Rumor: Wii U will be twice as powerful as Xbox 360

An anonymous developer working with the Wii U has told Develop that Nintendo's next-gen console will ship with twice the processing and graphical prowess of Microsoft's current Xbox 360 hardware. This follows other sources claiming the next Xbox will clock in at six times more powerful than Microsoft's current model, thereby sporting 2/3 more power than the Wii U if our strange, rumor-based math is correct.

Tossing the conflicting rumors aside, these reports suggest Nintendo's Wii U will not be on equal footing with its competitors when it launches later this year. According to their own experience, the sourced added, “I've heard [a project designer] complain it's underpowered compared to what Nintendo announced, resulting in people having to de-scale their plans.”

Nintendo has remained fairly tight lipped about the actual specs for its touchscreen console. Back at E3 2011, it did say the system would sport a multi-core processor based off the IBM Power series, and ship with all the standard HD bells and whistles. Everything else since — including leaked info that suggests the system boasts an IBM 3-GHz 45-nanometer CPU — remains unconfirmed. Nintendo did promise a final version of the Wii U will be shown off at E3 2012, so until then the fanboy wars might have to wait.


Nintendo Wii U


  • jdklaffke - January 26, 2012 10:49 a.m.

    I hope the 360 has a variety of good, new IPs next gen. And I hope the Wii does, too. Sony did well this gen with things like LBP and Uncharted and so on, and they probably will do well next gen, too. It's freshness of games that means the most to me. Final Fantasy has become stale and the developers have driven it to a state of disrepair. Call of Duty has hit a bump with MW3 being "too much of a good thing." Nintendo should be coming out with great new IPs like they did with Pikmin and Animal Crossing and how they reinvented Metroid and Phantasy Star. The Wii did poorly with games, and Nintendo knows they lost that hardcore crowd. They made millions of dollars, but lost a lot of fans. I'd love to see them make a sweet system and bring back those sweet games - games that don't give a shit about achievements and trophies or even twitchy online play, but games that are genius at bringing fun to the player.
  • TheLeagueOfNinjaSquirrels - January 26, 2012 12:50 a.m.

    To be fair I don’t care if this thing has the power to get me to the moon and back, at the end of the day I will only buy a console that has great games.
  • Ravenbom - January 25, 2012 7:29 p.m.

    At this point, who really cares about the hardware? The 3DS and less so the Vita have had mostly crap launch titles, I think if anything, the new Xbox and Wii need to come out with strong first party support.
  • Dadyo238 - January 25, 2012 7:42 p.m.

    I agree on the lack of first-party announcements, but have you seen the third-party games announced for it? Aliens:CM, Batman:AC, Killer Freaks from Outer Space, Dirt 3, Dragon Quest X, Ninja Gaiden 3, and many more!...I sound like an ad, don't I.
  • ChrisCultista - January 25, 2012 7:10 p.m.

    But will it even attempt to be a hardcore gamers console? Unlike the Wii?
  • jdklaffke - January 26, 2012 10:56 a.m.

    I think it will have to. Nintendo knows they aren't going to strike twice with such high sales as the original Wii because the people who bought the Wii are not looking to buy another console next gen. We are. The hardcore gamers buy consoles every generation, and Nintendo knows this next gen needs to cater to those hardcore gamers again. If they don't figure that out, they're going to end up on the bottom of the totem pole. I would love to see the Wii U (terrible name) bring out new IPs and reinvent old ones like the GCN did, because honestly, the best games are Nintendo ones. Microsoft and Sony have nothing on what Nintendo can potentially pull off.
  • shawksta - January 25, 2012 7 p.m.

