Since Nintendo's next console is reportedly using R700 series architecture there may not be any issues with being within the same ballpark as its competitors. The rumors from IGN contradict the rumor of AMD's Trinity fusion chipset being used in Project Cafe, but we still have a leak that points to the chipset being used in a next Generation console. The leak can't be linked to former plans from Nintendo that didn't pan out since according to rumor Nintendo's console is already in production or will be in production soon. It doesn't make since for Sony either since they need to continue to milk these generation. My guess is that the AMD Trinity fusion chipset will instead be powering Microsoft's next console. The four core CPU and either HD 5000 or HD 6000 series GPU would potentially be more powerful than the rumored three core PowerPC CPU and R700 series GPU, but not necessarily by much. A good contender for the GPU in an APU for Microsoft's next console is Radeon HD 6770, which is about 6 times as powerful as Xbox 360's Xenos. A good contender for Nintendo's Project Cafe's GPU is Radeon HD 4770, which is exactly four times more powerful than Xbox 360's Xenos. Then there is the possibility that Nintendo's console will be more exotic as unless Nintendo uses off the counter CPU parts I don't see why it would be as large as a original model Xbox 360 like depicted in the rumors. Its certainly possible that Xbox 720 could use a better GPU than Radeon HD 6770, but options available would make it difficult to use anything within the HD 6000 series beyond Radeon HD 6850, which is slightly more than six times as powerful as Xenos, but the difference in power wouldn't be more than 50 percent more powerful than Nintendo's next console and potentially if Nintendo uses a dual GPU or a Radeon HD 4890 equivalent GPU they could be more or less equal. Though if Nintendo is going with a dual GPU model the chances of it being more powerful than the Xbox exist, but if size isn't a concern Microsoft they can easily match it.

I wouldn't be surprised should THQ and potentially a few other third party developers have some knowledge on the Wii's successor that's far more concrete than anything in the rumor mill. A few developers have given me the impression they may know something regarding Nintendo's next console, which if it is going to be announced this year and released next year like the current rumors are buzzing about it would make sense that third party developers are already working on games.

There are no specific details in any of the rumors outside the controller (at least as far as detailed information) and the fact it is being reported by "sources" many game media sites trust that it will be capable of HD resolutions. A lot of the rest is speculation as far as hardware goes. An example being the French 01Net article. Apparently "sources" stated that the "Wii 2" has similar architecture design to the Xbox 360 and new controller with 6" touch screen everything else regarding hardware is speculation from 01Net. These includes the three core custom IBM PowerPC CPU, the ATI R700 family GPU, and the statement regarding "at least" 512mb RAM. These aren't real specs merely 01Net's speculation. The concrete information if true regards the controller (which is incredibly complex with Wii remote pointer and motion control capabilities, Gamecube/Classic Controller Pro level traditional gamepad functionality, and a 6" touch scream {capable of streaming video and games from the console, maybe HD, and the obvious DS like gameplay functions}) which personal sounds interesting, but at the same time doesn't seem like it could possibility be real.

As far as hardware capability goes information given in the leaks seem extremely vague. Some game media sites "sources" stating that the "Wii 2" is significantly more powerful than current HD consoles others either don't specifically state any concrete info of capability outside HD resolutions like current consoles. 01Net's own speculation regarding Wii 2's specs likely come done to rather vague info such as it still using an IBM PowerPC CPU and an ATI GPU simply because it still retains backwards capability and remarks by "sources" as stated above apparently stating that the hardware design more closely mirrors that of the Xbox 360. So be careful of believing any rumored specs as far as hardware goes, but if your worried about power don't be. If 01Net's speculation is close to what Wii 2's internal guts ends up being it would easily be noticeably more powerful than PS3 and Xbox 360 by a factor ranging from 2x to 4-5x depending on the chips.

These maybe a controlled leak from Nintendo because of the NGP and falling sells of the Wii in both hardware and software. This would explain the reason behind it being extremely vague in some respects, put more concrete in others with multiple sources giving game media sites similar information. They want to build hype for E3 and possibly a pre E3 reveal, but at the same time not giving away all the details.

I've been visiting lots of forums since I heard about these leaks, and there's one thing many Nintendo fans "fear": that the consoles MS and Sony will release as an answer would be much more powerful. this "fear" is based on the thought that all other consoles will most probably be released years after "Project Café" and thus will have much more up-to-date hardware.

