Now that anandtech have done a teardown and the real specs are known, I'm. Almost positive that this will be nintendo's last console. It cant go toe to toe with the next gen when it is barely more powerful than current garbage. The third party titles will drop off right away.
I am so looking forward to when Nintendo leaves the hardware business and I will be able to play Mario and Zelda on my Xbox.
Nobody knows the Wii u specs are, apart from the 2gb of Ram, a teardown only looks in-side the system, and does not look at what the spces are, you lame xbot fanboy...
If I had to estimate the GPU, I would say it is a custom part with features and specs taken from a variety of existing AMD GPUs.
I would say it is quite like the E6760 embedded GPU, but with much lower clockspeeds, and the 32mb eDRAM on die that we know of. It is gonna be some odd hybrid with bits n pieces chucked on/removed from the mainstream Radeon series.
Wii U's power consumption under load in game is less than 35 watts total, EVERYTHING, while the E6760's is 35w alone.
This heavily limits how fast the GPU can really be. There is no magic you can do that can reduce the performance per watt massively of current GPU technology on a current production process like 40nm. That is the definition of state of the art, how much performance per watt you can get with existing technology determines that Wii U cannot be as powerful as most desktop GPUs out there.
So we know E6760 is 35w @ 600mhz. Power doesn't scale perfectly downwards with clocks because transistor leakage doesn't work that way. E6760 @ 600mhz is 576 gigaflops. Xenos is 240.
So maybe it is a bit like an undervolted E6760 running @ 450-500mhz. Or maybe it is like an E6760 with shaders disabled, other sections disabled, whichever is better for performance/yields in this case. Maybe its both of these things. Who knows.
Either way its not THAT fast. Faster than Xenos and RSX for sure, but I would estimate 1.5x to twice as fast as Xenos, absolute top end of the possible scale.