Just looking at the specs of the APU demonstrates that this rumor is 100% BS ...

The A10-5800K (AMD's current top of the line APU) uses 100 Watts of power and is (roughly) 1/3 the processing power of this APU, so either Sony's processor will start fires or the rumor is crap.

And if Kaz Hirai shows up on E3 and says it will cost:
"FIVE HUNDRED AND NINETY-NINE DOLLARS"

*people going nuts*

"I'm just kidding, it'll be (350-450$)"

That would be epic :)

the A10-5800K (3.8 GHz CPU/800MHz GPU) has much more processing power if you include the gpu core, which ofcourse is included in the 100 Watt TDP

at slightly lower frequencies (-400MHz CPU clock/ -40MHz GPU clock) the A10-5700 is a 65Watt TDP chip, so I believe power consumption doesn't scale linear with frequency

edit: looking at your post again I guess you meant the combined chip of 2xJaguar+Liverpool which ofcourse is has a lot more processing power than the A10-5800K

yet the A10 CPU cores are designed for high per core performance, while the Jaguar is especially desgined for low power consumption, so I think that should be fine on a single die togehter with a GPU that might well be based on a mobile GPU chip

after all the high GFlops is single precision calculation, which GPU design of hardware does very very efficiently, but in a real PC double precision performance is just as important and that's where the big CPU cores of the A10 probably outdo this PS4 APU

If I'm reading those specs right, and what I can find of the Wii U is accurate, this is pretty much exactly where I figured the PS4 would end up.

Here are the CPU GFLOPS ratings of all of the 6th and 7th generation consoles:


(The "Total shipped CPU" measure is if you add up the total power across all consoles sold at the time that the article this came from was written)

Now, the thing to note here is that this puts the PS4 CPU at a total GFLOPS rating that is lower than that of the PS3. Much as how the Wii U's CPU is slower than the PS3. Indeed, most estimates of the Wii U's CPU seem to put it roughly in the same ballpark as the one listed here for the PS4.

For the GPU, estimates for the Wii U put it somewhere in the 0.5-1.5 TFLOPS range. So lets say that the PS4, according to this leak, has somewhere between 1.3-3x the power of the Wii U, in terms of GPU.

What does this mean? It means that Sony would have spent a little more than Nintendo on the GPU, allowing them to produce a faster chip, by eschewing an attempt to copy the Upad - remember, the Upad is fairly expensive to produce.

A quick look at the memory says that it has double the memory of the Wii U. That's probably about right - Sony would want to put a bit more in than Nintendo, because it tends more towards brute force rather than balancing.

And between all of these, I could definitely see Sony managing to release the console for no more than US$500 and making a small profit per console, or for US$400 and make a relatively minor loss per console ("relatively minor" compared with the PS3's initial loss per console). In fact, they could probably break even by selling it for US$450 or so. And I do think that's what Sony needs to do to remain solvent in the next generation - if their gaming division starts leaking money like most of the rest of the company, I doubt anything will be able to save them.


At least, that's how I'm reading it. Somebody could probably point out flaws in my interpretation - I'm happy to be corrected on any actual mistake.

Which one's Krillin? I don't know Pokemon very well.

The HD 7660D (The A10-5800k's GPU) has 384 stream processors running at 800MHz which puts its performance around 300GFLOPS, this rumor is suggesting that Sony's APU has a GPU of 1.9TFLOPS ... It doesn't take much to realize that the rumor is far beyond what is reasonable to expect from an APU

Aielyn said:

Interesting that the Xbox 1 pushes more FLOPS than the Wii, even though I'm pretty sure the Wii CPU is stronger in real-world performance. (PowerPC vs Pentium, larger caches, faster memory)

The PS2 does as well, but that makes sense as it had a beast of a CPU that was sadly a bit crippled in practice as it had to do a lot of the work that the Xbox/Gamecube/Wii did with just their GPUs.

I already edited my post (while you typed yours) and your calculation of the GPU core misses a x2 - each stream processor can do 2 floating point operations per clock (single precision)

It's worth remembering that the available operations also factor in. If there's a series of operations that are used a lot in the same way, and there's a way to turn them into a single operation, it will reduce the number of FLOP necessary for the operation. Basically, things like "SSE" help to speed up the actual processing speed despite not technically changing the FLOPS of the chip.

The only reason to use FLOPS is because it's the best available comparison - far better than MHz, but still not quite perfect.

they should do a gag with that.  Show $599 and hear the gasps and silence, then suddenly have it drop off the screen and show $399 and watch everyone go nuts haha