Keep playing your specs folks. I'll play games instead. Also, the E6760 is 2010/11 tech.

Benchmarks are good for very rough performance ranges, but don't necessarily suggest what you can achieve with the cards ...

As you mentioned Tessellation is an important factor. In theory, you could achieve similar visual results to most HD console games while rendering 25% to 50% as many polygons because a large portion of the polygons do not contribute significantly to the images produced. The reason for this is that the average 3D model that is being rendered is at a higher level of detail than can be displayed on the portion of the screen they represent.

I think the following is a good demonstration of what I'm talking about:

The close up characters are (probably) 10 times the size of the Banjo Player, who is (probably) almost 10 times the size of the far guy walking up the stairs. While many game engines have some form of Level of Detail system, few can actually render the nearest characters at a high enough detail or the middle and far characters at a low enough detail to really use detail efficiently without Tessellation.

With the next generation of graphics engines, I would expect hardware of the same (rough) performance level to produce graphics which were more detailed simply because there was less detail wasted where it couldn't be seen.

4890 is a really good card though, It's still viable even in 2012 with high settings in more taxing games, and really really power hungry.

Apparently you missed the part where it would be custom and perform better than the counterparts.  That's cool though.

not at 75W peak no, even if this is debunked, I wouldn't be surprised if the graphic power level in the final Wii U release is not much different or even higher than a E6760. It seems that Nintendo is taking technology that's proven and customizing everything as usual like the past so even if they use the same process to create the parts, it wouldn't be a Power 7 CPU or it might not be a Radeon 6xxx series but customized and created using the same die process and power consumption since there are so many instructions not needed for a gaming console and so many can be added in for extra performance.

So, really, we still know nothing eh?

You're wrong.  OK, your task is to build a computer for 400 dollars, that can play modern games at 1080p, with at least 30 fps on high and stream the game to a second monitor.  I doubt for 400 dollars that you can do it.  Oh and its power draw has to be under 90 watts.

I'd be happy with this if true. Obviously Nintendo's priorities are not to make a console that costs $500 to mass produce and sucks 180-200W along with being the size of a truck.

But this would be a good deal more powerful than a 360/PS3 and it would have a lot more modern GPU feature set (it's a 2011 GPU).

For a lot of Japanese devs this would probably be all the power they want and for some Western studios too. Not everyone is going to be able to afford expensive PS4/720 development IMO.

If you got a machine that can produce graphics better than The Last of Us, to me that's not the worst thing in the world. Especially in the hands of a developer like EAD Tokyo or Retro, that's going to be a monstrous upgrade from the Wii.

I remember having concrete facts on what the NES, SNES, N64, Gamecube, and even Wii's CPUs were clocked at.

Nintendo never released any information on the Wii's hardware ...