I don't mean that in a derogatory sense at all. I mean if you add up the combined processing of 3 Wiis, it is closer to that than it is an Xbox 360 or a PS3.

If you mean in terms of a ban on here then I apologise and will watch my language as I certainly didn't mean to insult any Wii-U owners or incite any bad feeling.

Back up your statments please.

a VGChartz member here "Soleron" has already debunked basically all of your post but I'll give my own take on your post and the power of the graphics card inparticular.

1. GPGPU been around for about 4 years on PC GPUs, not used at all except for Physics.

2. CPU is important when it's that low.

3. Tasks can't just be emptied onto the GPGPU, coding for GPGPU is extremely difficult and although it opens to the door to new things, given that nothing new has come from the PC GPGPU area, you can be sure nothing will come here.

4. Where do you get 4X the power of the Xbox 360/PS3, did you just roll a dice?

5. The Wii has 1.5GB RAM, of which half a GB is reserved for the OS. So it has 1GB, which is double what the Xbox 360 and PS3 has. This doesn't open up the door to anything from a graphical perspective but does open the door to increasing the gap between loading times and allowing larger game worlds. There will be no noticeable benefit in performance as in frame rate or resolution or texture detail because of this.

6. The graphics card isn't far better it's maybe 20% better being generous to the Wii-U. It's based on a 2 generation old card released 3 years ago and at the time it was only a mid-range card and cost less than £75 at the time. It's power is not up to much at all. The Xbox 360 and PS3 were based on top end cards that cost about £350 at the time hadn't even been released for the PC in the case of the Xbox 360.

The Xbox 360 had a souped up version of a Radeon X1800 in it with unified shaders, although it was far superior to an X1800 - which hadn't even been released at time of the Xbox 360s debut. The PS3 had an equivalent of an nVidia 7800GT in it.

It's common knowledge the Radeon 5670 is about 5-10% slower than a 9800GT which is a rebadge of an 8800GT.

The Radeon X1800 is a superior card to a 7800GT by a fair bit due to much improved shaders. So basically at the end of the day the Wii-U's graphics card is 5%-10% less powerful than a top end graphics card 1 generation ahead of an Xbox 360. Considering the Wii-U has been released about 7  years after the debut of the Xbox 360 and new graphics card generations happen basically once every year.

We have tech in the Wii-U that is about as powerful as a top end PC was 6 years ago in terms of graphics and about 20% better overall than the Xbox 360 graphics card but a CPU that is at least 40%-45% slower, even taking into account that it can do more per clock but the Wii-U also has 512MB extra RAM at it's disposal.

Considering how slow the CPU is, I can't see it being that useful because loading more into RAM will mean that the game is more complex computationally and the CPU is weak. It might make coding games easier for developers but I can't see it making a difference to actual output.

There's no way you will be seeing DirectX 11 type effects on it because the GPU is too slow, even if it technically supports them.

You ask me to back up my numbers, but you don't back up yours and some are outright wrong. A couple basic points are that the Wii U has 2 (not 1.5 as you said) gig memory compared with the .5 gig on PS360. On any computing system that is a wonderful improvement.

Yes, GPGPU has been available on PC's for a long time, but never on a home console before. So when I am comparing to PS360 and saying it is at least twice as able as those systems, that's where it matters.

You're also stating that the CPU is a specific percentage slower than the other processors. This is humorous because even the who did the hack to get the clock speed stated that processor is probably on par with current systems.

Unlike some unrealistic expectations from people, I never once said the GPGPU would go beyond Physics, nor did I ever say something like a DSP would take a lot off the CPU, but it's little things like these that helps with efficiency instead of simply throwing brute force into the equation. It's basically a fine tuned piece of hardware that when you look at raw power, it's more like 2 PS3s taped together. The Wii U simply has a different design concept compared to something like the 360 or PS3, where devs a lot of times would offload graphics workload to the CPU, it's in reverse, which is actually closer to game engines designed on PCs that are more GPU bound but without a ton of variations in hardware. The bottlenecks of the PS360 are both the same for the most part, RAM and GPU, a lot of that was made up with brute force CPU or SPUs, and since the concept is in reverse, you can't expect ports to be working that well unless they start making a game with Wii U in mind at stage 1.

That's not a bit silly, that's very silly BTW, and you are still being silly, it's more 2x 360 or PS3 and if the efficiency is as well designed as the GC or the Wii, then in real world performance, it'd be higher. CPU speed is not the defining factor in performance, it's how the engine is written to work on a piece of hardware.

This basically happens when a game is more GPU bound as a port: http://www.eurogamer.net/articles/digitalfoundry-trine-2-face-off

It's just that a lot of devs had to use the CPU to assist the GPU in gen 7 since the CPUs are the parts of the PS360 that were not the bottlenecks hence the engines were made that way, it's working with what you have, and Wii U simply hasn't had that time yet but is still able to run those games without too many problems is where it's impressive. I've said this before in another thread too, you can look up Saints Row 2 on PC, or the original Halo CE, that's what happens when you have ports that are not optimized even on hardwares 3X to 10X+ more powerful

Soleron is not the end game tech analyst of these things even though he and I are on the same page with most things, the problem is people either expect too much from the Wii U, or is putting it down too much like you are, both are at the wrong spots.

Or you could just cut those damn trees...

Yes, Trine looks better on WiiU than on PS360 (specially than on PS3) - it has locked 720p for start, unlike PS360 versions (in user comments, one of devs is explaining that). It's a good example of game that is by design GPU only heavy - therefore, WiiU's GPU (which is some 1.5-2x Xenos) is shining there (though not nearly bright enough to provide 1080p and SSAA of PC version), and WiiU's CPU is never bottlenecked.

But there ARE lot of games that are bot GPU and CPU demanding, physics or no physics. "If" next-gen 3rd party developers start using GPUs for physics (and I'd say that's still a big if, considering they will once again have more than capable CPUs to do that), porting to WiiU will most certainly be bit easier than without it. But there are other CPU heavy tasks which are either not possible or very hard to achieve on current GPUs - for that you still need strong CPU. In those cases, WiiU's CPU and low memory bandwith will be bottleneck, and I'm afraid no magical GPGPU coding will be able to compensate for that.

In my opinion, Nintendo did miss the chance to make just enough powerful system that will be fully 3rd party friendly - as with PS3, 1st parties will have no problem to reach it's full potential, but I believe lot of 3rd parties (specially AAA) might have quite a few headaches with it in years to come.

Yeah,  I strongly believed it too is a modified AMD e6760 downclocked to 550Mhz for Nintendo's uses.  The very least would be the Evergreen series upgraded with with a 1.4a HDMI output, UVD3, and stereoscopic 3D all of which available on the Wii U and unavailable on the basic Evergreen series.

Oh I'm aware, power is the reason I remain a PC gamer, in my opinion, 8th gen consoles won't rival a PC anyways. My true stance doesn't change, if a good game I want is on a console with no hidden cost, I will get it, I just want games that interest me, console power is irrelevant. My argument here is that the Wii U is not 3 Wiis taped together, that very notion is ridiculous.

The Wii U is powerful enough that it crashes pretty frequently, but not sooo outlandishly powerful that a crash kills the hardware (Xbox 360 TRL)

Please keep perspective of 2012 vs. 2005 technology in mind

Yes, the Xbox 360 in 2005 was a beast of a machine but we didn't know just how good until Halo 4 came out in 2012

No, we wont know just how powerful the Wii U is in terms of delivering what matters (games) until at least a few years in