Current PS3/360 games are built on 8 years of optimization for their specific hardware. Wii U hasn't even been out for a year yet, no console is maxed out that fast. You need exclusives designed around a console's  specific hardware to really show off what it can do, and no Wii U exclusive so far has aimed for high end graphics, they all adopt simpler styles that preclude technological boundary-pushing.

The Wii U has yet to have its Uncharted 2, its Gears of War, its Mario Galaxy, that one game that really puts its chipset through its paces and shatters its established graphical standards.

Sorry but that optimization excuse don't work out bra. The PS360 could out their own predecessors so why isn't the WII U doing the same thing to EVERY game. Even the PS4 and X1 could shit on their current gen counterparts easily bra. If the WII U had more bruteforce power to out the PS360 why ain't it performing better ? All that's needed to make a game look and run better is a significantly more powerful GPU an clearly the WII U lacks this. This generation ain't exactly over yet. Consoles altogether this generation started to use the GPU more and became more PC like in their philosophies and consoles altogether next generation are even dressed up PC's. Hell it's thanks to the WII Us different CPU that it ain't branded as a dressed up PC yet but that don't matter too much when much of it's power comes from an off the shelf PC GPU LMAO. If your referring to even older consoles like the PS1 and the N64 they also relied alot on CPU too and the N64 didn't even have a graphics processor! 

Don't you realise how mad that comment is? Nothing at E3 is important, the important thing is the results of real hardware.  Microsoft  used a nvidia gpu based PC's to demonstrate the xbox one at E3. The benchmark of what the wii u is capable of is an actual wii u. We are post launch now. 

I can't answer that, because I simply don't know. I think the question that should be asked, is what functions are being used right now? It has a tessellator on fixed-function silicon, that's likely not being used right now, it has extra GPRs compared to a conventional R700 series GPU, all of that extra cache (Nintendo has mentioned that Wii U was heavily reliant on memory) how much of that is actually being used? Unfortunately with Wii U dev kits being badly documented, I wouldn't be surprised if a lot of GX2 functions of Latte are being left unused. Like how Two Tribes suddenly discovered a hardware feature that reduced memory usage, and saved them 100MB. Was this feature not documented? How would they have just "discovered" something.

OK, then say it some other way. Saying "Off shelf part" makes it seem like Nintendo took a, for example, 5550, looked at it, and thought, "Hmm...this one's good, get rid of useless stuff and put eDRAM". They've worked on the console for over 3 years, that's a lot of time to have done all sorts of things to the GPU. 

eDRAM is 40nm Renesas eDRAM, we know information from this DRAM as it comes directly from the Renesas website, it should take around 220 million (+/- a few million), leaving 717 million for the GPU (depending on the million transistors per mm2). You're forgetting that off-shelf parts use die space for things you'll need for them being PC parts. Latte won't need those components and can easily be used for something else. And no, Latte has a DX 10.1 (plus extras) feature set-like compatibility for GX2 (based on documentation), it's not based on a 5000 series GPU (full DX 11 compatibility). It has an R700 base, and they modified it heavily from there. AMD does work with customers, and would allow modifications of stuff like shaders to work better on particular hardware.

And I never said that all of that 156.21mm2 was GPU logic, I already subtracted all of the eDRAM and I apologize for bad wording, I'm referring to the "logic" as anything usable to gaming, everything that's on the die that can technically be used for gaming purposes. However, eDRAM is also a factor for gaming too, conventional GPUs don't have that, and it can be very useful for increasing performance. You seem to be passing this off like it's disposable and not part of the entire GPU system. Heck, even for the CPU since it also has direct access. ROPs though, would not make a big difference in transistors, even if they added in 4 more. 

And I wasn't thinking about certain Wii-related functions in the GPU that are likely used for BC purposes, so I suppose it is possibly lower than what I have calculated. Though, going by Shiota's (from Iwata Asks) comment, he makes it seem like they simply took Wii U parts, and modified them so that they could be used for Wii BC as well. Of course, we don't know what exactly what they're talking about, but since they're talking about BC on Wii U for Wii, that could be the case. And I believe Marcan said that Wii emulation wasn't being run by an implanted "Hollywood GPU", so this could mean Wii GPU emulation is done from the same Wii U parts, meaning that not much would have been wasted for Wii GPU emulation at all, if any was. Though, if that's not true, that would put transistors at around 600 (Wii BC logic + gamepad compression shouldn't take up much space at 40nm) would still put it above some parts with more shaders. Plus, Latte is produced on a more mature 40nm process than any 5000 series GPU was....

