SSJ4 and Gogeta are not cannon

Core per core comparison is easy because It's PowerPC 750 based (same than Broadway and Gekko) with larger and faster cache running at 1.25Ghz... just it.

Of course there are three cores this time.

On paper it's around 3 times more powerful than the 360 - 3MB CPU cache compared to 1MB CPU cache, a modern architecture for the CPU, 4 times as much RAM, slightly more than 3 times more eDRAM on the GPU (32MB compared to 10MB) which also has the advantage of being on-die, a GPU that has a DX11 equivalent feature set rather than the DX9 feature set that Xenos has.

In real-world performance it should be around 4 times more powerful given that the CPU doesn't have to deal with sound and IO thanks to having dedicated silicon to do the job as well as the CPU having Out-Of-Order Execution, which means less wasted clock cycles and more effeciency.

We'll probably see the PS4 and 720 being 2-3x more powerful than the U, meaning we'll have the 8th gen being similar to the 6th gen with all 3 consoles being in the same sort of ballpark in terms of power.

I've highlighted the important part in bold. It's not 3 Broadways duct-taped together, there's going to be plenty going on under the hood that we don't know about yet.

Sorry but it's not anything new made by IBM... it's not Watson or anything else... it's the same architecture used in Broadway.

It is an improved Broadway... with the same pros and cons... you can say you want the  architecture is the same... you have a lot of K10 (first Phenom) processor from AMD: two-core, three-core, quad-core, more cache, less cache, more clock, less clock but in the end it's the same architecture... there is no miracle.

The Wii U's CPU is a tri-core Wii's CPU with more clock and cache.

I think the Wii U's CPU is at max 4x better than the Wii's CPU... considering all factors (and the multhreaded use of all cores)... cores, cache, speed, etc... and you can made a direct comparision because it's the same architecture... it's not Pentium 3 low clock is better than Pentium 4 high clock.

The Wii U's CPU is weak, slow and dated.

In the paper the Wii U is not 3 times better... what we have in the paper.

CPU (Espresso x Xenon): You can say the Expresso have a better IPC than Xenon... that's true but the Xenon have almost three time the speed of the Expresso and can run 2 threads per core... yeap the Xenon takes that easily.

Xenon won by a good margin.

Memory: Wii U have more memory but it's ways slow... sorry but it's harder to say what is better... for GPU it's better to have a faster memory than a lot of memory... I think both have the pros and cons... and Wii U have just 2x the memory of 360... not 4x like everyone here things (just 1GB is for games).

Tie.

GPU (Espresso x Xenos): The Wii U takes the leap here... the GPU is better and more advanced but it's a high-end GPU... it's a mid to low-end GPU (PC comparision). The clock is almost the same... so what will define how much the GPU is better is the other specs like SPs, ROPs, TMUs, etc... so what I read until now (and the size comparision) the GPU is at max 2x better than the 360's CPU.

Espresso won by a good margin (2x)

CONCLUSION

In the paper the Wii hardware is not even 2x better than the 360 hardware... it have better and worst components... overall I believe the Wii U is 1.5x better than X360 but just for you not says I'm biased...

Wii U is 1.7-1.8x better than X360 in the paper.

3x or over that is just delusional.

PS. The Wii's CPU is not modern... it's a 10 years old (or more) architecture... the same architecture used in X360's CPU.

... and I'm pretty sure it was designed to be that way.

Physics on the GPU is getting to be fairly mainstream, and here are a couple of games that have taken advantage of it:

While I haven't seen the numbers, I suspect that you probably end up with a far cheaper and more powerful system if you have a more powerful GPU at the expense of the CPU and offload as much processing as possible to the GPU.

Well that's could be an alternative but I think the Wii's GPU is not that strong to handle graphics and physics without sacrifices anything plus the best physics in the market is still Havok (CPU based)... even the Nvidia Physis uses the CPU for what the GPU can't do.

I will wait to see the developers using GPGPU in Wii U... and that's not do miracle too.

I mostly concur.  I think that the nextbox and PS4 will more like Gohan SSJ2 instead.

I remember seeing a demo of PhysX running entirely on the GPU (with the Geforce 8800 IIRC) that took up (something like) 20% of the GPU and was able to do far more than was possible with the CPU on that PC. Of course that would reduce what can be done on the GPU but, being that the GPU's AMD makes that are 40nm, have 480 stream processors, and are based on the TURKS core (the rumours about the Wii U GPU) are about 2.5 to 4 times the power of the XBox 360 GPU it should be able to run physics, display graphics to both screens, and probably have some moderate graphical enhancements over the XBox 360.