 which is great for graphics. But the One should have the edge in processes like multitasking, App switcing, AI, well basically any process the CPU deals with as the extra operations per cycle and the DDR3 will help it there.

Same happens with WiiU by the way

Well, from what I have read both the PS4 and Xbox One does 2 instructions per clock per hardware thread, thus best-case-scenario is 16 for both consoles, without the use of extensions or loopbacks.
Reason being is that the front-end of Jaguar is unchanged from the Bobcat architecture, it was a sacrifice of power/complexity vs performance in the end.

To put that in perspective, the first generation (Nahelem) Core i7 could do 4+1 instructions per hardware thread, but that's not going to make it twice as fast, allot more comes into play in regards to CPU design and thus performance.

Also, why isn't anyone peeved about the lack of GPU grunt this coming generation? :P