According to the rumors, Nintendo is going "back to the roots" with this one, and there's one thing in Nintendo's history that could help "Project Café" to stay on par with the competition: add-ons. They've used add-ons for almost every console they made, and there's one special add-on that could see a revival: the N64 Expansion Pak. The Expansion Pak was some kind of a cartridge you put into your Nintendo 64, increasing the RAM by 4 MB (this amount is kinda cute from today's point of view). I'm not a technician or engineer, so I can't say whether this is possible, but couldn't they release some kind of Expansion Cup Pak for Project Café? It could consist of an additional processor and more RAM, boosting Project Café to the level of the competition. I personally think that most core gamers would spent some money for such a thing, and considering that Project Café is aimed at exactly these core gamers according to the rumors, this might come true once Project Café's hardware starts to get old.

On the other hand... what do you think of the whole Project Café being a mere add-on to the Wii? Probably a stupid idea, as just adding some processing power wouldn't enable the console to use these fancy new controllers, and adding the controller compatibility by an update doesn't seem like something Nintendo would make. I hope Project Café will be an entirely new console because I finally want to make homebrew software for my Wii without risking not being able to use my games for a while! xD

Even if 01Net's speculation is right on the money we would still be potentially seeing a large step over PS3 and Xbox 360. There are GPUs in the R700 family that easily could give capabilities at least near 8x what current HD consoles are capable of doing now. The issue would be to update the GPU to be capable of utilizing OpenGl 4.1 API, which gives Nintendo an alternative to fixed shaders so their Wii 2 games don't suffer from a learning curve catching up with more modern shaders. An a three core custom IBM PowerPC CPU could easily be three times or more as capable as Xbox 360's own CPU depending on what modern Power processor line it is derived from. PS4 and XboxNext may have more modern architecture, but certain real world limitation exist limiting hardware. Be assured its doubtful that the deference in power will be as large as Wii to PS360.

Hardware is becoming ever increasing in complexity in these machines so I doubt "Project Cafe" is being designed with the concept of being able to be ungraded at a later date. The good news regarding hardware for "Project Cafe" comes down to how Nintendo has seemly changed compared to it's classical way of creating Hardware. Classical Nintendo created a device it believed had a market and met their own internal developers needs 3D party weren't involved. Nintendo now though is a different arena the console itself is still originally built with Nintendo ideas and needs in mind, but as shown with 3DS its possible for 3D party to nickle and dime Nintendo to increase the capability of console. The 3DS itself arguable changed perhaps three times during development in hardware and there is no reason "Project Cafe" won't either especially if Nintendo wants 3D party support for the long hall. Since it appears early developer kits have at most only been in the hands of 3D party developers according to rumors for at most a year and likely less hardware is no where near finalized.

These new touchscreen controllers appear to use a different version of the Wii remotes motion sensing and pointer technology according to some sources along with the ability to stream video and games. The necessary hardware to utilize such a controller doesn't exist on the Wii an software update wouldn't accomplish anything and in the first place there is no obvious way to attach new hardware to the Wii. This new controller itself requires greatly different hardware to the Wii, so without a doubt this is a new console not an add on.

Something within the performance range of the 4850 and 4870 is what I suspected before, but Neogaf focusing on something within the range of a 4830 to slightly above sort of curved my over all enthusiasm. Overall I'm confident that the final GPU will be newer in design and architecture than the R770 or simply the 4000 series in general. Though it may not be concurrent tech from AMD. 4870 based speculation was at its hay day several months ago since then the general focus has moved away from those articles and leaks that pointed to something in that range.

More RAM and HD may be all High Voltage Software wants, but from statements from Satoru Iwata and other big names at Nintendo more RAM and HD isn't enough to warrant a successor to the Wii. Nintendo isn't stupid. Satisfying the wants and needs of developers is one thing, but they have to make sure gamers would want to buy the system first. A Wii with more RAM and HD would be in my opinion a complete failure on the market. A large portion of the Wii's current market simply may not reliably upgrade regardless and hardcore gamers outside Nintendo fans would have little reason to buy the product.

If you read my last post about the leaks (the one in which I leaked an image myself), you'd know that these are supposed to be pictures of a developer unit with no working disc drive. So that slot you see isn't really a slot for anything.

