That's if you are convinced we are talking of Jaguar as in 2012/13. At worse case scenario this is a Puma+ custom design without the memory controller bottleneck as on the PC.

I'd say based on the custom silicon and unified GDDR5 system memory, for what its meant to do , at the resolution its meant to do it in...it could perform like a Piledriver at 4K.

As far as the GPU goes, apples and oranges. A GTX 1060 has a tiny bus and limited bandwidth and less memory compared to Scorpio for games....and it drops frames at 4K.  Based on the GPU load we saw of Forza 6 Apex on Scorpio, theres lots of room for further optimizations.

Two completely different environments anyways. PC games make VERY Inefficient use of the hardware. That's why for the most part this gen you needed a GTX680 to replicate a PS4 (with a hamstrung 7870, 7850) GPU.  That's the reality...

All that tells us is hints as to what we expect to pay vs Ps4 Pro. MS simply took an engineering approach to its performance and footprint goals.

Has no bearing on the box's actual performance as its a bespoke design meant to run Xbox/DX12  games to the metal...not poorly optimized,  driver overhead laden PC game code. 

It's always a little hard to tell, as the super-duper-optimized games usually are exclusives, to you can't compare them with a PC version.

Horizon looks a lot better than most games available on PC (dialog animation and complete absence of dynamic water notwithstanding,) but a lot of that is art direction and careful polishing aside from the clever optimization.

Apples and oranges.

For one Scorpio has a dedicated hardware to offload CPU utilization....meaning it doesnt need a monster i7 to push GPU utilization.

Reality Check: PC = A bunch of parts slapped together on a motherboard running copper traces.

A SoC engineered PRIMARILY for rendering graphics at the silicon level has unmitigated benefits and efficiencies.

Consoles do more with less, and PC parts age faster because after 1-2 years they are no longer the focus of the driver teams.

Puma still comes up short againt Piledriver. It's not a *wide* core. It's a very small and simple core.

Hell to the No.
If anything the GDDR5 reduces performance, it's higher latency. CPU's don't care much for bandwidth, but if a design doesn't hide DRAM latency like the Cat cores with their small caches, minimal prediction, narrow pipeline designand more... Then there is a penalty.

And? You do realise the Geforce 1060 can do more with it's bandwidth than AMD's Graphics Core Next right? You can't directly compare the numbers.

As for dropped frames. That's why I said overclock.

With that, Scorpio is running Forza 6 with Xbox One quality settings, the PC is on full ultra settings. The difference isn't comparable my dear watson, a Geforce 1050 could have achieved what Scorpio probably did with the Forza 6 demo, that is 4k, 60fps Xbox One-levels of visuals (Which are nothing to write home about, Xbox One is graphically garbage, I should know. I own one.)

PC games always tend to look better than consoles. And people seem to always chalk that up to being inefficient?

I don't disagree that consoles have a slight edge, but you are making it sound as if they are able to beat an Enthusiast-level PC. When they can't.

The Radeon 7870 is still able to run every PS4 multiplat game today at similar quality settings... But thanks to the power of the PC you can actually run every one of those games at 1080P. On the PS4 you cannot.

You can build a game to the PC's metal as well you know. You have that freedom. In-fact, before Direct X and Windows came along... That was more common than you think. But there is a reason why it doesn't happen anymore, which I would be more than happy to elaborate on later if you so desire.

When PC's were running high-level API's like Direct X 9, 10, 11, Open GL etc'. The consoles had low-level API's that did give them a rather larger boost in performance relative to the PC.

But since then, the PC has gotten a heap of optimizations, Direct X 12, Mantle which went on to become Vulkan are prime examples of that, they have taken low-level API advantages and brought them all to the playing field.
This generation any "Optimization" advantage consoles have? It's been severely diminished. It's really not an argument point anyway.

There is a ton of baked details/static items in that game. Which is why the game runs so light, even on PC.

I think you might be confused at what offloading a CPU does.

It doesn't make a CPU faster. It means the CPU is tasked with doing less. It doesn't turn a garbage CPU like Jaguar into a Core i7 competing chip, Jaguars performance ceiling doesn't change.

8x 1.6ghz Jaguar cores should be roughly equivalent to a Haswell Core i3 3ghz. So the 6x cores at 2.3ghz should be in the same ballpark as well.

...And then you realise. We are talking about dual-core processors.

A Core i5 would slap around an 8-core Jaguar and still have a game of Yahtzee.

