I'm quite sure that they won't integrate a power hungry desktop GPU like 7850 (130W TDP) into a custom made PS4 APU. Which btw has 16 CU's. I'm quite sure that the GPU in PS4 is 7970M with 18 CU's (2 disabled) which at 850MHz deliver ~ 1,95 TFLOPS (TDP is 75W). With lower GPU clock we get to 1,85 and rumored TDP of 80W of whole APU.

But that's the thing... Nothing I am saying is ambiguous and It's very easy to calculate CPU performance for PS4. It all comes down to performance per core.

They are using a custom 8 core Jaguar APU. Lets see what that means - 

 Jaguar is a replacement for Bobcat which was a dualcore, which are very low power AMD's Intel Atom equivalent. On the CPU side, they were downright terrible but they had an embedded GPU which helped. 

Looking at the expected Jaguar performance - http://news.softpedia.com/news/AMD-s-Jaguar-Runs-at-2-GHz-and-Brings-250-More-Performance-290001.shtml

So a 2.0 Ghz quadcore Jaguar = 260% improvement over Bobcat

This is an 8 core running at 1.6 should be about 400% better than Bobcat.

If we take Bobcat performance and give it the 4X the boost we get around Ivy Bridge i3 level performance.

To me that equals a 4 in terms of CPU power.

Same goes for GPU. To me Radeon 7850 would be a 6 with 7870, 7950, 7970 and 7990 being the 7, 8, 9 and 10.

Others would score it differently obviously hence why I said "my score" but there is logic behind my maddness.

Fully agree. However 7970m is roughly around an overclocked 7850 in terms of performance. People get confused when you say 7970m... It sounds like 7970 which is much better.

It's still wrong because you are comparing the PS4 (or a Gaming Console in general) to a PC the same way you compare a laptop to a desktop.

We still have a lot to learn about the customization of these chips before we can truly know how they stack up. Depending on how customized they are they could perform well beyond similar PC tech. Yeah they will never stack up to the pure brute of top end PC hardware, but the optimization of the the chips to the specific hardware means just as much as the low level coding.

Decent specs, with optimization, the overall hardware will do a good enough job, just like the PS3. The real good news, though, is that the PS4 appears to have a very streamlined architecture to work with, just glad they didn't insist on continuing this Cell nonsense and stupid integration solutions with memory.

Thats true. There could be some secret sauce which AMD and Sony worked on. I'm just looking at AMDs track record. their per core performance isusually reflective across the architechutre.

For example Athlon II X4 640 and A8 3580 are the exact same architecture and exactly the same CPU performance. A10 5800K uses the piledriver architecture and its per core performance is exactly the same as FX 8350 at same Ghz speed.

what about this...??

http://e-mpire.com/content.php/2056

Article makes sense... This part especially.

"There is no doubt that you could spend a small fortune and assemble a PC that would have the hardware capabilities to blow PS4 out of the water, even with these limitations. However, when it comes to bang for your buck, PS4 does easily provide a better hardware value for gaming than an equally priced PC would."

Something I looked for for a good while but could not quite find is how this new jaguar cpu will compare to AMD's desktop FX-8350 , any ideas?