They're not real Feld0. You shouldn't get your hopes up regarding images from a console that has only recently been in production, or potentially isn't in production yet. If you've ever seen an early Nintendo dev kit you'd understand that these devices don't fit the bill. Early dev kits are crudely built devices in the case of Cafe we're likely talking about a butchered PC.

Bandwidth is far more likely to be the reason behind the current two controller limit regarding the utablets depending on what technology Nintendo is using to stream video and content. It shouldn't be impossible to support four utablets if they upgrade Wii U's Bluetooth or other wireless technology. Eventually these controllers will start to hit the graphical abilities of the console, which may already be an issue past two controllers other than bandwidth simply based on the sort of uses Nintendo plans for these tablet controllers.

Actually, it has been confirmed.

It hasn't been confirmed merely that the original concept behind the Wii U is one controller per console, but they are looking into the possibilities of using two. We really don't know if the current Wii U build can play two utablet controllers, but since they are looking into ideas regarding using two controllers its likely it is on paper at least possible.

Every last leaked photo is fake. The Nintendo logo was wrong of the first few leaked images and many of the others have obvious features that give them away as being fake. Manufacturing of this console only recently started leaked photos should be of the developer kit not prototypes, which would be secretly held at Nintendo. If any of you have ever seen a photo of a early Nintendo dev kit you'll understand that usually these devices are very crude. The early DS dev kits where made out of two butchered GBA's with a Super Nintendo controller. The current Nintendo Cafe/Stream dev kits are likely butchered PC's.

Edit: I believe I've already stated this somewhere on this blog, but anyway these fake photo leaks are created using a Windows 7 software box with fake connections. They could even used photoshop to create the majority of image. They are fake and not worth noting Nintendo would be on these rumors quicker than flies to garbage would an actual photo leak.

USB 3.0 would be a smart move by Nintendo to incorporate. Its not exactly the only option though. Whether or not USB 3.0 or something else needs to be added depends largely from my understanding on the drive's read speed. USB 2.0 may still be useful if the drive's read speed is lower than the bandwidth of the USB 2.0 port.

Most current information and rumors from developers telling IGN that Radeon HD 4850 was the closest commercially available GPU, the rumors of R700 series GPU, specifically RV700 core, and Power7 based CPU all point to Wii U being at least about four times as powerful as Xbox 360. I certainly wouldn't call it next gen, but it should be able to pull off anything current PC games have accomplished and perhaps a little more with optimized code.

Firstly the extra 64 megabytes on the wii is buffer memory for the dvd drive and sound. The gamecube only had 16meg of slow buffer memory but it only had to buffer a single layer 1.4GB optical disc. The wii makes use of a full dvd disc so it was increased. The xbox replaces the dvd buffer memory with 768meg of cached hard drive memory for each game. Remember the hard drive itself has some cache memory. So that 64 meg is there because of a lack of hard drive and its still much slower but does mean the wii can load level data continously and doesn't need to pause to load new level data in the same way as the dreamcast for example.

The wii has 24 meg of main memory and 3 meg of video memory. 2meg of video memory is the frame buffer and 1meg for textures. The 2meg limits the resolution of the wii to 480p and the 1meg texture memory creates heavy restrictions on the amount of textures that can be used. Hence why many of the wii's best games are cartoon type graphics due to the texture limitation.

Xbox has 64meg of unified memory of which upto 12meg can be used for graphics. I guess that would be needed for 1080i games. Most games only use about 6meg I believe. 3 meg frame buffer and 3 meg textures I guess. Remember the Xbox has 32bit colour where as wii is only 24bit colour so xbox needs 33% extra memory for the frame buffer.

If you want to believe the wii is more powerful than the original xbox back it up with facts. You haven't made any case at all. Of course the hard drive is important. Maybe you believe the powerpc chip at 720mhz is more powerful than the Celeron at 733mhz in the xbox. Benchmarks proof otherwise. The xbox gpu is much more powerful than the gamecube/wii gpu.

The wii has more memory bandwidth overall but its a very limited console. The soundchip in the xbox was state of the art for the time producing a huge number of channels and with true 5.1 sound, the wii has a 2 channel sound chip.

