The latest PowerPC cpus are still nowhere near up to scratch per mhz relative to a current gen intel cpu.

This is starting to look like the "leap" between the gamecube and the Wii.

This false, the fact that the Saturn had two processors alone made it more powerful overall than the PSX. It also had more RAM and its RAM was faster as well as expandebble. 

Its not that the PSX did polygons better, its that they did them differently. The Saturn is the only console to my knowledge that used squares instead of triangles to do polygons which the majority of developers didn't know how to work with. Only SEGA and a few other could make good looking games on it just like with the Wii. Most games that ran on both the PSX and Saturn had a higher frame rate and more detail on the Saturn.

It was the same with the GC's TEV and the Xbox's shader model 1. The GC's TEV could produce better texture effects, but hardly anyone knew how to program it properly because it was so different than than the standard hardware the Xbox1 used.

Show me a PSX games that had textures this detailed and clean and water effects that good with aliasing control on that level running that fluidly with drawing distances that great. There is a reason why the PSX cost 299 and the Saturn cost 499

I call BS on the R700 core being used for the GPU.

There's no way they will be using tech that old, it's not even cost effective to use tech so ancient. There are low end solutions available from current gen tech that could easily provide that performance.

Old parts that aren't mass produced anymore don't cost less, they cost more and the dies haven't been shrunk to current acceptable levels for that generation.

Who wants a bet!?

They didn't say R700. They said R7xx, which was a large range of GPU's. The original reports say that is based on the R770 which is the HD4850.

What are you talking about the 360 is bassed on a R500/R600 GPU, Radeon X19X0/Radeon HD 2XX0 GPU hybrid. 

R700 HD 4xxx is 1.5 gen ahead of the 360 GPU

Actually that would be exactly 2(GPU) generations ahead and a jump from DX9 technology to DX10.1. Just as the Wii U is used a Power7 based processor where the 360 used a Power5 also putting it 2 gens ahead.

I will take you up on that challenge tomorrow on your wall if that's ok. It's a bit late now. But I will shoot you down, well i'll try lol, but as a quick aside there were virtually no games that looked better on the Saturn, most had a lower resoltion (Wipeout), worse lighting and crap shading (Resident Evil), lower frame rate (Doom), lower poly count, (VF vs Tekken), remember the first Virtua Fighter? It didn't even have textures at the same time Tekken was being released. :p

I know the saturn had 2 cpus, I remember reading some rubbish that 1 "processed" the foreground and 1 the "background" in the marketing spiel. Point is it's very hard to utilize 2 cpus at the same time efficiently for jobs that both are suitable for, especially in those days where programmers never had to thread things like engines and graphics over 1 cpu. Normally it was just 1 cpu for game and 1 for sound. (sorry if patronising).

I didn't know about the rendering method using quads to be honest. End of the day though, the lack of transparency effects is what truely showed up the Saturn and made it clearly look inferior, games like Crash Bandicoot with it's texture smoothing wouldn't even be possible on the Saturn.

I can tell you now that Sonic Racing youtube video is a fraud, the Saturn didn't support bilinear filtering so there's no way those graphics would be possible and that is clearly being run on an emulator. I played that game and it wasn't terrible looking but it didn't look that good. The only other reason I can think of for the smooth textures in it is down to the bad compression on youtube. I doubt that though as the edges still look crisp.

Saddly I was a die hard Sega fan and couldn't stand the idea of owning a games console from a company that isn't in the gaming business (Sony) and purchased a Saturn only to be treated to sub par ports with a few classics from Sega.

Sorry, said I wouldn't say anything now, but well anyway :)

Edit - Actually, just done a google to prove how bad the graphics were and turns out this was released on the PC, so that must be from the PC. The Saturn simply wasn't capable of graphics that good.

I was talking about the GPU, also the 360 was not Power 5 bassed it was PPE bassed it's not a Power 5 chip, tho they are both PowerPC chips. 

OK guys, seriously, tessellation unit doesn't mean shit for graphics without polygon pushing power, all it does is slow shit down unless you implement it in a way to save resources and work, it's meant as a tool for devs to do less work yet able to bring out more detailed objects in a 3D environment, which most likely won't be used for multiplatform games in general.

Also, Power 7 based CPUs have 4 threads per core, so if the Wii U has a tri-core, it'd have 12 threads, which would burn some rubber.

I was sure that was the Saturn version but I wll go with another then. Same attributes apply. This is a 100% Saturn game.

And Duke Nukem 3D for good measure. Do I need to pull out Christmas Nights, the Shenmue beta or Sonix Xtreme better? Most of the games that showed what the Saturn could really do never saw the light of day cause SEGA killed the system so early.