Now we all know for fact the PS3's GPU is faster as far as clocking goes but that doesn't mean I can't draw a fake graph with no science used and say the Wii's GPU is far better.
Where is the science used in those bar graphs? I don't see any actual mathematical calculations there and if there are any, please show me because I would love to see that.
I have a hunch somebody will call me a Playstation 3 fanboy and what I will say to that is, " No I just like science and scientific facts for everything I see where mathematical calculations can possibly apply."
The first thing I look for when I see something like that is scientific facts and the math used to calculate which GPU (Graphics Processing Unit) is faster. Yeah I can draw a couple of graph bars too and compare the Wii's GPU to the PS3's GPU and then say the GPU in the Wii is better according to the drawn graphs I made by hand and we all know how bad the Wii's graphics are. Wii Tennis graphics vs Metal Gear Solid 4 graphics.