Your garbage on the mechanics of tessellation is just enough for me to not take you seriously anymore ...

Exactly right.

Now that we are in agreement, and since you haven't rebutted by comments on the WiiU GPU being piss weak, I can assume that we are also in agreement there too.

We can finally move forward and look at what would be more reasonable, would it be more reasonable for Nintendo to pair a piss weak GPU with Ultra high bandwidth EDram (@500GB/s) despite the GPU being incapable of ever using it's full potential, or would it be more reasonable for Nintendo to put in an EDram with moderate bandwidth (@60-80GB/s) knowing that the GPU could use it's potential and still have a little headroom?

Keep in mind, the first option is not efficient and is costly while the second option is both efficient and cost effective. Which of the two viable option sounds like what Nintendo has done and would do?

---

In regards to tessellation;

Tessellation requires a capable GPU and not just bandwidth, you know as well as I do that just having bandwidth does nothing, it's the GPU processors that do the work.  Since tessellation is GPU processor heavy it really requires a powerful GPU to actually make tessellation both useful and practical for real time rendering.

So lets put this into perspective, the Titan Black only has 336GB/s of raw bandwidth compared to your WiiU EDram cache of 500GB/s but the Titan still obliterates the WiiU GPU in tessellation. Why, because the Titan black simply has more power processors, nearing 3000, to do this resource heavy task, again showing that processing capabilities are more important to tessellation than pure bandwidth.

Do you know how tessellation works ? 

Well enough, don't get me wrong I'm no expert but then again i'm not claiming to be. So if you feel I misspoke or have info you feel I should know, then hit me up cuz I'm all about learning :)

If no one uses that "hidden power", who cares ? Ps3 had the same problem, "hidden power". They figured for the Ps4 "obvious power" was the way to go. Its 2014, people dont wanna wait til 2019 to see what their 400 dollar investment is "truly capable of ".

Wii U's hidden power is so hidden that  not even Nintendo is  able to find it!

drkohler's calculation is for a single macro not all eight macro's combined, he forgot to input in his own calculation that Wii U has eight and not one macro. I assume he intentionally left out information that Wii U's main eDRAM is split into 8 macro's each having 4MB and 1024 bits or he does not know that information.

A proper calculation would have bee; 550MHz times 1024 bit times 8 equals 563.2 GB/s

sorry dude, but what megafenix says its right, wii u can use tessleation, the gpu is more than capable to use it, just not at 1080p thats for sure

here

http://hdwarriors.com/shinen-on-the-practical-use-of-adaptive-tessellation-upcoming-games/

"

Shin’en on the Practical Use of Adaptive Tessellation, Upcoming Games

Posted by: Iran White in Iran W, Wii U May 29, 2013 0

It has been rumored that Shin’en may be working on a sequel to FAST Racing League, and they have stated in the past that they will be using tessellation in their next game. When asked about this, and how resource heavy the feature might be, Manfred Linzner gave us a realistic outlook for use of the feature for games in general. He also informed us that Shin’en in fact, has two Wii U games in development. But in any case, if you haven’t yet bought Nano Assault Neo on the Nintendo Wii U eShop, you are missing out! Check it out today! 

Linzner:

‘We learned a lot with Nano Assault Neo. For one of our upcoming games we will use all that and will unlock more of the ‘Wii U’s power.’

‘Tessellation itself is not resource heavy on recent GPUs but it depends on actual usage. Although even previous consoles had these features you saw it only very rarely used. People often think of it as an easy way to get free ‘level of detail’. That doesn’t work. It’s because of certain visual problems associated with adaptive tessellation.
We already tried various tessellation ideas and it is a very handy tool for certain situations.’

‘We think FAST would certainly deserve a sequel because it had a very fresh take on an age old genre. However, we can at least confirm that we currently work on two Wii U games that will be announced after this summer.’

"

about the information he provided of the bandwidth of local data share and other things is true, i know about this cause is part of my life, 563.2GB/s aint nothing compared to the terabytes of bandwidth that the gpu caches have inside, but those caches are just few kilobytes, so obviously you cant fit that much in that, with a big cache that could be like a local RAM, well, now you can store bigger things, and since tesselation+ displacements compresses the memory usage you would need for a high resolution mesh storing a low resolution mesh well you save up a lot memory, so edram works perfect for this even if its small

if you dont beleive shinenm, then at least you will beleieve a game that was running on wii u and using tesselation+dispalcements right?

here

shadow of the eternals wii u and pc minute 7:50, listen to what they say about the graphics here until the end

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QlREuZz7MwE

on purpose

sorry faslob, please stop being a hater and a troll

I don't get it, they say from 550 Mhz to 563.2 GB, or something like that, but ¿is that equivalente to 800Mhz?,,please tell me I'm rigth

500mhz is just the clock speed, the 563GB/s is the bandwidth

to get bandwidth you need the bus width and the clock speed

i am not sure for edram cause there could be a parameter like in the gddr5 and gddr3, but megafenix isnt supposing  any data rate or using one so 563.2GB/s is the minium we would get for aormal memory without data rate(gddr5 seems to be 4 bits per cycle)

here

http://www.tomshardware.com/answers/id-1744975/confused-gpu-clock-speeds-radeon-7750.html

"

Bandwidth is the data transfer rate. It depends directly on the memory clock, memory type (GDDR5), and the bus width.
You can calculate the theoretical bandwidth by this formula:
Bandwidth = (bus width/8)*memory clock*memory type/1000 (GDDR3 = 2, GDDR5 = 4) you will get the result in GB/s

For example, for Radeon HD7770, Bandwidth = 128/8*1125*4/1000 = 72 GB/s

You can verify the result here.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Comparison_of_ATI_graphics...

"

it also like putting it like this

4bits per cycle*128bits of bus width*1125mhz of clock speed/(8its*1000)=72GB/s

for the wii u edram is used the same just that there is no data rate but 8 block each having a bus width of 1024bits, so total bus width is 8192bits

8 macros*1024bits*550mhz of memory speed/(8bits*1000)=563.2GB/s

but as said earlier, compared to the local caches on every gpu from 2009 up to nowdays, that isnt nothing

caches on the gpu like the hd5000 have like  1 to 2TB/s of bandwidth, and thats per SIMD core, its called data share and you can have about 

for example, an hd4870 has 10 SIMD cores, so thats 10 local data shares

and we still havent accounted the bandwidth of each l1 texture cache

the wii u edram would be working like a big global data share cache