true, even if its 200GB/S vs 563GB/s-terabyte/s still wins in latency, and not only that, micro has expalined that they dropped the edram cuse they needed to mix the mebdded memory with the ddr3, and for that edram didnt do, neded to change to esram

with edram obviously micro could have reached the terabyte, but would not have the perfromance that esram has plus that trick to mix esram with ddr3 logic

aving more than 200GB/s with esram is not impossible just to costly, esram requirs like 4x more transisteors, so obviously is more expensive, ad the kinect on the xbox one and you also have less money to afford  more bandwidth cause you need to keep the price as cheap as possible

as for the comparasion of bayo vs bayo2, come on, we are being gentle here cause the xbox 360 already had years out on the market and engines were optmimized over the time and developers got used to the system. Wii u is new system, engines are still not well optimized for the harwdare and developers are just getting used to it, so the results arent that bad considering that

eDRAM and eSRAM are apparently more or less equal when their size is 30 to 40MB, above 40MB size and eDRAM is better than eSRAM.

Everything has its advantages and drawbacks here and there.

the reason of the change was not bandwidth but performance

here

http://www.eurogamer.net/articles/digitalfoundry-vs-the-xbox-one-architects

"

"We had to pull over all of our vertex buffers and all of our textures out of system memory concurrent with going on with render targets, colour, depth, stencil buffers that were in eDRAM. Of course with Xbox One we're going with a design where ESRAM has the same natural extension that we had with eDRAM on Xbox 360, to have both going concurrently. It's a nice evolution of the Xbox 360 in that we could clean up a lot of the limitations that we had with the eDRAM.

"The Xbox 360 was the easiest console platform to develop for, it wasn't that hard for our developers to adapt to eDRAM, but there were a number of places where we said, 'gosh, it would sure be nice if an entire render target didn't have to live in eDRAM' and so we fixed that on Xbox One where we have the ability to overflow from ESRAM into DDR3, so the ESRAM is fully integrated into our page tables and so you can kind of mix and match the ESRAM and the DDR memory as you go... From my perspective it's very much an evolution and improvement - a big improvement - over the design we had with the Xbox 360. I'm kind of surprised by all this, quite frankly."

Indeed, the level of coherence between the ESRAM and the DDR3 memory pools sounds much more flexible than many previously thought. Many believed that the 32MB of ESRAM is a hard limit for render targets - so can developers really "mix and match" as Goossen suggests?

"

micro could have gone edram again and have like a terabyte of bandwidth but would be able to flow data to the ddr3 like the esram does and would have more latency and the refreshing issue. But esram is way more expensive so the drawback is less bandwidth cause micro would have to pay for having more of course, and already they added kinect, they wouldnt be able to keep the price low on xbox one if they also had packed more bandwidth

Except that those games in Xbone/Ps4 threads are cross gen titles, never designed to take full advantage of next gen power. X is not a cross gen game. 

And WiiU as a supposed 8th gen system should have had better looking games than anything on the ps3 right at launch just like ps360 and their successors had.

And lets not pretend WKC was The best looking ps3 game in 2008. I dont see any 2014 wii u game looking better than MGS4, although Watch Dogs might prove me wrong

easy, prblem is developers are not using tesselation+dispalcements on wii u yet, well, maybe only precursor games was with shadow of the eternals according to them, but no one else has

once they do you will see more graphical fidelity according to these times, just not in 1080p, but 720p within 30 to 60fps

the thing is that in order to implement them with high performance, edram plays a big role here, and so does the communication between gpu and cpu via the edram pool(maybe the extra 3MB of faster edram)

Ninja Gaiden 3 has character with +100k does that mean it looks better then ryse, GOW3 has better anti aliasing, textures, character models and lighting then baynetta 2, and i don't why you keep bringing up resolution, both bayo 2 and GOW3 are 720p. 

edit the pics: you posted of baynoetta 2 are super sampled bull shots, why don't post some impressive shots,that actually represent what the game looks like.

you could at least put better escnes on bayo

the problem with that pic is its a bull shot, its super sampled, tecmo does that samething with ninja gaiden. anything that missing jaggies is a bullshot cause bayo 2 has plenty.

here is the best pic i could find of bayo 2 

mm, maybe they are bullshots, god of war incluced

just by seeign these shots from ign

one can deduce that

thsese seem to be real

nope those are bull shots, also it well documented how amazing the AA solution is for GOW3, those are all real gameplay shots

"God of War III is using an implementation of morphological anti-aliasing, carried out by the SPUs. This achieves superior edge-smoothing, and is another example of how offloading tasks typically done on the graphics chip can result in both performance and quality increases."