Do you have any source for the 176 part, the only place I read about it was from neogaf forums...

That's blowing it out of proportion I think. :P

These chips aren't meant for handheld devices.

It's not as uncommon as you think.
Whenever a new node is used, there are tweaks to the process as time goes on.
28nm for example went from 250w on the 7970 to the FuryX at 275w... Transister counts doubled. - And there was a performance difference of 40% to 300% depending on benchmark.

Global Foundries is using Samsung technolgy anyway, Samsung managed to reduce power consumption by 15% and increase switching speed by 15% when it moved from it's LPE (Low-Power-Early) to LPP (Low-Power-Plus) process. Aka. 2nd Generation Samsung 14nm.

This is likely based on the 3rd Generation Samsung 14nm process known as LPC (Low-Power Compact).

It will be competitive in the mainstream markets most likely, not the high-end, just like Polaris.

Nintendo wouldn't be using an embedded chip. They will likely opt for a Semi-Custom design.

How do you know it's close to the Xbox 1 in terms of performance or better than a Wii U? There is more to performance than flops.

Samsung had laid out their fabrication plans well in advance, Global Foundries licenses Samsung's technology in it's Fabs, Nintendo would have been aware of this for a long time.

I hope Nintendo doesn't go with nVidia and goes with high-end AMD hardware in a fixed-console, if the console is going to be mobile Centric, then I hope it is nVidia or an ARM chip using a fully-fledged Bifrost GPU.

Sony will likely release a revision to take advantage of this new fabrication process in time, all these chips are being made by the same company remember.

I would be all for a 4k-Bluray support.
The Playstation 4 had the potential to be the ultimate Multimedia hub for the home, but they gave that opportunity away to Microsoft with the lack of CD and 4k Blu-Ray support.
A PS4 Pro Slim could turn that around.

Polaris can hit those flop numbers as well with aggressive clocks and binning.
Which brings home the point that Polaris and Vega with the same "Flops" will still perform very differently, Microsoft will go with whatever is the most  price/performance efficient at the time.

The Fabrication "rumors" are the real legitimate tidbit.

I was legitimately looking at 10-Core Xeon's today. Because it would be cheaper than upgrading to LGA 2011-3~ *Grumbles*

Depends on what they are comparing it to.
This is the 3rd Generation 14nm Finfet Process by Samsung.
The 2nd Generation brought a 15% improvement.
Thus if it's improvement is a 50% increase against the 1st generation 14nm process, then it's only a 35% increase from the 2nd generation 14nm process.

Polaris is actually energy efficient. And does well with what it is given.

The problem is people are comparing it against nVidia, nVidia has had a massive edge in efficiency since Maxwell, when nVidia introduced their tiled based approach and took on some things they learned from building Tegra.

Simply put, nVidia is just better. - Will this likely change the landscape in favor of AMD in regards to price/power/performance? Not likely. That is probably a few years away yet.

Comparing chips on flops alone is highly inaccurate.

It's 176. The Wii U is more efficient which is why, when games are made it's-way, it can have a massive lead over the Xbox 360 and Playstation 3 graphically.

We cannot forget either that Embedded products tend to not be aggressively binned. They need to be built for reliability first, so they usually run with more volts than they need.

Damn it Perm, you can't make posts like these, they are so hard to reply to. It's very hard to delete all the posts that are quoted. It's beautiful posting architecture, but not very practical.

Why don't you think Zen can be competitive in the high-end market when an old ass CPU like the AMD FX-8350 still is only like 25% slower than a Core i7 6700 in modern games? Even in CPU-intensive games like Fallout 4 or Battlefield WW1.

If the Zen can be like 10% slower in gaming scenarios compared with the next version of an Intel Core i5-6600 or Core i7-6700, but cost $200 it should be competitive.

Comparing FLOPS with FLOPS works quite fine in the context of new consoles. Even if the margin of error is like 30%, they give a good ballpark estimate. But of course it's good that somebody reminds people that it's not always a linear relationship.

Because AMD doesn't have the resources to tackle the high-end market, sadly.
Intel has the fabrication edge, the man-power edge, the financial edge and the R&D edge.

As for the FX-8350. It might be competitive in Fallout 4 or Battlefield 1. But those games are also able to run on a 10 year old Core 2 Quad, so it's not saying allot, they aren't known to be CPU killers.
Throw a lightly-threaded, CPU demanding game and watch the FX chip cumple.

Zen's cache hierachy is also telling us that it might not scale as well as Intel with higher core counts, all predictions are that it will allow for AMD to makeup the massive performance deficit with Intel's current chips, not surpass them, even it's chipsets are pointing towards the mainstream and not the high-end market segments with no support for Triple/Quad-channel memory and lacking in PCI-E lanes. (20 lanes for AMD, 40 for Intel.)
Intel is also gearing up with Skylake-X and Kaby Lake-X for launch. (With Kaby Lake having some rediculous improvements in some cases.)

After that we get Coffee Lake.

Besides, AMD's track record hasn't been great lately.
They flopped with the Phenom and it's TLB bug.
The Phenom 2 was a great price/performance chip, but still lost to Core 2 and got beaten by Nahelem.
The FX Lineup, despite AMD's promises and the Hype-train, never amounted to anything steller.
Polaris after years of AMD GPU' stagnation and re-badges was a massive let-down against a very competitive and well-executing nVidia.

Basically we can sum it up as this.
If you are waiting to see what Zen brings to the table before you upgrade/build your PC, then don't. Go Intel now as AMD is not likely to retake the performance crown anyway, they might help lower prices though.
I'll likely still pick one up, I have had every AMD CPU generation since the old K6-2.

Eurogamer is the source of both the Tegra rumor and the tablet. And Eurogamer said that 3DS would use Nvidia.  So both can reasonably be dismissed together. 

When you then switch the concept in reverse, that it is a home console with a portable component, AMD makes much more sense. I don't think for a second they are trying to stuff competitive chips in a tablet.