Well first games are hardly optimized.
And later it is fight to death for "better looking game" isn't it?
720p is ~2-something less pixels and most people have 32-40 LCD's and sit far enough to have problems differencing between 720p and 1080p.

I would not be suprised if last games for PS4/X720 struggled with 720p and 30fps like today Crysis 3 do (20fps and really blury graphics compared to PCs).

In other words: We're going to wait to see what the 720 can do and if it can't do 60fps we'll cater to the lowest common denominator

Superchunk, there is no difference between laptop GPU's and desktop GPU's.

Quite frankly the only difference (talking AMD here) is the core clock speed. Usually what AMD does is take a series of GPU's from say desktop mid range, downclock the core speed and call it a series higher when moved over to a laptop or "M" variant. You making as if there is architectural differences between the GPU's, there usually isnt unless the mobile gpu is based on an older desktop version. AMD does not develop the GPU's independantly.

The best example of this is the 7970M gpu. This GPU is based on the "Pitcairn" gpu ie. 7870 and 7850 desktop gpu. In fact it is the EXACT same gpu as the 7870. Exact. One difference = core clock speed tweaked down from 1000mhz to 850mhz.

So what about the PS4 you say? Based on the PS4 specs that we know it is sitting pretty much exactly like this ---> 7850 < PS4 GPU < 7870/7970M

Granted the PS4 has some major customisations like the added memmory bandwidth which is higher than both the 7870/7970M. We also obviously know about the increased amount of memory which is 8GB. There are also other smaller tweaks which result in a give and take on performance compared to the above mentioned GPU's. Other than that this is the exact same gpu also based on pitcairn. Have a look at the gpu architecture drawings and you will see what i mean.

The final big similarity is that of the overall performance. The ps4 gpu has almost 2tflps of raw computation performance. This is exactly between the 7850 and the 7870/7970M gpu's. Exactly.

So please tell me what mobile gpu you are talking about? Keep in mind that the 7800M series is a downclocked version of the 7700 desktop series. These gpu's have raw computation power of ~0.8tflps. 

And to make this entire argument completely useless, both Sony and AMD have already announced that the PS4 gpu has 18 full GCN cores. This is two more cores than the DESKTOP 7850 gpu and 2 less than the DESKTOP 7870 gpu.

Again il reiterate 7850 < PS4 GPU < 7870/7970M.

If you already knew this then my bad. However i get the feeling your understanding of mobile laptop gpus is a bit off.

The PS4's GPU ran BF3 at around 50FPS in bench marks with ultra settings at 1080P in a PC. I would imagine it would be quite easy to get BF4 to 1080p/60 in a unified console environment. PS4 will have more and faster memory to work with. That alone should be enough to get BF4 running a steady 60fps.

http://www.bit-tech.net/hardware/graphics/2012/11/05/msi-radeon-hd-7850-1gb-review/3

I do not think 60PFS should be the priority for developers instead I would like the option to choose.  Sometimes I would want the higher FPS in a multiplayer game but if a game has a slower pace, I might want to go for the full eye candy and play at a consistant 30FPS

@Shinobi-san
PS4 GPU is at most comparable to 7850. And 7850 REFERENCE design, most PCs' 7850 will have better specs.
The only thing that is above would be memory bandwidth - on paper - because on PC it will be not shared with CPU like PS4 will do.

Putting it between 7850 and 7870 makes false impression, 7870 has much higher clock, higher TU number etc.

@KBG29

More memory means squat for speed - bigger levels, more mipmaps for textures not render speed.
There's some silly conviction that GDDR5!!!one111 will make everything 3x better.
It wont.
On PC for example you get in practice 10-30% in GDDR5 equipped card over otherwise identical GDDR3 one.

Thats just wishful thinking.

thank god I want smooth games and if it can give BF4 60fps then AC, KZ, and whatever SSM and ND are cooking up should be fine.

I agree the closest thing to the ps4 gpu is a reference 7850 gpu.

Id still peg it between the 7850 and the 7870 though, just on the raw computational power alone, extra bandwidth, 2 extra GCN cores as well as access to more memory (which can indeed have an impact on performance). Overall its just a better all round GPU than the 7850.

And obviously im talking about reference AMD designs? Thats what everybody is talking about when they do these comparisons..otherwise you comparing it to something uncertain. Since the APU is made directly by AMD its best to compare it with what AMD builds.

Everything i said in my post is correct. And I also wanted to correct what Superchunk said about the PS4 being a mobile variant gpu which didnt make much sense given my explanation.

There is no 7830. A graphics card like this doesn't exist. PS4 Gpu is with 18 CUs between 7850 (16 CUs) and 7870 (20 CUs)

Yes the 8 core is a small CPU but Tablets don't run with 150+Watt.

Games are mostly GPU limited anyway. In a Console the CPU is not that important especially with GPGPU. Games on PC utilize just 2-4 Threads max. So 6-8 Core CPUs arent utilized anyway. Alot of CPU time in a PC goes to Windows anyway this will not be the case in a Console. A Cpnsole CPU can make Draw Calls 10 times cheaper than a CPU in a PC. The Overhead on a PC is massive, especially for the CPU.

So really CPU is no Bottleneck for Consoles at all. Its again the GPU. PS4 GPU is about 2Tflop its budget but people underestimate how much power AA costs and also there is a certain optimization potential 1080p@60 fps with tweaked (reduced) IQ is entirely possible for PS4.  

People wiill be surprised that the difference will not be that big. Diminishing returns are a thing 1440p 120 FPS will be reserved for PC. But BF4 1080p/60fps with subtle trade offs in image quality  will be absolutely possible on PS4.