There is nothing like Half life 2 on the wii. That game on the xbox had a full physics engine. We are certainly going off topic with the discussion but its clear the wii is inferior. Can you think of a single wii game with realistic graphics that is superior on wii to a similar title on xbox? Something like Call of Duty 3 on the wii has lost the excellent 5.1 soundtrack, its lost the 32bit colour range and been downgraded to 24bit colour. Some of the detail in the game is missing to fit into the 24meg memory of the wii. Treyach really went to town with the wii version and it's the wii's most successful first person shooter selling over 2 million copies but its still inferior to the xbox version. Far Cry is far superior to Call of Duty 3 on xbox but it would be unfair to compare Far Cry xbox to Far Cry Wii.

The fact is people assumed the wii was more powerful than xbox because it came out later, the reality is that it isn't. Many xbox games are hugely ambitious and the likes of which have never been seen on the wii due to limited memory and lack of hard drive.

Just to summarise;

Xbox is best for;

GPU
CPU
Memory
hard drive
sound

wii is best for

memory bandwidth

Your still not getting it. Certainly there are some features the Xbox GPU has that the Wii's doesn't, but overall in raw capability the Wii surpasses the overall capabilities of the Xbox. The hard drive on the Xbox isn't capable of acting like RAM. You can load game data onto the hard drive and pull it directly from there, but you still have to run game data through the slower memory bandwidth. It may or may not be faster to load data from the hard drive I'd have to do further research than I think this topic requires. A hard drive hardly has any effect on the capability of a console its a nice feature that's quite welcomed in the case of the PS3 because of the slow Blu-Ray drive, but its not going to magically improve a console's capabilities. Wii is a console only meant for standard definition obviously and fixed function so the feature set of Hollywood and Xbox's GPU is quite different. You again have to understand that regardless of what you may find on the Xbox's GPU in real world situations because of one restraint or another it wasn't considerably more powerful than the Gamecube. Architecture improvements and a higher clock more than makes up the difference. The largest advantage of the Xbox over the Wii your going to find is programmable shaders. Its possible as quoted by devs to reproduce the shader effects of the Xbox, but most don't bother to do so.

Its been considerably more difficult to search up some of those old threads and news releases regarding the capability of the Wii compared to the Xbox than I thought it would be, but still using Google you should be able to find sources that explains why Wii is technically more powerful than Xbox in far more detail than I can. The CPU Broadway is more powerful and regardless of its own limitations Hollywood has several advantages and technically capable of more in regards of real world situations. The Wii simply hasn't been pushed graphically. Majority of third party developers focus more on making Wii games as cheaply as possible since they haven't been historically successful on the console and many developers have admitted to the fact they don't really try to push the console.

How on earth do you consider the Wii noticably more powerful than Xbox? The xbox had high resolution graphics upto 1080i resolution, 32bit colour not 24bit colour, true 5.1 sound, a more advanced gpu, a faster cpu, 64meg of main memory not 24meg plus 3 meg video, a built in hard drive with the ability to cache in extra game data quickly. How are you gauging the Wii has more power than the Xbox? I've got both and the best Xbox graphics easily beat the wii. Games like Soul Caliber II run at 720p on xbox. Some games run at 1080i. Have you actually seen Far Cry on the original xbox? Still a stunning game visually.

The 64MB of unified memory within the Xbox was for everything while the 88MB on Wii is split. The unified memory is superior that's certainly not something I'm arguing, but if you think all that 64MB is for GPU work you need to do more research. On average I doubt Wii has less memory available to the GPU, and at the resolutions used by the Wii it really doesn't matter. Wii's GPU however is superior in some ways to the Xbox while inferior in others. Overall however the Wii is more powerful than the Xbox its not even arguable. The only significant advantage the Xbox had over the Wii is programmable shaders. A hard drive hardly has anything to do with the capabilities of a console so that's a mute point. Developers choosing not to really push the Wii really doesn't make this any less true. I'm gauging the Wii's power based on info that's been found by various sources. You have to realize that in real life applications the Xbox wasn't extremely more powerful than Gamecube and the enhancements to the architecture from Gamecube to Wii as lack luster as the console was surpassed what was actually capable on the Xbox.

We still don't know the final specification of the Wii U. Nintendo don't make a loss on consoles and the Wii U console itself is quite small only marginally bigger than the Wii. I've read comments from developers that have sounded at times its less powerful, the same power or more powerful than 360/PS3.

