Come on man,AMD FX is AMD 8core CPU you talking about,i was in this thread yesterday(AMD FX+Sea Island blahblahblah,i remember that),why i need to look back again?

And this is the rumor of few months ago

http://www.eurogamer.net/articles/digitalfoundry-the-curious-case-of-the-durango-devkit-leak

And no,neogaf guys was discussed about 4 core jaguar mostly,and it's not APU,not even A10(actually even PS4,today's news is first time we get the rumor of A10)

PS4's original rumors had an A8, then later stated the "steamroller" which is a 2013 version. i always thought the A8 was too low as it was below the original WiiU rumors. A10 seems more likely and steamroller is very plausible.

Yes, 360s wasn't an APU in that rumor, sorry. However, Jaguar is the 2013 mobile APU. I'm actualy leaning to the desktop "steamroller" instead.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/AMD_Fusion#Jaguar

2013 APU?You won't see that in nextbox then,and even if it use juguar,you tell me how can jaguar=A10?

Btw,sea island is HD8xxx

The leak can be backtracked to the guy that sold a developer kit on ebay (which supposedly really was an earlier developer kit). The latest rumour talks about an AMD FX8xxx processor, which is an 8 core CPU, not an APU. If we assume that MS went from IBM to Intel/AMD. A VERY reasonable assumption since MS is strongly pushing to unify the PC/tablet/console hardware/(software=Windows 8) diversity, then an 8core FX8... processor is EXACTLY the right hardware for what was leaked in a MS paper about XBoxNext features a few weeks ago.

In the OP we currently have IBM, or a quad-core CPU/APU. This is definitely NOT what will end up in the XBoxNext. At least a six-core CPU is required and the path to eight cores is not that much more expensive. With current knowledge, I'd say an 8core processor like FX8...  is 95% certain in the XBoxNext.

A10 is simply the classification in the line. The steamroller (the one I think is plausible) will have an A10 model, just as the current "trinity" line does.

360 launched in 2005 and contained 2005 CPU/GPU configurations. PS3 launched in 2006 with a 2005 GPU. Its certainly possible as the APU line in itself is purposely designed to provide high tech power in smaller footprints of space, wattage, heat, etc... all perfect for a console.

I say a highly optimized APU (4 to 6 core) is a better choice when considering the size/wattage/heat/cost use of having separate high-end CPU/GPUs.

You know the top model of juguar still call A10(in 2011 top model was A8,2012 was A10...well)?still use HD7660D?People discussed about HD7660Dver A10 is because it's top model of A10(Trinity) right now,plus juguar's product will call Kabini/Temash,btw,juguar just from neogaf's discuss,not even from any news

And so where is sea island in your comparisons?you read the news right?The lastest rumor about nextbox not even talked about APU,why ignore that?and even we don't really know is PS4 really use HD7660D,maybe better

Isn't the Xbox 360S powered by a semi-APU consisting of the ATI Xenos and IBM Xenon?

If so, wouldn't it be possible for Microsoft to include a IBM/(ATI) APU in the NextBox? I kinda hope so, IBM and ATI/AMD have worked very well for them this gen, it'd be just silly to switch.

Might be completeltly wrong here and remembering shit that doesn't exist.

Edit: Hmm, not sure whether the XCGPU qualifies as an APU?

There is nothing concrete. I stated in OP that its based on rumors and logical speculation.

I've changed it numerous times based on discussions in this thread and people explaining why I should include this or remove that.

Nothing in the OP states its fact or otherwise. Its all to be considered to be taken with a grain of salt until its confirmed and I state that as I have with some of the WiiU information.

Some rumors get blasted big time by not just me but many others, so I don't put that there. Based on the discussion that MS has switched to AMD AND knowing how dev kits are created early on vs final specs... it makes a lot more sense that the reason they are going for AMD is due to the APU technology... not a separate CPU and GPU combination. Hell, its even more likely that its an APU plus a 2nd GPU in a crossfire configuration than two separate chips.

Its been demonstrated numerous times in this thread and others that a very high-end CPU plus a very high-end GPU simply makes no sense when you consider the costs associated, heat dissipation in a small enclosure, wattage necessary, etc.

That is why I when I heard the AMD rumors... and considering this early dev kit likely has an overpowerful CPU so it can emulate the GPU and other features... I think it makes more sense to have the high-end APU, similar to Sony's rumors. More than likely both ending up with some kind of Steamroller configuration and/or trinity A10 with 2nd HD6XXX GPU.

Could I be wrong, hell yes and that will come out as dev kits get leaked with more final builds. But when many people here and devs on gaf talk about tech that is all right around what I currently have in OP... I think it makes a lof of sense and has a lot of support.

