The Wii U is around 1.25 GHz a core on pre-install firmware.

The PS4 is like 1.64 GHz a core on pre-install firmware.

The Wii U has a 3 or 4 core IBM POWER 7 CPU.

The PS4 has a 8 core AMD APU that will most likely use 7 cores to do CPU functionalities, while 1 core will be clocked at 800 MHz as a basic GPU.

I already knew this stuff without the threads, but AMD processes less because of how it process stuff.....for example, my Windows 7 Labtop has a AMD CPU so it can't emulate DS games, but if I had a Windows 7 with any other CPU, then I would be able to emulate DS games. IBM POWER 7 CPU is more of the opposite in processing quality, but the PS4 is clocked at an additional around 0.4 GHz, but e Wii U is ahead in major firmware updates and the Wii U has its GPGPU guarantee to do all the game physics, but the PS4 is sporting 2 to 3 cores more for CPU functionality over the Wii U which still makes the PS4 boss with room to spare and sacrifice to keep proper functionality. And this is best case scenario for Wii U.

Plus for the past 5 years Sony has just been buying the weakest technology, like the PS Vita AMD CPU & 512 MB DRAM (which is the worst 512 MB RAM but also the cheapest).

The Wii U specs seem to currently be where the 3DS & Vita use to be. We use to thought the 3DS & PS Vita had 2-core 200 MHz CPUs, and then we found out the PS Vita had 4-cores and then we found out it was 1 GHz a core, and then we found out the 3DS is 1 GHz and then we later on found out the 3DS CPU is also 1 GHz a core. (of course they are both underclock below 500 MHz a core on pre-install firmware) this explains both handhelds being $250 each, which also explains how there is only a 20 million polygons difference between the 2 handhelds"

Anyways we know more about the Wii U & PS4 around release then we did about the Vita & 3DS. But they wouldn't be wasting so much RAM that clocks the GPU at 800 MHz if they were to only clock it at 550 MHz, plus the Wii U GPGPU doesn't seem to drain that much Hz to be running at 800 MHz. We use to thought the 3DS & Vita did 15.3 & 33 Million Polygons, but then we found out it was actually: 3DS = 160Mtriangle/s & PS Vita = 140Mtriangle/s. And we use to thought the PICA200 was 200 MHz because of overheating but then we found out it only drains 0.5 Hz at 400 MHz max clock frequency.

Plus the Wii U seems to use a custom made GPU like the GameCube, which means it will use its Custom Made GPU to do 3D while the PS4 has to use one of its CPU function cores to do 3D but still will have most of that core to use for other stuff.

Its best to wait 2 years after release of Hardware to truly get a sense of Hardware Specs, if history of 8th Gen systems has thought us anything.

I get that PC is better than consoles in regards to graphics.  I can't argue anything there.  But PC doesn't even really compete with consoles.  It doesn't affect console sales and it is typically held back by consoles since the majority of sales for these AAA titles are on consoles.  PCs aren't restricted to the same generations as consoles, because they are upgradeable and the next big thing comes every 6 months (or whatever it is) rather than 5-10 years!

Comparing PC to consoles is like comparing apples to oranges.  Comparing console graphics to console graphics (which this thread is about because it doesn't even mention PC) is like comparing a granny smith to a macintosh (the fruit not the tech company).  Or 2 different sports teams in the same sport (versus comparing the Heat to the Yankees).  The former are in the same playing field.  They directly compete with each other.

If WiiU is going to be compared to PS360 over PS4/XB1 that can imply that the WiiU is in the same field as PS350, because if WiiU had games that boasted graphics on par or anywhere close to PS4/XB1, we'd see a compelling thread on that.  So even if this thread is trying to prove that WiiU graphics blow PS360 out of the water and is therefore a true nextgen CONSOLE, then why not skip these comparisons and put the best WiiU has next to PS4/XB1?

Why? Cause I tried once, but you seem to be beyond salvation.

And what arguments would be that exactly? You mean your belief that you can cram 480 shaders part in such a small space @40nm fab? Cause that's what you need to get above 500GLOPS at 550MHz clock rate. 700 GFLOPS? And you wonder why I laugh? You need 640 shaders at that clock for that. Unless you think Nintendo uses alien tech, I really can't figure out, if you ever bothered to dig bit deeper than your beliefs, where you're coming up with this numbers. (Not to mention that GFLOPS are completely meaningless when comparing PS4/XOne vs WiiU architecture, cause GCN is way more efficient than VLIW5)

Go research a bit, there's plenty of info out there, if you're really interested in anything but your "safe bets", and then we can perhaps have a discussion.

That might be RE 4.

Sorry if you were being sarcastic...my batteries in the sarcastic meter are being used in a Wii remote.

this thread asks if the 3 mentioned games would run on ps360 and that's what was talked here, at least at first. how does that mean to you that nintendo fans stopped prefering gameplay?