For example the GPU will more than likely be bottom of the range similar to Xbox 360 and may be underclocked to prevent overheating in the Wii U case but the fact it will be using slightly later technology and have more high speed video memory will give it advantages. One comment I've read is it can use higher resolution textures.

Until we get a final specification we won't really know the power of the console. Remember the Wii was launched well after the original Xbox and yet was far less powerful.

Nintendo were happy to use PS3/360 graphics to showcase the Wii U at E3. You would think if the console was as powerful as modern PCs they would have used PC graphics to showcase Wii U graphics. I think we need to put our realistic hats on.

I do believe Skyrim will be fantastic on Wii U though and as its got to come later to the format it will probably come with many of the bugs already fixed. Bethedsa games always seem to have major issues and require patches. I just hope the patches the Wii U version will need don't fill up the Wii U's flash memory.

Nothing supposedly from developers have placed Wii U at or below current HD consoles. For the most part developers aren't willing to talk about graphical horse power and more than likely Nintendo has told them to say nothing regarding this issue. How the console relates in power to the other HD consoles has been practically a no comment issue. Practically all developers have said is that it is an HD console and that its architecture fits their current business model. Currently by piecing together information regarding current Dev Kits that's leaked it seems because of a heating issue they had to be down clocked because under too large a load the kits crashed. Otherwise the GPU for instance is supposedly from multiple rumors within the range of a Radeon HD 4850. We'll have a better idea of the consoles actual abilities sometime this month once the new Dev Kits get into the hands of developers willing to leak info.

The Wii wasn't far less powerful than the Xbox. In fact it was noticeably more powerful than the Xbox. The only capability Wii lacked was programmable shaders a feature Nintendo at the time really didn't like.

Nintendo apparently used PS3 and Xbox 360 footage because Wii U footage available to them from 3d party developers wasn't noticeably better than the PS3 and Xbox 360 footage. This was Nintendo trying to prevent the issue that occurred to Microsoft when showing early Xbox 360 footage that lead to the belief that Xbox 360 wasn't noticeably more powerful than Xbox. Many of the rumors regarding the GPU should allow Wii U to play any modern PC game at high. Perhaps it would of been smart to showcase some of the latest PC games as an example of what the console is capable of, but it is obvious that their focus was the controller.

I don't think they are better than the ps3 or xbox, but I suppose it's equal to them. Now nintendo has a chance to redeem themselves from the wii. And actually compete.

The Wii U is significantly more powerful than either the PS3 or Xbox 360. Both tech demos show cased that fact simply how much more powerful is the question. Rumors before E3 pointed to a theoretical figure of something between 4x to possibly 6x the capability of Xbox 360 depending on how the rumored chipsets where customized. The only thing in doubt about the full capability of the console was whether it could be considered a full generational leap over current consoles. As a measuring stick going by those original rumors there isn't any reason with optimizing the code for a closed box system that majority of the more graphically impressive games that have recently come out for the PC could run on Wii U on their highest settings.

There's a rumor going on on NeoGAF saying that the WiiU's CPU is based on Watson's Power7 CPU. Although that doesn't mean that your WiiU could beat you in Jeopardy because Watson's a gigantic cluster with 2880 cores and 16 TB of RAM, it still means that the WiiU uses considerably newer tech than PS360. Let's hope the GPU will be good enough not to bottleneck the CPU.

This bit of information though is extremely interesting. Basically the only thing that can be taken from it is that Wii U's CPU is Power 7 based, but that means far more power than many expected. Depending on the number of cores, the clock speed, and exactly how the chip has been customized it could theoretically be a full generational leap over Xenon. Going by the AMD press release the GPU may be something from the Radeon HD 5xxx to 7xxx family of GPU's instead of the originally rumored 4XXX family of GPU's. Which would result in a better feature set, better performance with a lower TDP, and would benefit from AMD Eyefinity technology. The biggest issues I'm worried about regarding Wii U now is its total RAM.

