The Wii is built on less expensive and more reliable technology, so messing around with the chips probably isn't a big priority. Even if they were, the console's hype isn't primarily based on ZOMG HORSEPOWER, so there isn't much reason to let everyone know it.

If they shrunk the parts on the mother board, it would be more interesting for them to use the space to add an internal hard drive then to make a slim version.

"the console's hype isn't primarily based on ZOMG HORSEPOWER"

"no primarily based"is an understatement. Nintendo has every reason to keep the horsepower discussion under the rug.

This just means that IBM is not going to continue to pay for R&D for the G3 because it is no longer cost effective for them; it is unlikely that they're going to get any new (large) contracts from companies based off of a 45nm G3 processor.

Nintendo (on the other hand) could pay for IBM to modify their custom CPU to take advantage of the 45nm process because it is cost effective for them. In my opinion, Nintendo would be very smart to make the Gekko/Broadway CPU and the Flipper/Hollywood GPU the core of their next generation handheld, and to base their next generation home console on these processors (or to include these processors in the system); hypothetically speaking, with how little power the Wii uses you would expect a 65nm or 45nm process would allow these processors to be used in a handheld (with a 32nm process allowing for a very small handheld), and if the chips are integrated together would be very inexpensive to include into their next generation system (if necessary).

There were talks about using the same config as the Gamecube in a future portable device. I wouldn't be surprised if they went that way or continued on with their use of ARM cpu's.

I figure that shrinking the die size down to 45nm would be in Nintendo's best interest. It allows them to shrink the Wii down by 35% (matching Iwata's 3 DVD case speech he gave in 05). They can save aprox 1/2-1/3 the cost of each cpu or gpu they purchase at the reduced size. They can also drop the 50 watt power supply down to around 25-30 watts. They could stop using fans inside the cases and cut down the size of the motherboard even further. It's a win win for Nintendo if they did shrink the component sizes down. Obviously the sooner the better, the higher price the price of the Wii for consumers the more Nintendo makes off them. So why not increase profits even further?

 I don't think nintendo knows. They probably closed their eyes and told IBM..."no no...don't tell us"

lol i misread....again

But the Wii already uses less than 20 W of power under load.

You guys are overestimating the need for this.  The chips that go into the Wii are already pretty darn cheap.  I'm sure Nintendo is always looking for ways to make the Wii cheaper to produce, but there are other factors at work here besides die size.  Process maturity also affects yields, and the Wii's CPU is already down to just 19 mm^2.  By comparison, the Cell die shrink was from 221 mm^2 to about 150 mm^2.  They're not even in the same ballpark when it comes to chip costs.

During the initial run (back in 2006), the wholesale cost of the Wii was just under $200 including $19-20 in assembly costs. They were/are both 90nm process processors. Initially, the price of the CPU was reported as being about $25, the GPU, about $30. The most expensive component was the DVD drive at about $31.

Nintendo is undoubtedly producing them for less currently due to volume purchases of components.
Really no immediate need for smaller/cheaper CPU/GPUs since they cost in the vicinity of $40 or less combined currently.

Kotaku reported the breakdown back in 2006 as follows:

http://kotaku.com/gaming/wii/wii-autopsy-discovers-manufacturing-cost-221736.php

The market value for each is as follows:

Graphics chip: $29.60
CPU: $13.00
DRAM: $7.80
Optical disk drive: $31.00
Power supply: $11.30
Manufacturing cost: $19.50
Cost total: $158.30
Wholesale price: $195.99