One thing Nintendo has *always* excelled in, IMHO is the art style. They don't need crazy Polygon counts to make something look pleasing to the eye.
With that in mind... Talk about crazy amounts of Aliasing, limited amounts of shadows and lighting and low-resolution textures! :P

Still, I genuinely hope you enjoy it in 2 weeks time!

Who cares game looks gorgeous except for the haters!!! YES I will be enjoying this game for a looooong time.  I actually will probably take a few weeks off posting to enjoy this game to it's full potential!!! Mario 3D in HD is really something to behold!!!

Best 3D World screen:

Why would the latte be based off of the HD 4000 series ?.....

Just so y'know the intel iris pro or the GT3e has eDRAM too.....

@Bold That's a terrible assumption .......

Doesn't matter we'll get a DF analysis eventually to conclude this. 

Best 3D World screen:

@Bold That part is true because a few games will miss some graphical effect when rednering in DX9 mode but that's done because of speed gains.

Were you running the WII games in DX11 mode ? BTW those games don't look very demanding to me and PCSX2 can run them pretty well but as for games like MGS3 and zone of the enders those will teach you a lesson to not have anything lower than an overclocked i5-2500K.  

When I mean that PS2 emulation is CPU limited I mean that it's really CPU LIMITED. The reason why the cpu power is very important for PS2 emulation is because the CPU essentially does most of the work for emulation. They have to emulate alot of compenents such as the EE and it's VUs which are very complex. Despite the fact that the PS2 has a multicore architecture the components needed very tight communication so a lower amount of threads were more preferable due to the fact that each component was required to pass information very quickly to another processing component and in turn caused PCSX2 to initially use 1 core but very quickly transisitioned to a usage of 2 cores because the developers sought out that the the GS could be isolated and in turn be made very threadable for more performance gains. The reason why PCSX2 can now use 3 cores is due to the fact that they have figured out a way to isolate VU1.

Hence why it is easier to emulate the WII rather than the PS2 because the gains in CPU performance hasn't skyrocketed like GPUs and the WII as well as GC is very dependent on the GPU to do most of it's graphics task. 

Only on the surface. The TEV Could do things the Geforce 3/4Ti Couldn't do and vice versa and could even pull off some of the same SM1.0/SM1.1 etc' effects with a bit of work, so I wouldn't really say it's similar to Direct X 7 GPU's at all, when programmed it's way, the Flipper could easily pull it's weight.
With that said though, even Direct X 7 cards such as the Radeon 7500 had programmable pixel shaders to a certain degree, just games never used it because it wasn't standard in any major API's that games targeted.  (Which is the same Story with Tessellation on the Radeon 8500, 9700 series, at-least a few games used it.)

Ironically, Flipper and Hollywood isn't based on any of AMD or ATI's prior generation of GPU's as it was designed by a company known as ArtX before ATI bought them out, that team then wen't on to build the R300 series of GPU's which pretty much dominated nVidia's Geforce FX, there are some minor similarties in R300 and Flipper on a very very low level though, I still wouldn't even call them cousins thrice removed.

As for the Wii U's GPU, we know it's based on a Radeon 5000/6000 series of GPU's since it includes Tessellation and Geometry Shaders, what extent Nintendo chose to modify that class of chip remains to be seen, but it's certainly a closer relatation to PC GPU's than the Gamecube or Wii ever was.

I completely disagree.

How can you arrive at this conclusion? Why do you ignore the most important stuff? There are more than those 2 customizations. The PS4 APU (and the whole console) is highly customized by Sony:

- Volatile Bit cache for compute/graphics better simultaneous uses.

- Onion bus which can completely bypass GPU caches.

- Unified GDDR5 memory which is a first for a CPU (not obviously for a GPU).

- Low power mode which can just power the ram, nothing else, not even the CPU (nor the GPU obviously). (not sure here, can recent PCs do that?)

All those elements to my knowledge had never been done on a APU before. Even the PS4 motherboard glorious sleek design is very far away from a PC motherboard as seen on the PS4 tear down. Not even talking about the small size of the machine nor the ingenious cooling of the machine: obliqued shape for insuring air release, circular "slits" which insure air entrance even if console blocked by stuff, passive cooling of GDDR5 chips on the EM shield (the ones that are at the back of the motherboard!! so much usual on PC!!), advanced active cooling by state of the art Sony centrifugal fan. Finally the PS4 APU is the bigger ever designed.

It is as much customized you can get (nowadays) actually.

In my opinion.

Wait a minute. Does this mean that AMD also has silicon graphics engineers.

Sure does.

I wonder if their the ones who were more involved in designing the R7 260X and the R9 290 as well as the R9 290X chips. 

I still wonder why silicon graphics went belly up.