Can you provide more info about this? A link would be very appreciated.

To put things a bit into perspective (just for GPU, not well informed about Power architectures to draw conclusions):

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)

So the gpu is significantly better then Holodude

I guess the numbers are wrong.
1.25gh is even for the usual nintendo low tech to pathetic.

You can manufacture the same cpu running 1.5-2.0 for almost the same money,but than you can better compete with the soon coming ps460.Why taking the risk to lose the remaining core gamers if you can save only a few pennies?-or nintendo think that they can keep the wii u running only with mario ,dance party and mario kart .this may work for 2-3years but soon they will be in same trouble like they were in the past 2years with the wii software sales.

In Shader performance some 2-3x as expected from rumours. In Pixel and Texel throughoutput, slighlty 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).

It was just something that someone on Gaf pointed out. The thing with the Xenon and the Cell is that they're In-Order processors and that they have to handle a great deal more than the Broadway such as IO and sound. And every process has to be run in the order that they come in. If there's a process that needs doing is waiting for conditions to be met the CPU remains idle until the conditions are right.

With the Broadway (and the Gecko in the Gamecube and now the Expresso in the Wii U) the Wii has dedicated silicon to handle sound called a DSP (Digital Signal Processor) and the CPU is an Out-Of-Order execution processor. If there's a process is waiting for conditions to be met the CPU switches to other processes that can be worked on until the condition is met, meaning you get less idle cycles. An OOOE CPU is more efficient.

And having a DSP is a major advantage, developers have to have at least 1 thread out of 6 for the 360 and 1 SPE out of 7 for the PS3 reserved exclusively to handle sound. For sound intensive games such as racing games developers often have two threads handling sound - that's a third of the 360's processing power. :Oo

It basically beats the 360 at general processing due to a combination of it being more efficient thanks to OOOE and having dedicated silicon to handle sound, it basically has less work to do and the work it does do is more efficient.

The CPU speed isn't about money though.... I don't think so anyway.  It seems to me that the Wii U is getting stuck with a subpar CPU for two reason, 1 is backwards compatability and the other is because Nintendo really wanted to make the Wii U super small.

I'm not liking that idea.... it's very Japan-centric, which makes sense as Nintendo is a Japanese company and the only region they seem to really fight for is Japan.  It's just a shame that the system might have a real bottle neck only because they wanted to make it run less hot in that little box and consume less power; it also makes a slim model down the road less attractive to consumers. 

Exactly. I think my new laptop also has a CPU clocked about 30% lower than my 2008 laptop, but the real-world performance is off in a different league.

Although if developers are just trying to ram things through by clock-speed alone, i can see the issue here.

So many tech illiterate people jumping the gun again, thinking clockspeed = power. Funny stuff again.

Which is better my laptop or the WiiU?

 i5-2430M 2.4 GHz

3 MB Intel Smart Cache

6GB DD3

750GB SATA HDD

AMD Radeon HD 6470M 1 GB DDR3 Graphics w/up to 3813 MB video memory