I thought it was really small when I saw the first picture! In reality it's a little bigger but still quite small. I wouldn't buy one though.

If it was a bit cheaper i would definitly get one and mount it on the wall behind my tv and hook it up with a wireless keyboard and mouse.. I already have an apple tv and android box hooked up but something with more power would be nice

but the most are a bit bigger and dont have a i5 inside.   its a fine toy, but its just not usefull. u  cant play most games well because of the gpu and if u just wanna work with it, its way to expensiv and overpowered.  the i5 has more power than the ps4 cpu and is used in mid level gaming pcs(if they pick a good i5 and not one from the lowest end).

there is just no market for this kind of minipc.(u can buy a gaming netbook for the price, with a lot more power)

It's not hard to just put more hardware into a thing. But the price for this is just ridiculous. What makes it even worse is that the usecase for those kinds of PCs don't warrant high power. Nothing you will do with those will require an i5, probably not even an i3.

Duping people while falsely claiming innovation makes this one of the worst things.

 <p><span class="spoiler_text">Also I'm pretty sure an i3 already easily beats the PS4 CPU in gaming ;)</span></p>

it depends on the game. if the game just uses some cores, the i3 could hold itself(2 strong intel cores can beat 2-3amd cores)

but games that use alot of cpu power and cores will run better on the amd of ps4.

the 4 core i5 are stronger than the ps4 without problems.  intel cores a just so freaking powerfull. (6 year old quad cores from intel can beat the ps4 cpu power.( q9550 is still a beast)

It's just a really tiny computer, nothing really revolutionary about that.

You are incredibly overestimating APUs.

Just the quickest example I could find right now:

http://www.cpubenchmark.net/high_end_cpus.html

Look at the latest and strongest APU(7850k) on there. The i3 is practically on the same height. And now consider that the PS4 CPU runs at less than half the clockspeed. Double the cores won't do any good there, especially if they're not properly utilized. So not only does a proper i3 beat the PS4 in power but also ease of utilization.

Of course we're talking PC hardware vs Console hardware here so it's not really fair. The PS4 CPU was intentionally scaled back. Nevertheless, the point is the same.

the benchmark u linked is realy core heavy it seams, so its natural that the apus are a bit worse and intel duo cores a bit better.

u cant transfer this directly to gaming, so i maybe give the ps4 cpu to much credit.

im building a pc to beat the ps4 in price and power.  atm its not possible(even if u count in ps+ for a year), for the xbone its possible(u can build a full hd "gaming" pc for 450€)

You could look for one of Zotac's mini-PCs, or Gigabyte. They can be a bit cheaper and while they are a bit bigger, that allows them to have VESA mounts so you can mount them on the back of you TV.

But the problem of these mini-PCs is that they are too expensive for what they can do. You have to pay a premium for its size.

It's definitely not possible to beat a console in price/performance. It might not even be possible to beat it at the end of its life. I mean the hardware is one thing but consider the form factor, assembly, OS, controller, maybe even a free game. All that adds to the value so if it's for price, PCs will never be able to beat consoles.

Good that they don't have to.

And don't forget that you need much stronger hardware than the console hardware to match the performance thanks to the low level API and optimized games.