Because of the smaller screen size and newer architecture and shader capabilities. Also Vita has 133 million. The 35 million figure does not exist. Unless you are only counting 1 of the 4 cores.

is this one of those... if you stare long enough you would see a bunny?

The 133 million is the rumor NGP Specs, and the PS Vita is not the NGP, nor does it have 1080p screen nor 1080p graphics like the NGP was said to be like at the time.

Plus that wouldn't add up because then it would be 140 million instead of 133 million which shows that 1 of these 2 hundred million comes from a wrong source for everyone about the Vita.

And either way it still wouldn't matter because it is still does not explain the 3DS, so I would still need a lot more details for an answer either way.

Plus the shader cores & triangles are where the 3DS outdoes the PS Vita by a gigantic margin, but we have seen the difference between the 2 Handhelds graphics and the 3DS does not look better nor miles better then the Vita.........so your answer wouldn't add up, because then the 3DS would be looking way better in graphics then Vita if your answer was the case.

So clearly theres something else most likely.

Heres a video on this link page:

http://nintendo3dsblog.com/lots-of-footage-from-the-3ds-version-of-sonic-all-stars-racing-transformed/

The person recording it has a bad camera when it comes to his or her cameras Frame rate as mention in the video.

Plus YouTube only streams 2D videos in 30 fps, but YouTube does stream their 3D videos in 120 refresh rate (60 fps per video stream)

3DS - PICA2000:

• 400 MPixels/s @100 MHz
• 1600 MPixels/s @400 MHz
• 40 MTriangles/s @100 MHz
• 160 MTriangles/s @400 MHz

VITA - SGX543MP4+ (4 cores):

• 1000 MPixels/s @200 MHz per core
• 35 MTriangles/s @200 MHz per core

polygon count isn't that important in these - texture size, which is determined mostly by vram size and bandwith, and shader effects per pixel are way more important for good looking graphics

with tesselation polygons play a larger role again as polys dynamically are added the nearer you get to an object (it can be blown up to absurd amounts of polys), but none of the platforms you mentioned uses that

Surprise surprise.

Nintendo have always relied on their own graphics technologies instead of other companies' engines, and of course their hardware is custom built for their way of doing things.

It's as some disgruntled 3rd parties say: Nintendo consoles are built for Nintendo games.

Nobody's made a game on Wii that looked better than Mario Galaxy, and chance is Nintendo will make the best looking Wii U games themselves, even with other studios having much more experience with "HD" asset creation.

Well you cant really expect the entire industry to change, just for Nintendo. They should adapt a bit, but it seems that they are just to stubborn. Lets wait and see if it all playes out as they expect.

Are you calling Miyamoto a liar?

"The other point is that many of our third-party software developers have been dedicated to technologies like shaders. As Wii U is designed to bring out their real strengths, there have recently been more cases where we develop something with their help," said Miyamoto. "It has been more convenient for us to work together with them because they have been able to more smoothly utilize their know-how for development for Wii U."

http://www.videogamer.com/news/nintendo_in-house_has_almost_reached_the_next-stage_of_wii_u_development.html

He seems to think the GPU was designed to bring out the strengths of studios used to using shaders, and that their internal teams have been learning from third parties how to properly utalize the Wii U.

OK, thanks for both responses. I'm just glad it's not looking like Wii vs PS360 alover again.

Thanks, I'm starting to understand now, plus the 3DS has at least around 50 shader cores, so it makes sense now I guess.