The likely way the Virtual Console will noticeably change is by included Gamecube games to the preexisting service. I doubt there will be many at launch though merely a few of the more popular games. Outside that something I always thought Nintendo could do with the Virtual Console is offer a monthly subscription to stream access to previous games. It would be smart on Nintendo's part to do so as individuals that may not buy many games from the Virtual Console may very likely be willing to pay $11.99 a month for unlimited access. As far as storage looking at the 3DS the Wii's successor will more than likely have greater internal storage, but I have a feeling willing it will merely be 8 or 16 GBs of flash storage with the option to expand memory storage by SSD cards. At most an option to buy a dedicated external hard drive may be included among the early accessories.

Great posts Jikayaki!

I've been reading the GAF rumour thread all week and it started out as a good thread for info but has gone to the pits of hell with people thinking Ninty will ditch motion controls and go back to 'normal' controls for the 'hardcore' gamers.  

I'm pretty sure the 'going hardcore' rumours just mean Nintendo is trying to get better third party support along with their first party offerings, not that they are going to become more like Sony and MS.

I don't think motion controls will be dropped at all. I'm just waiting to see what that dual analog rumour meant.

Nintendo going "hardcore" doesn't surprise me for the most part I expected a strategy from Nintendo much like the 3DS in their next console. Nintendo wants to be the PS2 of next generation and cash in on both hardcore and casual gamers. Motion controls I don't think have been dropped some rumors from Edge point to it carrying over to this new console. I believe Nintendo is going to make two primary controllers for the console this Gameboy thing and an improved Wii remote. For the rumored touchscreen Gameboy-like controller to work its going to have to either upgrade to Bluetooth 3.0 or utilize a cheaper alternative. Pair a modified Wii remote + with Bluetooth 3.0 and a better camera and realistically it should be a sizable upgrade over the Wii's motion control. I doubt an upgraded Wii remote + would cost much to manufacture more than likely something like $18 including a nunchuk depending on the camera they use to replace the one in the Wii remote.

i agree with this, games are only going to take longer to make with the hardware they will be dropping. Unless they want their gamers to suffer droughts all through the generation, they will have to make sure they are getting third party ports to fill in the blank spaces.

I'm expecting them to do a little expanding of their studios, maybe buy up some new ones, but I still think they will need better third party support.

To my knowledge several studios including Retro are expanding. Nintendo is creating a new R&D studio as well and at Nintendo often these studios are used for making games not merely software and hardware R&D.

I have an odd feeling that this upcoming generation may be the last, or second last, generation of (console) video games... At least for a long time.

Especially if the project butterfly rumors had some truth to them. If that's the case then all we'll have is 'sub-generations' for a very long time.

The difference in capability next generation compared to the current HD consoles likely isn't going to be as large a jump as we're used to with previous next gen console jumps. Simply put software needs to catch up with hardware otherwise costs in the industry will continue to balloon out of control. Depending on bandwidth limits and internet speeds the generation after this coming generation may be the end of console gaming as we know it. Nintendo 7 for instance may maintain majority of its power from servers something like Onlive. In one way it actually allows for expanded console generations something the overly expensive devices introduced by Microsoft and Sony this generation aren't really capable of doing, but this means you'd be paying a monthly or annual payment for the duration of the console generation. It may even be smart to allow the capability to utilize such a feature in next gen consoles and when or if bandwidth and internet speeds meet the level necessary offer the service. It wouldn't be completely impossible to over it free if costs where gained in some other fashion.

Thanks for that list, Play4Fun. I featured it over on the blog.


I agree with most of your points there, Jikayaki. Honestly, I don't think anyone's yet made a game that uses up every ounce of even the PlayStation 3's power yet, so the arms race for the bigger and badder console is probably going to slow down as the console manufacturers begin to focus on providing engaging services and experiences, now that they've made machines so powerful, comparisons between them don't even matter anymore.

Some kind of game streaming tech a la OnLive would be amazing to see implemented by a major player someday, if only because they'd do it better. Actually, Nintendo received a patent some time ago for a technology similar to that, which also allows the developers to directly send game patches and updates to the distribution servers - I remember it was a fascinating read. I can dig it up, if you're interested.

I'd actually would be interested in that patent if you can find it, but that sort of technology isn't ready yet. It would be a waste to invest in an OnLive like system next gen console since the necessary bandwidth and internet speeds for mass market appeal isn't really there yet even in most first world countries. Currently the latest graphically impressive games on the Xbox 360 and PS3 utilize about 80% to 90% percent of the total power of these machines. Its actually rather unusual to reach this level of capability in closed hardware simply because usually we'd would of already seen a console refresh.

