"Weaker CPU" and "not as powerful as a whole" are 2 different things. I am not a hardware expert by any means but  I think I read that the Wii U has some stuff that reliefs the CPU from certain tasks.

great news! obviously if the cpu is slow that means more time will be spent on gameplay!!

I totally know how you feel about that. I'm personally saturated with Nintendo doom calls personally. I was saturated with it last year, and I'm again saturated. Here, look at the dates on these two threads of mine, each at two different levels of saturation with Nintendo doom :)

May 2011: http://gamrconnect.vgchartz.com/thread.php?id=129268

July 2012: http://gamrconnect.vgchartz.com/thread.php?id=145165

So I know how you feel. It doesn't help that people extrapolate too much from the speculative threads that it would rub us the wrong way.

These are normal comments for developers working on a new system for the first time. It doesn't tell us much.

Actually, the processor in the Wii is way faster than the one in the Xbox and so is the one in the Gamecube. The PowerPC processor processes 3 intrustction per cycle compared to 1 like the pentium 3 based processor in the Xbox1. In all test the PowerPC processor got higher all around performance at half the clock speed.

This is a different issue. Seems that Nintendo has intentionally used a low cost, low performance processor this time. This is dissapointing. The price of the console better not be above $250.  Not with the tech they've demonstrated.

Is "is" possible that the CPU is simply clocked low like the one in the PSP and that the clock can be raised when it is needed but I doubt Nintendo did that.

I would wonder why, unless they feel they can get "good enough" performance from the processor, and lend the larger duties over to the expanded RAM and the GPU.

So basically the Wii U is more beauty than brains.

It isn't threadworthy and definitely isn't a problem. Contrary to uneducated popular belief a CPU's power isn't dependent on its clockspeed. The lower clock isn't a problem because the U is using a GPGPU which will perform the floating point operations that the Cell and Xenon will be performing. You've also got to take into account the advantages that the U's OoOE is going to give compared to the IOE that the Cell and Xenon have as well as the U having a DSP to handle sound. At least 16% of the 360's processing power is dedicated to handling sound, most developers use a third of the processing power to deal with sound given its importance.

Producers generally aren't clued up about hardware, if his team are having problems then they're struggling to port a game from two consoles with the same architecture to one console with different architecture, and architecture that will be shared by the PS4 and 720 next gen so they'd better get used to it lol.

Developers blindly porting code from the PS3/360 to the U without optimisation are going to have problems. That's developing 101 for gawd's sake.

Probably the best, and most accurate, article in the thread. Good job. 

That is indeed true. From what I've seen in P-100, the physics seem to be beyond what the 360 and PS3 can do but the physics are may be getting processed on the GPU instead of the CPU.