However, I do feel justified in putting a 'or' in the 360 columns to show the bigger CPU option as well as a note that a real HD7XXX standalone GPU could be there in that case. But, I think that is the lowest possibility at this point when you really think about it.

Ok, I didn't want to go into lecture mode, but this seems to be a point people don't want to see/understand, so here it goes:

First of all, an FX8.. CPU is not high-end and not high price, it's just the end of the line at AMD for high-end processors, given their financial situation. Any Intel quad-core beats the crap out of it. The multicore AMD CPUs have a very distinct design feature that separates them from Intel hardware. I'm not going to evaluate on this because it is rather complex (=boring read), but the point of the excursion is that AMD works best in "pairs" of cores on dedicated software.

If you built an XBoxNext, you'd have to make a fundamental decision right at the beginning: What are you going to use to process Kinect data?  Let's look back at the XBox. MS had three choices: Use the processor built into Kinect. use the CPU within CPU memory space, or use the GPU within GPU memory space. Each of these three choices works and has different advantages and drawbacks. MS went with solution three (the first one being the most expensive) because shader architecture is well suited for this kind of image processing, and they had three shader groups. The result is we get images 320*200 using one or two of the available shader groups (and cheesy graphics because we just lost at least one shader group). Now we often hear that Kinect2 will be able to "see fingers","facial expressions","whatever". It is instantly clear that the resolution has to be at least four times higher, 640*400. That is still very low resolution for a room full of people, so let's say we want something extreme like 720p 15Hz. 

For an AMD APU, that is a mighty number of shaders we must use to process a Kinect2 image (actually we must process two images since Kinect2 is a set of two webcams and no longer IR hardware). Most likely 4 of the 6 shader groups of the A10 (384 shaders, 96*4 vliw4) would be needed. So we have the same problem that we have now with XBox: we must surrender too many shader groups to Kinect and don't have enough shaders left for good graphics.

We know nothing about dedicated Kinect2 hardware processors, so this path seems to be highly unlikely.

That leads us to the simple path, use CPU power for Kinect2 processing. As I mentioned before, pairs of cores will be used for this purpose. How many pairs depends on the image size the webcams deliver a(nd the lag time allowed). This size defines the amount of work the cores have to do. What is clear that an FX4xxx quad-core processor would be a bad decision, as we lose half the processing power to Kinect2 (of course only if it is used at all). So the next step would be an FX6... hexacore processor. This would give us four cores for running the game and a pair of cores for Kinect2. Only MS knows how much processing power is needed, but if I were them, no doubt I'd go for an FX8xxx processor which offers two pairs of cores for Kinect2 (cutting image processing times in half) and four cores for the game and OS.  Given enough incentives, the FX8xxx memory controllers could be enhanced to allow for the increased memory bandwith needs.

Of course, one could also use a high-end dedicated GPU for a combination of Kinect2 processing and graphics processing. I'm not sure if I can down that argument but I have a feeling that this solution would require a massive change in chache and prefetch architecture (translation: it gets very expensive) of the GPU, as the gpu has to process two entirely different memory streams (that is something that CPU front-ends are particularly good at). Otherwise the GPU could constantly stumble on memory acesses and the results are rather unpredictable (frame drop hell in essence).

In short:

XBoxNext: AMD FX8xxx processor, dedicated GPU. possibly "Weirder than usual" memory structure. GPU could be out-of-the-box, the processor modified for increased memory throughput (a third memory controller would do the job, come to think of it...)

PS4: AMD A10 APU, dedicated additional GPU. Conventional memory structure. If they chose to operate PS4 in quasi XFire, the second GPU would be another HD7660. XFire only works reasonably if both GPUs are equal power. And a more complex memory structure since we now have three "equal processors" fighting for the address bus.

My solution would be an A10 APU with separate HD7770 GPU (separate meaning it has its own 1G of GDDR5 ram) with 4GB of CPU dram.

FWIW: In case I haven't mentioned it: My second PC was a Gepard (the third was a $900 AppleII with two 160kB $900ea. disk drives). Nobody here has ever heard of it I'm sure , because the company went under before they finished the complete design. So I sat down, and with the help of friends and books, designed and built the rest of the hardware (some of it on my kitchen table, most with the machines at the physics department). Memory cards, bios rom cards, harddisk adapaters, even a graphics card (mostly copied from Byte, when Byte was thick and Steve Ciarcia was the king of homemade electronics). So I think I still have some understanding how things work. I also worked as a consultant in various industries so I know what "Save a dime" can mean..