Actually, it seems to run higher, mostly 40-60fps where GoW3 was mostly 30-45fps.

this thread makes me laugh xD

God of War is a Hack n Slash game, that said I dont think that comparison is fair because GoW has much better lighting effects, per object motion blur and a custom high end AA solution. If Sony wanted GoW to target 60fps, I feel they could have done it with similar compromises and achieved similar performance rates to Bayo 2. GoW 3 managed to hit 40fps in certain areas for example. Its a shame that the 360 doesnt have its own flagship Hack n Slash game but in all honesty I dont think it would be far behind Bayonetta 2 if it did.

I say this because the 360S GPU is stronger than the PS3s, it also had 10MB of esRam that came in handy for AA and other effects. The performance of Forza 4 in comparison to Mario Kart 8 further points to that conclusion. I feel Forza Horizon 2 on the 360 will put on a show equal to or just slightly worse than Project CARS on the Wii U as well, both are confirmed 720p30.

It is dissapointing that the Wii U doesnt leave behind 8 year old systems in the dust bit its no surprise given the hardware. Digital Foundry accurately predicted these performance levels in 2011 and 2013.

2011

"The lighting is excellent, with many changing sources and a few particle effects in evidence - but my untrained eyes saw nothing here that an Xbox 360 or PS3 couldn't do. Perhaps Digital Foundry will say different." Or perhaps not. The Zelda demo, or "HD Experience" as Nintendo calls it, is almost certainly running at a native resolution of 720p, with no anti-aliasing and seems to be locked at 30 frames per second with v-sync engaged .... It's a good demo, but as Oli says, it's very difficult to see this as anything other than affirmation that Nintendo's technical vision of the next generation is to effectively match the rendering performance of what's in the marketplace already

http://www.eurogamer.net/articles/digitalfoundry-vs-e3-nintendo

2013

"AMD's RV770 hardware is well documented so with these numbers we can now, categorically, finally rule out any next-gen pretensions for the Wii U - the GCN hardware in Durango and Orbis is in a completely different league. However, the 16 TMUs at 550MHz and texture cache improvements found in RV770 do elevate the capabilities of this hardware beyond the Xenos GPU in the Xbox 360 - 1.5 times the raw shader power sounds about right. [Update: It's generally accepted that the PS3 graphics core is less capable than Xenos, so Wii U's GPU would be even more capable.] 1080p resolution is around 2.5x that of 720p, so bearing in mind the inclusion of just eight ROPs, it's highly unlikely that we'll be seeing any complex 3D titles running at 1080p." 

http://www.eurogamer.net/articles/df-hardware-wii-u-graphics-power-finally-revealed

The Wii U will get better with time but how much better is the real question. Look at the strides the XBox One has been making lately, it would be nice to see that kind of progress on the Wii U ecspecially in comparison to last gen.

I expect Wii U's (and PS4/Xbone's) rate of graphical improvement across its lifespan to be similar to the original Xbox, that it's most advanced games versus games released to date will be like Halo 2 vs Halo 1, rather than the massive improvement seen on PS3 and 360.

The catch is that the Wii U doesn't really have those studios that pour tons of time, money, and resources into getting the absolute most juice out of the system; there's no Nintendo version of Naughty Dog, 343i, or Sony Santa Monica. The closest thing they have is Shin'en, who are set to reveal two new Wii U projects aimed at pushing graphics in the next few weeks. (Fast Racing Neo and Art of Balance)

Wii U having twice as much RAM and a newer GPU than PS3/360 will realistically probably translate into the same kind of difference we saw with PS2 vs Wii or PSP vs 3DS; a noticeable but not massive gap.

It has more RAM, but its CPU is more or less just on par with last gen. Better at some tasks and worse in others. It has more RAM but most of that will be chewed up by assets. RAM alone doesnt boost framerates unless theres a bottleneck and given that 99% of all Wii U games run at 720p with no AA that'll never be the case. Its GPU is equivalent to the Radeon 5550 whos base performance levels are barely above a Radeon 1900XT, which is the PC equivalent of the XBox 360s GPU. The XBox 360s GPU was pretty powerful at launch so it has aged well. The 5550 was low end at launch so that hasnt worked out well. This shows in a lot of games both 1st and 3rd party.

Mario Kart 8 = 720p. locked 60fps. No AA. No Anistrophic Filtering.

Forza 4 = 720p. locked 60fps. 4 to 2X hardware MSSA. Anistrophic Filtering. Tesselation

The 5550 does have Direct X11 support but just like low end PC cards that means very little if the card doesnt have the raw power to take full advantage of those features. Things like Tesselation, HBAO and tens of thousands of particles won't ever feature because of the performance cost. It will help the cards base performance but not significantly.

That has to do with the graphics themselves.

God Of War III (PS3):

God Of War: Ascension (PS3):

Bayonetta 2 (Wii U):

Both God Of War III and Ascension have way better lighting, textures and anti-aliasing than Bayonetta 2.

It also has to do with the fact that the Wii U has a more modern GPU than the PS3.

That's false. MK8 and Bayo 2 don't, but those are just two games.

Yes it does but the main point is you cannot compare the framerates of Bayonetta 2 and GOW III/Ascension directly, as they have different level of graphics.

You can compare them in terms of playability. If the framerate didn't bother you in GoW, it won't in Bayo 2.