I will talk about the Jaguar soon... it is not weak like everybody thinks.

The problem is not the mobile gpu (who said that does not know much about gpus) but the tablet oriented cpu, with its very low single threaded performance. It's something that all this generation consoles will have, very low single threaded performance, and there are things that you can't subdivide in smaller threads.

Actually it's probably weaker than what most people think. Adding more cores is never a linear increase in compute power due to the inefficiencies of sharing caches and bandwidth, this is a well known phenomenon when adding more cores to what is generally serialised processing.
Remember, Jaguar has a low transister budget for a cost sensitive device, you can't expect it to compete with any decent Mobile or Desktop processor, 8 cores or not.

Hell, Cell was never anything special either, yet people actually thought it could be used to render detailed high-resolution graphics and was able to compete with super computers in terms of compute performance, it's marketing at it's best, pure and simple.
In the end, it was more or less a hindrance rather than a benefit and the additional compute power claimed by many never really showed any benefit in anything.
Heck even simple web browsing is slow and clunky due to the lack of CPU power. (Something that the Xbox suffers from too.)

As for the PS4 having a mobile GPU, it is partly true.
Jaguar is a *mobile* processor, hence the GPU which is on the same die is hence by it's very nature also mobile.
However with that said, the only *real* difference between a mobile and desktop GPU is the binning process. Mobile GPU's generally can tolerate lower voltages at certain clock speed tiers, Desktops it doesn't matter, they just dial up the voltage and the clock speed and call it a day, very much how overclockers do it, but AMD does it at the BIOS level and even then will still be conservative about the clocks.

In the end, the most important piece of hardware going into the PS4 isn't going to be the processor, it's not the Ram, it's the GPU. - It's what pushes the framerates up, it's what creates the geometry, lighting, texturing, shadowing and all the other amazing bits and pieces and THAT is the part of the APU that will take most of the PS4's cost budget and those transisters aren't cheap.

With that said, the PS4's GPU isn't even cutting edge in terms of performance, Desktop GPU's have been faster at the highest-end for about 4-5 years now, but those who buy such cards also wouldn't be running at only 1920x1080 where it would go to waste. (And if they are, they should be shot!)

Neither PS4 CPU or GPU are cutting edge, but the "mobile" GPU argument is crap.

who cares about whether it is based on a mobile or desktop gpu? aside from drivers, yes, it is mainly clock-rate that differs. in the past mobile chips also were selected by their "quality" resulting in better tdp but it doesn't affect performance. but overall the whole discussion is useless to me. i don't understand why you had to do this thread, ethomaz. did you fear some could doubt the performance of the ps4-gpu?

Actually its better for PS4 to have a mobile GPU, it'll consume a lot less energy. PS4 was rumored to have a HD7970M, which is about the same level as a HD7870 desktop. Guess what, PS4s gpu is about the same level as a HD7870, it has 2 Compute units less.

wrong: the gpu will use the energy it was designed for Sony (and MS). Also mobile gpus can eat up a lot of energy as desktop-gpus can also operate in low-energy-mode. there are still gpus which can be passively cooled. the whole comparison to similar amd-gpus is crap as the ps4-gpu has its own parts and is specifically designed for its use. by comparing it to better gpus one is wrong and by comparing it to weaker gpus is wrong - one side wants to imply it's really powerful, the others want to downplay it.

really im speechless

Man I honestly did not care til you posted this thread. Makes me wonder why you feel the need to justify it.

On a personal note, I been play PC games on a laptop for a while now, 630M, not the greatest but it sure does do a good enough job for what I need. Only annoying part is the heat on the lap haha.

Actually it's slower than a Radeon 7870 Desktop.
The Playstation 4 will have 1152 SPs and 72 texture units, whilst the Radeon 7870 GHz Edition has 1280 SP's and 80 texture units.
But because of the clock speed, it's compute performance is around the level of a Radeon 7850 (1.76 TFLOPS for the 7850, 2.5 TFLOPS for the 7870 and 1.84 TFLOPS for the PS4, making the PS4 closer to the 7850 than the 7870.), but with a little more texturing grunt.
With that said, anyone who has a Radeon 7850 can overclock it and it will end up faster than a 7870 and thus PS4 anyway.

But don't think it's as capable as a 7870, they can't push the clockspeeds high in a console, they have the thermals and power consumption to think of, much like a laptop.