I know this is old based on the new rumor of WiiU GPU but I think you guys will
find this video link interesting

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3zwxOGAtBd8&list=UUBQnkb7JjTfpaIARq53ZLGQ&index=5&feature=plcp

watch it and tell me what you guyz think

What I don't get:
Why are you ignoring the GPU in AMDs A8-3850 APU? It's called HD 6550D and is capable of delivering 480GFlops (with fast enough memory, like e.g. GDDR5) at it's base clock (which is a lot lower than what is possible because in PCs where this APU is typically used the DDR3-RAM is too slow and so they cut the power of the GPU down; but there's no problem to apply a 20-30% higher clock to it -even 50% is possible but that may result in too low yield rates or too much power consumption).

So you have at least 480GFlops to add to the PS4s graphics power.

edit: and another thing I don't get: Why are you thinking that the Wii Us graphics card will have DP? You don't need DP for anything in gaming. That's more for scientific work. Also the bandwidth of the cards does not matter as long as it's fast enough so that the GPU does not have to wait for data. But that's not a problem in any of the graphics cards, so you might just skip that values (there really is nothing that they tell about the power of GPUs; things like Pixel (Fill) Rate or Texel Rate etc. would tell a lot more).

Plus IBM dumped the project as well. The only other partner in the Cell Project hasn't said or offered anything with the Cell since 2007 (toshiba).

I think it's wishful thinking to think that the WiiU will be similar in power to the Xbox720/PS4 considering it comes with a tablet which is more expensive than a conventional controller, the one year difference in launch dates (possibly longer for one of the consoles), and what we know about Nintendo and rumors about the system.

I don't really follow the logic either given the one year separation between presumed start of production times, the alleged $299 MSRP (maybe $349?) of the Wii U, paired with a controller that is significantly more expensive to produce than a standard game pad (possibly on par with the production cost of the presumed included with every Xbox 3.0, Kinect 2.0). 

I'm still riding the assumption that the Xbox 3.0 and PS4 will have an initial MSRP of $399.

If anyone suggests Nintendo can sell their console a year earlier for a hundred less, remain profitable over production cost on a per unit basis AND perform on par with the Sony and MS consoles, my only question would be so how many Magic Mushrooms did that take?

People have been looking at this "hidden crossfire" setup and even with best conditions (with a 6670 GPU), the whole AMD idea - when run on a PC architecture - turned out more or less as a complete dud. You get around 10-15 fps if you want 1080p. Granted an imaginary PS4 setup with 1G UMA and no windows driver interference, 1866MHz memory, will fare much better, but stable 30fps at 1080 would be extremely difficult to achieve.

And forget pumping up clock rates, the A8 already burns through 100W at 2.9GHz.

Asymetric crossfire can work when your complete setup is designed for it. If(!) the GFlops somewhat resemble the actual performance of the GPUs a 2:1 frame-ratio may be the way Sony want's to go with their design (if the rumours are true at all), if a game wants to have really nice graphics (if not the extra power may be used for physics-calculations or maybe calculations necessary for the move-controller etc).

So for each 2 frames the dedicated GPUs processes 1 frame is processed in the GPU-Part of the APU. This would result in 50% more FPS compared to only the dedicated GPU doing all the work.
10-15fps increase doesn't tell you much if you don't give the FPS the games ran without the crossfire setup (a 10-15fps increase when running at 20-30fps before is a big deal). Most of the tests with PC-Hardware use test scenarios where none of the coming consoles will be able to deliver high enough framerates.

And really: The problem with the APU in desktops is the DDR3-Ram. Tests showed that the HD 6550D is capped with Ram with a speed lower than ~1500Mhz. Even if you use 1866Mhz-Ram you still get capped if you only increase the clock-rate by around 20%. But with GDDR5 you can essentially get each bandwidth you want, so bandwidth isn't a limit anymore at that point and you may overclock the GPU-Part(!!) of AMD's APU. Afair an increase in that clockrate (as long as you don't have to increase the voltage!) doesn't lead to a high increase in power consumption.

But even if the GPU in the APU can't be used to it's full power, I don't think that it's right to just ignore it. It has to be somewhere on the tables on page 1 (just put a note there that we don't know how it will actually be used).

Also Microsoft might have a subscription plan option making their system $100-$200 cheaper up frount, thought costing more in the long run.

On another note. It's funny looking at how we all want to make sure Unreal Engine 4 runs on the Wii U after how much many of us hated on how UE3 made a lot of games look same-y. But we want to make sure our next console can handle it since a lot of 3rd partys will persumably use it.

The next two years are going to be fun!

Interesting video. Strange to hear Epic praising the Wii U and hating on the others.

New rumor to chew on:

http://www.ubergizmo.com/2012/05/wii-u-price-and-release-date-reportedly-leaked-by-ubisoft-milan-developer/