    OBJECTION! Hold it right there Matt! You obviously havnt been paying attention, your conclusion is flawed, one rumor states that the Wii U will be 2X more powerful than the 360, and the 720 being 2/3 more powerfuller than the Wii U cause of the rumor that its 6X more powerfuller than the 360. Sounds abot right....... HOWEVER, the rumor of 720 = 6X 360 has STATED THAT ” BUT %20 more then the Wii U” Thats CONTRADICTORY BETWEEN RUMORS. Boom, all speculation and Bullsh*t till the truth arrives, they ARE rumors afterall. And as stated before, ”Final Version of Wii U to be revealed at E3 2012” so we gotta wait.
  • madman725 - January 25, 2012 7:16 p.m.

    ... that's why it's a rumor...
  • xarab4lyfex - January 25, 2012 6:38 p.m.

    That's great and all, but as long as the games are good, then graphics and power aren't THAT important. I have all three systems and my wii got much more playing time than my xbox due to the wii having much more and better exclusives than the 360.
  • AuthorityFigure - January 25, 2012 6:17 p.m.

    I'll expect the Xbox 720 to be 2 or 3 times the price of the Wii U then.
  • Shinn - January 25, 2012 5:01 p.m.

    Is that really something we should consider difficult?
  • Rowdie - January 25, 2012 4:31 p.m.

    The only spec we need to know is the RAM. Detailed specs would be great but even just the quantity and speed would be enough.
  • ultimatepunchrod - January 25, 2012 4:20 p.m.

    Didn't Nintendo already say that the Wii-U won't be much more powerful than the PS3? I don't see why they wouldn't aim for it to be a bit more powerful than the current gen, but I also doubt Nintendo will go full on next gen hardware.
  • WTeen8 - January 25, 2012 3:47 p.m.

    Ya know....I'd say we already if the wii u is even a bit more powerful than the xbox (what ever power means in this situation anyway) then wouldn't we of hit a wall. If we keep going it'll eventually become way too expensive to make and buy, and graphics seem to be at the maximum capacity right now. As a wise falcon with blades said, WHO CARES ABOUT POWER AND RUMORS?! Really, just show us some maybe a new star fox.....or MOTHER game....hint hint Nintendo now make those.
  • GamesRadarMatthewKeast - January 25, 2012 3:19 p.m.

    From a gamer's perspective, current gen games may be "powerful enough" but if you were to talk to developers you'd get a very different answer. During the making of any game, an artist or designer always wants to do something, but then limitations of hardware constantly stop them from doing what they want. It's not just about texture resolution. For instance, say a level designer has the idea for an epic battle against thirty enemies, with a waterfall in the middle of the area that affects the gameplay by making the ground slippery and/or washing enemies over a cliff, and gorgeous beams of sunlight coming down from the sky. They try to get it to run and the hardware crashes. Now they have a choice: cut out some enemies, cut out the waterfall, or cut out the sunbeams (or cut out a thousand other details that make the scene not look like crap). They'll obviously cut out the sunbeams, but then realize it still runs at a bad framerate. They realize that their epic battle just isn't possible due to hardware limitations.
  • BladedFalcon - January 25, 2012 5:51 p.m.

    ...Except most of the things you mentioned were pretty much graphical, visual limitations. I appreciate them as well, of course. But I mean, at the end of the day, if you look at this last generation of gaming, how many true new, innovative genres surface? What kind of original, truly creative game-play mechanics were created that could not have been done in previous hardware? The way I've seen console upgrades in the last generations, it's that they basically get better graphics and the ability to put more content as like you said, number of enemies and the such. Bigger and better. But most of the games tend to feel like just expansions of what could be done before. But, if you look at other technical aspects, like say, for example: AI. There might be a few exceptions, but if you ask me, in most games of this generation, the AI did NOT evolve significantly over the way it behaved in the previous generation, even though you technically have more tools and power to improve in that area. I guess that the point I'm trying to make is that I don't feel that even with much more technical power, developers haven't really evolved that much in the way they create games. the technology and graphics might be impressive, but there's a distinct lack of creativity, or even focus on more important stuff like AI algorithms that can make the world feel more genuine, real, and ultimately more fun to play in.
  • Gex4212 - January 25, 2012 2:59 p.m.

