Quoting the wrong person. I gave this link earlier:

http://hexus.net/tech/news/graphics/36725-amd-radeon-hd-7990-specification-leaked/

The number of processors is exactly double, but the GFLOPS is only about 84% more, which is still good, more then 70% more like the other guy said.

:-O!

But Super Mario Galaxy AND Super Mario Galaxy come in at 2nd AND 3rd with a 97% (1% less).

Comparing clock speed of GPUs is pointless. PS3 VRAM had 22.4 GB/s of badwidth and the PS4 has 176GB/s unified which is an almost 8x increase. Memory bandwidth wasn't nearly as much of an issue as having 2 small pools of RAM, the split pools is what caused games like Skyrim to have it's issues where as not having an embedded framebuffer like the PS2 and 360 at worst caused some lower quality alpha blending and lower quality AA until MLAA/FXAA became popular. 

True... though, launch games will tell more of a story then they usually do, since it seems like these two consoles are going to be more like regular PCs in design then ever.   Since the two big improvements in graphics over a generation are familiarity with the hardwre and new graphic techniques.  

That said what is also being overlooked is... while you might not SEE as much of a change when looking at one dude. ... what we WILL see is a big change technically.

So you might not see a big change in the "look at how amazing these small set piece enviroments like GOW look" however the big open world games that have to have all kinds of assets on screen at once?

They'll look WAY better then last gen, and seem more alive as they will be able to add more to scenes.

The release of the BF4 17 minute video and Epic Game's Infiltrator tech demo running on a single 680 show us two things,

1) This generation the PlayStation 3 and Xbox 360 have been holding back the PC versions of games because having the smallest sales rate of the three makes developing an engine that will only be fully utilized on the PC and need to be cut down extensively for the other two platforms is expensive and time consuming.
2) The release of the PlayStation 4 and NextBox will result in a monumental shift in game engine design, with the consoles being able to run the same engines but in the same way that slower PC's run games with the settings dropped down a few notches - This will allow PC titles to show their full potential, as these videos have shown.

So console fans who are arguing the toss over the gap between console and PC games not being huge (despite the obvious advantages of better textures, resolution and AA), the very consoles you're defending at the reason why very few PC games push the boat out graphically.

That's the funniest thing, when they claim that the next crop of consoles are somehow going to beat current PC's graphically based purely on power - when PC gamers high end hardware isn't even being utilized fully.

Then they state the difference between PS3/360 and PC isn't that big, when the advancements (fps, resolution, aa and texture quality) are the main differences new console games will have, yet somehow when those differences are on a PC with current tiles it's "insignificant".

Talk about one sided.

won't change much, highest denominator graphics, mods, special Cuda or OCL codes here and there, PhysX money hatting, most control options, laugh at console graphics and at people comparing them, people will keep bitching about cost of PC building while bashing on a Nintendo product on graphics even though it'd be the cheapest, pretty much going to be the same hycrocritical shit lol.

The problem is that high end PC's will always be in the eyes of enthusiasts and not to the average consumer of games. The general public is not going to go gaga over a bit more image quality and extra effects from PC. They just want affordable machines, which runs their games, for a half a dozen years or so.

So it makes perfect sense that Sony/MS doesn't want to pursue ultra high end hardware this generation because the consumers will not pay over the odds for it. Look at the PS3.. it was expensive and overengineered as hell and never sold well until Sony lowered the price to a reasonable level. There shouldn't be anyone debating the power between PC and consoles, but as is the case.. consoles are built to play games and games they will get. With the advantage of being the lead platform for a lot of them.

Okay so the VRAM bandwidth increased 8x, GPU Bandwidth increased 3x, Raw Processing Power (What would you call GFLOPS?) increased 9x, GPU Speed increased 1.6x, but because RAM increased 16x the PS4 is 10-15 times more powerful then the PS3 instead of 9x or less powerful?

I don't understand, RAM wouldn't make the PS4 go from 8x as powerful to 12x as powerful, no matter how good it is, it's not needed, something else will bottleneck the system.

Honestly, I have a hard time getting games to max out my old rig, which is running 3x 3gb GTX580's

The new quad titan rig doesn't even come close to breaking a sweat on games, and it's nothing to do with optimization or anything like that, just that engines are scaled back to make compatibility with current gen consoles easier on the designers (dont have to make two sets of geometry and two sets of texture assets, and of course two sets of shader instructions)

p.s. Green light on the lower two cards are from the debug arrays they have, as they're development cards not retail (a bit faster, to boot).