I hate to tell you this but you've been misinformed. Geometry shaders are not a DirectX 11 level feature and the Wii U GPU does not have the hardware to support DX11 and the GPU does not have direct access to the edram.

• Geometry shaders have been possible on many DirectX versions and OpenGL. You can do these shaders as far back as DX9. So geometry shaders prove nothing besides DX 9-11 level hardware support.
• The Wii  U GPU comes froma reference design that only has upto DirectX 10.1 feature level hardware. It lacks the needed hardware to ever support features exclusive to DX11/ newer OpenGL.
• GPGPU is just a term that stands for general purpose GPU applications. It is not new or exclusive to the Wii U gpu and both the PS3 and Xbox 360 support that. It is simply about running code originally meant for the CPU and adapting it to the GPU. They had GPGPU even before the PS3/Xbox 360 launched.
• The 32mb of EDRAM is embedded on the CPU not the GPU on the Wii U. This means that the GPU can never directly access the EDRAM iwthout first doing through the system bus and querying the CPU. This adds latency and computational costs that would quickly destroy any advantage of using the edram by the GPU. Nintendo should have put the EDRAM on the GPU not the CPU.
• Shin'en is not a particularly good example for developers praising the Wii U's system architecture. They are pretty much exclusive to Nintendo and have no real experience outside of Nintendo products. They haven't even released any full retail Wii U titles yet. So they can be classed as a sceond party indie developer.

Can't believe the "wii u is only weak on paper" claim. lol kinda sounds suspiciously familiar to the "PS4 is only powerful on paper" routine i always used to see.

Also if i were you I'd refrain from going to places with nintendo in their URL they tend to be biased and spout lies favoring nintendo. Some of those places even claimed the Wii U having memory bandwidth rivaling that of the PS4/xbone and quite obviously thats not even close to being true.

I didn't mention the Wii U's edram because its basically just the same thing the Xbox 360 has only more of it. Edram is only used in a handfull of operations with most having to do with image post-processing. Besides the Wii U edram is embedded on the CPU not the GPU where it should have been. So the technical advantages of the Wii U having edram are rather limited and not worth discussing here.

As for the Wii U gpu having new hardware features: Yes of course it would. The GPU is basically off the shelf , a slighty downclocked AMD/ATI Mobility HD 4650 variant. So yes it has unified shaders that the ps3/xbox 360 lack. But having some new hardware features is only useful if it is exposed properly through a software API. Nintendo would have to do that. With the Wii developers complained about not having access to programmable shaders even though the Wii gpu supported GPU shaders. This is because Nintendo decided not to expose those features in the Wii API even though they could have. Same thing happend with the Wii U.

And what's with the "somehow" slower CPU and memory. It is not "somehow" it is mathematically proven, the numbers don't lie. I even ignored the fact that the Wii U has a 32-bit CPU, lower clock speed, older design, etc. The Wii U cpu comes from a design that competed against the Intel Pentium 2. The memory the Wii U has is a function of its slower CPU and 32-bit architecture. The WII U's system ram could actually be about 55gbps but is limited by the CPU's low GHZ rating (which controls the system bus) and 32-bit word size (which controls how much data can be moved around at one time).

The wii u is a seriously weak console which doesn't quite manage to match 360 and ps3 for  most games.

However I'm really hopeful Nintendo will make the NX far more competitive. I think they realise now the game is up, shit hardware at inflated prices just won't cut it and I think they'll bring something to market with very decent cpu performance for a console and competitive gpu performance plus perhaps a few new innovations.

thismeintiel said:

So, if the NX has a better CPU, but a weaker GPU than the PS4, it's not really going to improve Nintendo's situation. Even one that is on par with the PS4 isn't going to help.

And considering Nintendo is going with another expensive controller, I don't see them going that powerful and keeping the price below $399. And I think Nintendo wants to aim for a $299-$349 price.

And like I have said countless times, this still isn't going to help them against a PS5, which will be 4x-5x more powerful than the PS4.

Actually Wii U for what Nintendo where is aiming is very solid console, very efficient, small, silent and in same time very capable 720p console, Nintendo games looking gorgeous and in most cases they running at 720p and locked 60 FPS while in same time Wii U gamepad taking part of Wii U resources. Even we know that aim wasn't good decision.

I don't think they will use same philosophy this time again. This rumour about NX CPU is pretty reliable, same guy before gave informations about GC, Wii and Wii U CPUs, Wii U arrived 6/7 years after Xbox360/PS3 and had slower CPU and this rumours is saying that NX that comes 3 years after PS4/XB1 will have 30% stronger CPU, IMO that is quite progress for Nintendo.

 I've got a wii u, ps3 and 360 and its easy to see overall the wii u is struggling due to its very low cpu resources.  Most games look and play better on ps3 and 360 compared to wii u. Not all of course some games with lower cpu requirements which allow the superior gpu to shine give the wii u an advantage but most games do require reasonable cpu performance.

I actually like the idea of the NX cpu being more powerful. Even if the games visually end up being the same or even lower resolution with a few missing  graphic features if the same game has more going on in the game world thanks to greater cpu performance that would be good. I'd rather play Skyrim with more people in the game world, more birds, more plants animation than see an anti-aliased tree. 

Efficient yes it hardly takes any power despite being on a 40/45nm fabrication process (not 28nm like ps4/xbone) that's why the gpu can't be 352 gflops as it simply isn't consuming the power required.  I've got a wii u, ps3 and 360 and its easy to see overall the wii u is struggling due to its very low cpu resources.  Most games look and play better on ps3 and 360 compared to wii u. Not all of course some games with lower cpu requirements which allow the superior gpu to shine give the wii u an advantage but most games do require reasonable cpu performance.

I actually like the idea of the NX cpu being more powerful. Even if the games visually end up being the same or even lower resolution with a few missing  graphic features if the same game has more going on in the game world thanks to greater cpu performance that would be good. I'd rather play Skyrim with more people in the game world, more birds, more plants animation than see an anti-aliased tree.