    @Pruman to me Honestly the Wii has done so well because it brought something new to the table which was motion control. The fact that it was the cheapest console around and targeted the demographic that no one really cared about. 360 was a great console that offered some good IPs and it changed online gaming for a console. I do believe the PS3 was the most powerful system of the 3 the reason why it took long was because of shitty ports and the difficulty of coding. But as you see devs have a much better understanding and you can see the past 2-3 years shows and its continuing now. People know theres another PS but theres lots of life left in that console. Whereas it seems MS is going another route with their consoles and the 360 is start. I feel like we are beta testers for their new Media Hub lol
  • Pruman - January 25, 2012 2:40 p.m.

    I have really had it with console makers screaming from the rooftops about how powerful their system is, and idiots using that as a measure of its worth. No console that has claimed to be "the most powerful" has EVER won a console war. Power is UTTERLY MEANINGLESS without good games. Saying the most powerful console will have the best games is like saying you'll make a great painting because you're using the most expensive paint supplies. Let's take a quick trip inside the Wayback Machine: -1989: The Sega Genesis and TurboGrafx-16, the first consoles I can recall specifically pointing out in their marketing that they had better hardware, burst onto the scene. Both struggle to gain significant market share until they get good games, or in the TG-16's case, die horribly from a lack of them. -1996: The Nintendo 64, arriving a year after the competing Sega Saturn and Sony PlayStation, absolutely SMOKED those other two systems hardware-wise. It also had a lot of great games. However, Nintendo's use of cartridges in the CD era, failure to understand where the game market was going, loss of killer app franchises to competitors, and longstanding disdain for third-party developers all combined to put that system on ice. -1999: The Dreamcast pitches that it's prettier and more powerful than the N64 or PlayStation. People buy it until the PlayStation 2, arguably an inferior system from a hardware perspective, crashes in on the hype tsunami Sony built for it and utterly drowns the fledgling system. Also, it gets amazing sequels to all those games everyone loved on the PlayStation, along with a bunch of new ones. -2001: Microsoft releases the XBOX after it recognizes the PS2 as a threat to Windows, and makes a huge deal out of all the cool hardware it was going to have. In fairness, the original XBOX cast a long shadow over the industry that's still there today, but the hardware-challenged PS2 simply pointed and laughed maniacally while becoming the best-selling video game system of all time. Although the XBOX had some great exclusives, they weren't great enough to win with. -2006: Sony tells us the PlayStation 3 is going to be the most powerful system ever made, then tells us it's going to cost more than some people's rent, doesn't do a good job of explaining why it's worth it, and that it's so awesome that we should be prepared to work more hours to get one. That same year saw the release of the Nintendo Wii, a system which one developer mockingly compared to two GameCubes duct-taped together. It absolutely blew the doors off this console generation, to the point where both other companies are trying to rip it off as much as they can possibly get away with a good year or two after the Wii craze has mostly ended. OK...that wasn't quick. But I hope I made my point. As Steve Jobs said at Apple back in the day, "SOFTWARE SELLS SYSTEMS!"
  • kezins - January 25, 2012 2:38 p.m.

    The Wii U has piqued my interest, but I hate having to wait until E3 to find out more details on it. If it's double the power of a 360 and ends up with a great game library, I might just skip the next Microsoft console. I currently have all the consoles, but it's hard to enjoy them all with so little time on my hands.
  • An_Awesome_Guy - January 25, 2012 1:15 p.m.

    Your maffs are wrong, innit. If the power of the xbox 360 was equal to 1, then the Wii U would be equal to 2, and the NextBox would be equal to 6. 6 divided by 2 equals 3, meaning the Nextbox is 3 times the power of the Wii U.

Showing 1-20 of 28 comments

Join the Discussion
Add a comment (HTML tags are not allowed.)
Characters remaining: 5000