Not that there's really much of an envelope left to push, as you're putting it. I still remember the days when the PlayStation 3 was thought of as a miniature supercomputer, and hearing news stories about them being used in clusters in scientific and military applications. But yeah, 5-year-old technology is 5-year-old technology, and it would probably be more surprising if Nintendo didn't surpass it with the Wii 2.

It would be almost impossible not to surpass the PS3 to some extent using more modern architecture. GPU's exist that would have what I'd consider in the ballpark of next gen capabilities over current consoles, but I do have one worry with next gen consoles though and in a way that explains why Microsoft and Sony are banking on 3D tvs. Going by 01Net's R700 class CPU speculation as an example the most realist mid end GPU of that family of GPU's that may not be that difficult to optimize for consoles is Radeon HD 4850, which would roughly be a little more than four times as powerful as Xbox 360's own GPU. This GPU would allow likely at native 720p lighting and physics effects on GPU side increased by four times over the Xbox 360. If you understand the little details behind the capabilities existent in current games that is an impressive increase in its own right since most games can't run on a descent FPS on 720p on current consoles with only 1/4 the effects, but the average consumer won't be capable of noticing the difference. The image will be clearer with more detail and four times more realistic physics and lighting, but the average consumer already has trouble understanding the difference between 30FPS from 60FPS, 720p from 1080p, and even sub-HD from real HD. There isn't going to be that clear cut difference between generations we're used to regardless of how much more power these machines have within a realistic range.

The most power I expect in Nintendo's next console ranges from about six times as powerful as the Xbox 360 to eight times as powerful. According to a leak from AMD picked up by Neogaf its Trinity APU is going to be in an next generation console to release in 2012, which currently if true could be the Wii 2 making the console about 6 times as powerful as Xbox 360 if its using a Radeon HD 5770 equivalent GPU. Like the situation above, this would carry over to all consoles not just Wii 2, it would no longer be possible to truly bank on the possibility that the average gamer would be able to notice a considerable difference between the new hardware and its games and the current HD consoles. In this case the console would easily be capable of native 1080p with again a large boost in physics, lighting, and A.I., but a clear cut visual difference isn't guarantied. A format beyond 1080p being made into production would go a long way to creating a visual difference that the average gamer could see, but Nintendo wouldn't bank on technology only now entering the market anyway, much less something not yet available. Sony and Microsoft are banking on 3D to be the visual distinguisher between current gen consoles and next gen. Nintendo seems to be banking on content instead regardless of how powerful their next console is going to be. Still this is something to think about Sony and Microsoft may not push too far beyond Nintendo simply because it wouldn't be beneficial.

EDIT: To explain simply the complexity of games will increase greatly next gen, but visually the improvements will be more subtle than we'd usually expect from a generational jump. From diminishing returns and simply available resolutions along with some other factors it won't be as spectacular as previous jumps because of technology limitations. So as I meant in a previous post I don't expect as large of a jump as seen in this generation by the two HD consoles over the previous generation in this coming generation simply because it wouldn't be useful. NOTE I'm only talking about how visually impressive the graphics would appear to the average consumer. Viewing distances, A.I, physics, lighting, and the general possible size of game worlds would increase noticeable in any game actually utilizing the hardware's capabilities, but overall there wouldn't be an overly noticeable increase in graphics visually.

I think it will only be a tiny bit more powerful, but hey, the PS3 is super powerful.

Compared to the technology available the PS3 is extremely weak. Going by rumor and speculation if Nintendo uses a R700 family GPU from 2008 there exists the possibility of a console ranging from about twice as powerful as current consoles to almost exactly 10x times more powerful than current consoles. It would be rather cheap for Nintendo to out do PS3 in a noticeable way its merely a matter of how far Nintendo is willing to push the envelope since they themselves have little interest in continuing the hardware war.

More IGN rumours:


IGN

These rumours are driving me crazy. Now they say it's coming out later this year...
I know GBA and GC released the same year, but will Nintendo really do this?

