You are correct, when it comes to raw computing power the PS4 gpu is 9x as powerfull, memory size or speed doesn't direcly give it more computing power. However graphics memory was the biggest limiting factor in the PS3, especially since it wasn't shared and was fixed at 256mb. With PS4 they could use 5000mb for graphics and much higher speeds, so atleast that bottleneck(as you already mentioned) is finally gone.

But seriously guys why are we comparing a dual gpu card with a console here? You can't blame consoles for for limiting the possibility's or your Crossfire or SLI system. When it comes to power consumption the PC graphics card industry is just going berserk:

Now the HD7990 is slightly more power friendly, using 350W max. But seriously, a 7800 GTX used 80W back in the day and that's why they could use it in the PS3. If you go look at what card fits that bill these days you get.... exactly a HD7850. From a power/performance view a HD7850 is simply top notch, and comparable to the top cards back in the day. Anything higher is not a fair comparison and unrealistic, it would be like comparing a tablet PC to an Ultrabook.

Really you should be able to max out any PC game with a 100W card(aside extra filetring options etc.) but the PC industry has become obesed. It's not healthy to need a 200W+ card to max a videogame out.

the quad sli (4x) Titan rig i use for work averages 1.2-1.3kw draw on gpus alone when being used properly lol

I don't think it's a good development though. If you take the huge jump in power consumption in to the equation the GPU industry hasn't really advanced that much in computing power the last 5 years.

As an example, an HD3850 card uses about 60w max, a HD7990 uses over 350W. That means you could run 6 HD3850 with the same power consumption as one(dual gpu) HD7990.

6x HD3850= 6x 427 GFLOPS= 2562 GFLOPS (that's close to an HD7950)

1x HD7990= 2x 3788,8 GFLOPS= 7577,6 GFLOPS

So that's less than 3 times the computing performance in 5 1/2 years, or just over 20% a year. The rest is simply due to letting the chip draw more power.

What does that have to do with what I posted?

Do you mean 10-15x?

And how, please explain to me. Most of the upgrades to PS3 software ranges to 1.5-9x more powerful/capable, the only component which sees a greater then 9x boost is the RAM....wait....I looked it up PS4 only has 8GB of DDR5 RAM, not 16GB like you stated. So no single component of PS4 is over 9x as powerful as PS3. This means that PS4 is probably in the 7-9x more powerful then PS3 range, and that's not a big jump considering you need 4x the power of PS3 just to run PS3 games in 1080p.

http://www.extremetech.com/gaming/148974-ps4-hardware-specs-analyzed-a-big-upgrade-but-ultimately-underwhelming

This is probably why I have not been amazed with the new Killzone...

Oh, sorry I thought PS3 had 1GB of RAM, my bad.

Still the raw processing power, bandwidth, number of processors, etc....they all multiple to 9x more then the PS3 or less. Just because RAM is up 16x, that doesn't magically make the PS3 a 7-9x more powerful system to a 10-15x more powerful system. RAM just doesn't do that, all RAM will do is decrease load times (which were devestating on the PS3).

So explain to me why you think PS4 is 10x more more powerful then the PS3 despite all the components being less then 10x more powerful? Or am I missing something?

Stop talking down to me, geez, you have an ego.

You never stated why you think PS4 is 10-15x more powerful without referencing anything except for RAM. I said that PS4 was 9x as powerful as PS3, you quoted me and said it's more referencing RAM, someone else mentioned 10-15x, and then you started using that figure, but never gave any other reasons for your belief.

So, as I have asked you multiple times now, why do you think the PS4 is 10-15x more powerful when none of the components (except the RAM) are over 9x as powerful as the PS3's? The GPU is 9x more powerful, a GPU Clock speed only 60% greater then the PS3's, 3x the bandwidth, 3x the drive read speed, the VRAM is 8x larger, and the CPU from a laptop/tablet CPU lineup (so probably not a big jump over PS3's).

You never went over anything again before, so please if you're going to reply to me, don't talk down to me, and don't ignore my question.

"I don't feel like going over this again", "others have tried to explain to you", and "I don't have the patience to repeat myself." - You're trying to make me look dumb.

If you look at everyone who has quoted or replied to me, Captain_Tom backed you up in stating the PS4 is 10-15x as powerful as the PS3, but not one person gave a reason for it, not even you. So by telling me that you're repeating yourself, and that other people have explained to me how the PS4 is 10x or more powerful then the PS3, you're just full out lying.

The only related point someone mentioned was zarx when he stated that the VRAM was the bottleneck in the PS3, and since it's what 8x more powerful then in the PS3, and no longer split into a pool, that will no longer be the bottleneck and thus the PS4 will have "less issues." Never did he state or argue that the PS4 will be 10x or more powerful then the PS3 (like you believe).

---

As it stands right now, you claimed that the PS4 is 10-15x stronger just because Captain_Tom mentioned that number, but you have no reasoning behind it. So instead of giving me a reason, you just resort to "others have said this before." Instead of admiting that you're wrong, or stating that you don't know why you think the PS4 is 10-15x more powerful then the PS3, you'd rather just attempt to make me look like the idiot.

Na-Uh! And that's poor discussion skills. Please don't insult or talk down to me again, it's ungrounded responses like that which make the Sony fan community look bad.

----

From what others have posted, and since not a single part except for the RAM is over9x as powerful as in the PS3, I reckon the PS4 is 6-9x as powerful as the PS3. That is unless you give me a reason to think otherwise instead of talking to me as if I were a child.

The 7th gen never caught up with Crysis maxed out.

That's not a reason for why you think the PS4 is 10x as powerful or more then the PS3. That's a reason for why that video of Battlefield, which was run on a PC 3x as powerful as the PS4, might be an accurate portrayal of what it might look like on PS3. I never argued that it wasn't. You like to avoid questions you don't like the answers to, don't you?

Sorry to label you, but prove me wrong. Either show me why you think the PS4 is that much more powerful then the PS3, or admit that you initially thought of it as a more powerful device then it actually is. Admit that you were wrong about something Sony related as a Sony fan, or that you wrongfully tried to claim that I was wrong. You are a Sony fan right (I didn't say exclusively Sony did I)?

I am not wrong for saying, that because you like Sony, you'll talk down to me when I contest your optimistic view on a Sony product? You do like Sony do you not? Yes it's Vindication, but prove me wrong. Be more polite in future discussions (set a good example for Sony fans), or talk down to me when I point out less then ideal comments towards Nintendo, Microsoft or PC's. Either way, this is off topic, so stick to my question.

Why do you think the PS4 is 10-15x more powerful then the PS3 when the mass of it's components (with the sole exception of the RAM) are between 1.6 to 9x as powerful as in the PS3? I am repeating myself now.

The 1.6 times applies to the cpu i pressume?:

Cpu won't matter much in running battlefield 4 either, especially if they optimise it a bit to use all 8 cores. Also PS4 can use the gpu for big calculations like physics, something the PS3 can't. When it comes to those calculations PS4 could easily be tens of times more powerfull than a PS3.

In the end it comes down to what part will be the first bottleneck, and since PS4 has more than enough memory it will be the GPU. And that is about 9x faster, hence in it's main application(games) it will be 9x faster.