actually there are 35MB of edram on the wiu gpu, the smaler 3MB are said to be faster than the otehr 32MB, mybe these 3MB are used for the cpu and thus the gpu can also access them once the cpu has transfered data into it

Some people really need to stop commenting on tech threads; posting links which don't actually prove their point and in some cases do the opposite.

One thing from the OP, x86 is not inferior to PowerPC, and in recent years, x86 chips are by far superior to PowerPC. Nothing comes close to the Intel (or AMD) CPUs.

What you done  is set up a 'straw-man' argument based on red-herrings and semantics. Either taking comments out of context and responding to them, or bringing points that are not directly relevent to the topic and rebutting them as if that person actually said it.

Is 3 out of 4 or 5 equal to over 80%?

80% of 5 is 4.  Simple arithmetic. 

When will Wii U games be able to use 4 or 5 GB of RAM?

That is like asking someone, "Have you stopped beating your wife yet?"  Well you are assuming that person is married, and are assuming they beat their wife.  The question of "When will Wii U games be able to use 4 or 5 GB of RAM" is negated by the fact that because it uses smaller memory footprint and 4-stage pipeline of the PowerPC RISC architechture and the speed of the eDRAM with bandwidth that can be clocked as high as 1TB per second it does not NEED 4 to 5 GB of RAM.  That is the whole point.  A 8-cylinder car doesn't go faster than 6-cylinder car just because it has 8 cylinders.  Most turbocharged 6-cylinder cars can go as fast or faster than most older 8 cylander cars.  That's how you have to look at the Wii U.  It's a like a turbocharged engine versus an engine with more cylinders.  It doesn't matter how it gets there as long as it gets there.  There is more than one way to skin a cat and Nintendo knows how to do it the most efficent way possible.  SInce they have designed video game hardware for over 40 years, I think that they just might know what they are doing.

Can you provide a reference that says x86 code is bigger than PPC?

I don't recall the actual code was ever at topic in that post.  The XB1 and PS4 run with 15-17 stage pipelines where as the Wii U only uses a 4-stage pipeline.  There is a lot less to recover from using a 4-stage versus 17-stage.  Even if the PPc code is bigger, the response time is much faster because there is little to no latency.

It's interesting how companies that actually have built games from the ground up on Wii U hardware rave about how powerful it is.  Slightly Mad Studios says that the most graphically-intense part of their upcoming Project C.A.R.S. ran on the Wii U like a breeze.  Retro Studios said that while working on DKC:TF they virtually had no limit to as much polygons as they wanted to use.  Shin'en Multimedia was able to do Nano Assault NEO with one core.  Resogun on the PS4 uses 50% of the PS4 CPU and it looks the same. 

I don't know why people take it so personally when people bring up the fact that the Wii U is on-par with the PS4 and XB1.  People go back and forth skewing the facts to fit their opinions.  Huge arguments insue, name calling takes place, and it's just a huge mess.  The Wii U can do anything the PS4 and XB1 can.  Period.  It's a fact.  That is not going to stop people from enjoying the PS4 or XB1 nor should it.  It doesn't make a difference.  I honestly think people have made the PS4 into an idol god.  They worship it and it's supposed power.  Anyone that says anything to challenge it is an infidel.  It's ridiculous.  The Wii U is not now, nor ever has been underpowered.  The brain of the CEO of Nintendo Saturo Iwata is what is "underpowered."  If people want to bash Nintendo put the bashing where it needs to go to get Iwata outta there so the power of the Wii U can truly be seen in genres besides platformers and party-games which is all what Iwata thinks gaming is and should be. 

We can all agree XB1/PS4 is stronger than Wii U, but not as much as people are led to believe. Iwata isn't "underpowered," he's just going by "if it's not broke, don't fix it." Now that the money making power of the Wii won't replicate the profits on the Wii U is the time to"fix". You can't just wave a wand and a bunch of games magically appear, it takes time.

If you had read the above "reasonable and realistic comparison" article, you'd see that IT AGREES WITH YOU. It basically says, WiiU is around 60-100% more powerful than the 7th generation (depending on what you look at). The graphically intensive games should see a relatively large leap (when properly applied) similar to the gap between XB1 and PS4, although the CPU bound games may end up being worse than X360 due to the weak CPU. The WiiU CPU is rumoured to roughly have twice the performance of Wii, and it's almost common knowledge at this stage that it is inferior to even the X360's CPU.

The main issue for the WiiU (in terms of development) is the entirely alien CPU architecture, the conflicting generational position. There is little reason to program for an entirely different powerpc architecture as the installed base (who is interested in third party games) is too damn small to justify the additional costs. The Big N is not making things easier for them either. And if they end up programming for the PowerPC architecture, they'd prefer doing it for the X360 & PS3 audience.

Also you should check this out :

http://www.eurogamer.net/articles/2012-08-30-how-powerful-is-the-wii-u-really

lolz at this thread.

Broadway is inferior to Xenon with floating point work but beats it hands down with general processing and integer work. But, again, we have no idea what the strengths and weaknesses of Expresso are, it's a completely different animal.

And with regards to ports, developers will have a much easier time porting between the Wii U/PS4/One than the Wii U/PS3/360 for several reasons:

1) The console architecture of all 3 current gen consoles are very similar. They are all 'GPU heavy' with regards to floating point work whereas the PS3 and 360 are 'CPU heavy'

2) The RAM setup of the Wii U and Xbox One are practically identical

3) The CPUs for all current gen consoles are out-of-order and the CPUs for the PS3 and 360 are in-order

4) The CPUs for the PS3 and 360 handle sound (at least one thread of Xenon and one SPE of Cell is dedicated to audio, a good few games with thousands of sounds at once on the 360 - such as racing games - dedicate an entire core to sound) whereas all 3 current gen consoles have DSPs for audio

Everyone is always harping on about the difference in CPU architecture but developers have been porting between Power based CPUs and x86 CPUs for years without a problem.

Developers are going to have a much easier job porting between the 8th gen consoles than the Wii U/PS3/360, those 4 points above are the reason for poor performance of Wii U ports in comparison to last gen consoles despite the Wii U being much more powerful.

only sales matter in teh warz

D

Don't pretend that gaming is not for kids and nerds still.

Greatly behind