You know, that "unusable logic" idea factors more for the commercial off-shelf GPU, a console GPU will not have as much if there's any, otherwise that'll be a terribly designed GPU if it has so much unused logic.

And no, we don't have a DF analysis, but so far, reviewers have complained about these framerate issues. If those framerate issues are there (unless the consoles playing those games are malfunctioning in some way), then I would blame the developers, not the hardware. 

Did you see the first few 360 games? They were far from a huge leap I even named one earlier, this is what calls you out on your damage control, selective memory is a common trait with people doing this, it wasn't until Oblivon and Gears arrived (two games that were optimized for the hardware setting) that we saw a big leap, you're starting to sound desperate at this point and you should look up what off the shelf actually means. The N64 had a GPU for you to even try and pass that off shows how off key you are N64 had one of the first programmable GPUs in the RCP it had features that even PCs were just getting, look up how Ken Kutaragi fought tooth and nail to make sure PS3 had a GPU because Sony wanted it to run purely off a CPU and he said it just can't work with out it, consoles have to have a GPU of some kind. Forethought and Hynid have adressed everything else so need for me to repeat their posts.

Scoobe

GCN is a GPGPU architecture like I said, AMD supplied each company with a base GPU which is GCN hardware and each company made their custom changes to them depending on their console design. MS have a video of their customization that they released before E3 for reference, the closer to PC then before term is referance to how both consoles aren't using ground up propriety hardware to allow GCN which makes development across all platforms a lot easier that's all it means, AMD introduce Mantle soon as aswell for better optimization for all platforms.

Nonetheless the xbox 360 had ALL of the superior multiplats! The one damage controlling is you. FYI the RCP is more of a coprocessor like the xeon phi rather full blown GPU. The only thing programmable about the RCP is the RSP which is based off of the MIPS 4000 integer vector processor. Hence, why it's a co-processor rather than a GPU. As for the RDP that's fixed function. The RCP is getting those things because that thing is practically a CPU that acts like a GPU for the most part and y'know what CPU's did back in the day ? (You probably don't know. Answer carefully otherwise you'll be branded as a fraud for that "I game on PC" cop out statement.) When did ken kutuaragi fight tooth and nail for a GPU ? If anything that dude wanted the PS3 to be cell processor only machine. It was the engineers with ken kutaragi that argued that the GPU was necessary.

What more delusional crap do you want to bring up now ? 

I think you should look up what damage control means before you use it as a number of you posts contain incoherant uses of terms and words, the RCP was dedicated to doing the work of a GPU hence why I pointed out all consoles need a GPU of some form that's the point, yeah I got the engineers mixed up yet it still proves my point that something dedicated to graphical duties has to be there. What's hilarious is your constant babble about gaming on PC highlighting that you must well beyond upset about it, explain where gaming on PC means you have to be a tech head I have over 100 games (concrete proof, something you're not familiar with) on my Steam account as well as several on my Battle.Net account and even Streaming Diablo 3. I'd honestly be surprised if you knew what a CPU is tbh let alone what it does, for your knowledge a CPU executes logical, input/output of a system by following the instructions of programing seeing as you ask.

Gaming on PC means just that kiddo, I'm a gamer on the PC platform go back and read and you'll see I never said to be a tech head, the irony in your post is that you've formed some delusional view of this thinking the's an underlining meaning trying to disprove it with words like fraud yet your own self professed technical know how has been called out and questioned and quite effectively as well, for all your attempts to look slick you just look mad now.

We don't know how mature the development software is but the wii u is not a complicated design. It's using a well known and well documented radeon gpu (which one we aren't sure of) and I don't think there are any surprises when it comes to the 32 bit CPU which dates back to 1997. The wii u is not a ps3 or even a xbox 360 its a much simpler design. When the ps3 and 360 came out they were cutting edge hardware and new to market that is not the case with wii u. Also just about the most impressive gamecube/wii title is Rogue Squadron despite being a launch title.  Also Halo represents a very level of optimisation on the original xbox. The wii u is not cutting edge its a combination of well documented and mature components clearly this will have an effect on what level of optimisation it achieves. Did the wii make great strides over the gamecube in optimisation beyond the extra 64MB memory and 50% overclock plus dvd storage capacity. I certainly don't think so.

The gamecube itself hit the ground running with great performance unlike the ps2 because it was a much better design to develop for as is the wii u.