Seems 01Nets speculation had something behind it. Going by these specs depending on what IBM processor the custom core is based on and what R700 series GPU its graphics processor is based on we're looking at a very sizable increase in power. There are four realistic choices Radeon HD 4850, Radeon HD 4860, Radeon HD 4870, and Radeon HD 4890. Radeon HD 4860 is a little too inefficient at merely 3.5-3.8 times as powerful as Xbox 360's GPU with higher TDP than Radeon HD 4850, which itself is slightly more than 4 times as powerful as Xenos. I honestly hope they use a GPU derived from Radeon HD 4870 or HD 4890 which would result in about 5 times as powerful with 4870 and almost 6 times as powerful with 4890. A TDP below 150 watts doesn't seem a priority going by the rumored size, so who knows it could utilize a rather hot CPU or even a dual GPU depending on costs.

Found it. Here's that patent.


Wait...AMD is shipping a ton of Trinity processors next year? That's news to me. When did that get get leaked out?

A leak from AMD apparently some time last year are so stated that Trinity APU would be in a next generation console launching in 2012. There is a thread on Neogaf where the idea of a Trinity APU powered Wii 2 originated from to my knowledge. I've seen several forums predicting that Trinity APU which should be in production in 2012 could power the next Nintendo console since the leak mentioned AMD designing the CPU for a next generation console to launch in 2012 and a few put two and two together. I haven't yet confirmed the existence of this leak, but I first heard of it at Neogaf, which I take as a rather reliable source. I still think Nintendo would go with PowerPC or at least Power derived CPU, but something interesting brought up on Neogaf's is it isn't impossible to include PowerPC cores in the APU. The sealing point of Nintendo possibly utilizing a Trinity APU derived processor to me is it would cast less than twice what their CPU and GPU did last generation only at about $80 at mass product levels. Depending on the price point of the console Nintendo could easily up Trinity's GPU a little an throw in two small PowerPC cores and make profit from the beginning with a sizable upgrade in power over current consoles.

Nintendo has always been about creating awesome content first, then making a console worthy of it, so to speak. Really, as you explained over your entire post, and as I said in my last one, there won't be any spectacular differences between the competing consoles because we're rapidly approaching the physical limitations of our current hardware (e.g.: I don't think 4k TV's really exist yet; even 3D ones are still brand new). I see the next generation of consoles as one in which hardware power will play a much smaller role than it did before, and the focus will be on creating incredible, memorable gaming experiences instead - and Nintendo is better known for that than any other company out there.

I'd agree Nintendo is very successful in creating memorable franchises that hold a lot of weight for the fanbases they attract. I don't think Nintendo can compete next generation without third party developers, but Nintendo seems to be handling that rather well. Resolutions beyond 1080p do exist, but primarily on Monitors not HDTVs. A higher resolution on HDTVs is unlikely to appear for quite sometime.

is there any quote from developer or nintendo or even rumors that state this is being built in Wii U? im dying for info on this console.

Unfortunately no there isn't any quote from a developer or Nintendo pointing to IBM quad channel controllers or a system on chip or system in package designs for the Wii U. That is merely speculation from Neogaf the memory controllers coming from IBM's statement that the CPU within the Wii U is related to Watson and the speculation regarding SoC or SoP originates mostly from random statements from IBM with no real relation to Wii U and the size of the console in comparison to the rumors. There was a rumor on Neogaf from supposedly an investor or employee of the company manufacturing the embedded memory for the GPU that the Wii U will use the 28nm manufacturing process, which could point to more impressive GPU than previously thought. It doesn't look like anything concrete will drop regarding the Wii U until next year. Hope still exists that leaks will follow the release of the third gen dev kits, but that could of already happened and we haven't heard anything.

We already know that the 3DS changed to some degree to better match the wishes of third party devs and a lot of the focus on the Wii U's design is maintaining third party support. After the lack luster start to the 3DS it wouldn't surprise me if devs aren't able to push more with Nintendo regarding the Wii U in comparison. That said Nintendo has some very capable hardware designers. Going on leaks and rumors I do believe it won't suffer from many of the issues that plagued the Wii regarding the core audience and third party developers, at least for the first three years. Then if you add in some of the speculation from IBM's quad channel memory controllers to possibly a system on chip or system in package silicon designs Wii U may end up more impressive than the high end rumors while still using parts equal to rumored PC counterparts. A lot depends on what Microsoft and Sony do next gen, but a lot points to both potentially utilizing a more modest jump in comparison to last gen.