I agree with many of your points, but PS4 Pro has its apparent limitations and that's why developers have been at odds as to which way to offer refinements due to those bottlenecks. I'd argue to the contrary, its actually been impressive what they've achieved given those limitations in many cases.

Take into consideration that game developers have adapted to using PS4's fast memory bandwidth to hit that 1080p target...and now with PS4 PRO they have 2X the GPU and the SAME bandwidth. They are stuck passing the same asset quality and having to resort to checkerboarding to reconstruct a higher quality image.

MS has had a better engineering effort and it shows, they dug deeper and smarter for a hardware refresh. They are giving developers a 384 bit bus and 326 GB/S to handle all the 4K assets and bandwith extensive data...thats GPU bandwith even get in the best 1080 PC with GDDR5/X you can buy.

All the fast ram they need, more bandwidth they'd know what to do with, a FAST GPU clock for a console...they just targeted throughput better than in Sony's case and it will be developer friendly to have the overhead to do more.

 CPU doing less per instruction, allows it to handle more instructions (driving GPU load up)....that's the point of offloading to the GPU Command block, no?

Why would a 'wide core' be needed? Game code is rather simple compared to the plethora of productivity/ computing CPU's in desktops are engineered to do at scale. And compared to the 30hz/60hz needs of a console game on a television, unless you want a 400w power brick and a large enclosure...what's the point of flexing desktop grade CPU power in a console? At some point we have to come to reality that in 2017, Scorpio's SoC...is probably the best case scenario possible for such application. Have you seen the size of the chip and the cooling required?

The question was never that said PC parts are not more powerful, rather than lots of it is left on the table for obvious reasons.

We can all come to terms that how a developer optimizes for the console has a lot to do with the SDK and how closely they work with the platform team.

 98% of the visual experience is still there, requiring a magnifying glass to a still to point out the most subtle details that are not useful in a livingroom environment

Actually PS4P ram it 24% faster than PS4. It is 218 gb/s. Microsoft obviously have spent more time and money on Scorpio so if they can sell it for 450$ it will be a fair price. Having said that we have not seen any games run on it just a report from DF for Forza6 only for now.

But the CPU's max theoretical performance remains unchanged, regardless of load of lack there-of.

Jaguar is still still shit, whichever way you cut the cake. It was shit in 2013 when the Xbox One and Playstation 4 launched. It's still shit in 2017.

Offloading some of the processing isn't going to suddenly turn it into a Core i5/i7/Ryzen CPU.

Why? More performance of course. The game code is irrellevent. A wider CPU can execute more instructions per clock.

Jaguar is only 2-issue wide. Ryzen is 6-issue wide. Massive delta.
Newer CPU's also have better branch prediction, micro-op cache, prefretching, turbo/boosting, instructions, better caches and more. Jaguar is low-end and.
It wasn't even fast on it's release.

It's simply a fossil in 2017.

And no. You don't need a 400w PSU. There are CPU's just as efficient as Jaguar on a TDP standpoint, but offer vastly superior performance. Which is to be expected, Jaguar is 4 years old now.

And why would such CPU power be necessary? Well. That's simple. A.I and Physics have a ton of room for improvement. The CPU can also be tasked with decompression for better texturing and audio and other such things.

As for Scorpio's SoC. It's 7~ Billion transistors large. Which is roughly 40% more than the Xbox One's SoC.
That's right. Scorpio doesn't even have twice the transistors as the Xbox One, there was obviously room to move for a better CPU.

Good. Because a console will never be more powerful than a PC. Ever again.

Sure. And the extra "optimization" a console gets over a PC is being diminished as time goes on. That's the simple fact.

Maybe you are new to the graphics rendering game? Not entirely sure. But I can pick out the differences between the Xbox One and a mid-range PC. It's stupidly substantual.
The same will continue to hold true for Scorpio vs an Enthusiast level PC.

Remember. The PC isn't limited by 4k and 60fps. It can take it farther.

You are forgetting something about the Playstation 4 Pro's bandwidth. It's actually more than 24% faster in the real world. I'll let you figure out what that specific technology is though. ;)

So are you saying the scorpio wont be close to the 1070? and/or since you ssaid yourself that consoles punch higher that the pc counterpart, what are we looking at the will be close to? Imm only going with the 1070 cuz digital foundry said so.

Except nVidia or more specifically, Pascal... Tends to have more performance than AMD even with "less GPU resources and compute ability".