Check out my hype threads: Cyberpunk, and The Witcher 3!

Consoles won't blow away high-end PCs like they did last-gen, but they will put them to shame in terms of efficiency and cost. My $600 custom PC can barely run a game like Guild Wars 2 in high settings at reasonable framerates. There's slow downs in the big towns, its playbable, but noticable. If a game like Guild Wars 2 was built specifically for my PC, it would run much better. Sadly, PC devs can't optimize their games for everyones setup. That's what PC settings are there for. So much power is wasted with PCs that they never live up to their true potential. It's all brute-force and raw power.

Its for Laptops now but if Main ram bandwith increases alot through stacking for example its possible to pair a strong GPU with a strong CPU. HSA has an efficency and cost advantage. It just won't replace the highest end but I can easily see it being an option for mid end Desktops. Intel definetly will push it too.  

For allot of titles that is true, but PC's generally run with better graphics out-of-the-box than any console game in 99% of cases anyway, so the comparison isn't usually fair, even the lasiest ports usually have the games running with better textures and a higher resolution.

However, compare games which have been ported well like... Any Call of Duty, most Unreal Engine 3 games and you would be hard pressed not to run it on PC specs that are very similar to the consoles (With a larger amount of Ram of course.)

Then take something like the first Crysis which not only did it run fine on PC specs similar to that of the consoles, I.E. Any dual core processor since the Core 2 Duo, Radeon x1950/Geforce 7950 etc', it actually runs with better graphics than the console version of the game as the console version had reduced textures, draw distance, foliage, lighting, objects the works.

So not under every circumstance is the console version of a game more "optimised" just the majority of the time, PC games look far better, which isn't free on performance.

Why are you telling me this? I know that most games look better on PCs than they do on 7/8 year old consoles. That is obvious.

For allot of titles that is true, but PC's generally run with better graphics out-of-the-box than any console game in 99% of cases anyway, so the comparison isn't usually fair, even the lasiest ports usually have the games running with better textures and a higher resolution.

However, compare games which have been ported well like... Any Call of Duty, most Unreal Engine 3 games and you would be hard pressed not to run it on PC specs that are very similar to the consoles (With a larger amount of Ram of course.)

Then take something like the first Crysis which not only did it run fine on PC specs similar to that of the consoles, I.E. Any dual core processor since the Core 2 Duo, Radeon x1950/Geforce 7950 etc', it actually runs with better graphics than the console version of the game as the console version had reduced textures, draw distance, foliage, lighting, objects the works.

So not under every circumstance is the console version of a game more "optimised" just the majority of the time, PC games look far better, which isn't free on performance.

Nah. APU's will never replace mid-range, for starters nVidia and AMD make far to much money from that segment to simply give it up, if anything APU's will push what has essentially been a static mid-range segment for the last 4 odd years in terms of performance to higher levels, AMD and nVidia still have a fair amount of transister budget in that segment if push came to shove.

What it will benefit is the "good enough" market, those who can handle a low/mid range processor paired up with a semi-decent GPU at a good price, which isn't a bad thing.
APU's should benefit the entire industry, even the high-end GPU's especially with Intel jumping into the GPU game finally bringing with it more competition and hopefully in the end... A higher minimum level of graphics performance.

Again.
Single precision vs double precision.
The Cell will do around 26 Gflops in double precision.

The Cell will however have an edge in single precision, but should still be beaten by the Core 2 Quads.

On the graph, gpu flops are for single presicion and I guess that would mean the same for the cpus no?