You comparision with burgers is wrong.

Now about GDDR5 and DDR3... the latencies is not that different between the two... not to create any advantage for multitasking.

In fact there is no advantage of DDR3 over GDDR5 execept the price.

I´m not into this topic but in the end... PS4 beats One concerning the games, right?

Because finally, as a simple consumer, i don´t give a shit if the One is well-balanced as long as the GAMES look good. I´m rather looking forward to Naugthy Dog´s and SM´s exklusives in 5 years from now as the PS4 will be able to do nearly the same regarding the multi-media stuff.

Actually, it's most likely based on Bonaire (7790, more similar to Pitcairn and Tahiti than to Cape Verde), with 2CUs less. Before launch, 7790 was supposed to come with 256bit bus, but production cards ended up with 128bit bus and lower bandwidth (92GB/s). Though on paper it's looks like 7770 equivalent, XOne's better memory susbsystem should most likely, as you already noticed, put it in between 7770 and 7790.

Still:

"With graphics, the first bottleneck you’re likely to run into is memory bandwidth. Given that 10 or more textures per object will be standard in this generation, it’s very easy to run into that bottleneck," Cerny said. "Quite a few phases of rendering become memory bound, and beyond shifting to lower bit-per-texel textures, there’s not a whole lot you can do. Our strategy has been simply to make sure that we were using GDDR5 for the system memory and therefore have a lot of bandwidth."

Another advantage of GDDR5 (at that bandwidth) seems to come from different perspective:

"One thing we could have done is drop it down to 128-bit bus, which would drop the bandwidth to 88 gigabytes per second, and then have eDRAM on chip to bring the performance back up again," said Cerny. While that solution initially looked appealing to the team due to its ease of manufacturability, it was abandoned thanks to the complexity it would add for developers. "We did not want to create some kind of puzzle that the development community would have to solve in order to create their games. And so we stayed true to the philosophy of unified memory."

Not sure how much this will influence 3rd party devs, but it seems that PS4's approach is simpler to use from the start - this will probably not affect bigger devs, but it can help smaller and indie devs making console games for the first time.

Someone, somewhere (I think it was actually here on VGChartz) had a good observation about all this - DDR4 was late, GDDR5 was too expensive, so MS decided to go DDR3 + enhancements approach. Sony made a gamble - and it payed off.

IMO, what is most interesting in PS4's architecture is not GDDR5, but enhancements built into GPU - direct bus from GPU to CPU, that bypasses cache, reducing synchronization issues between the two and significantly reduced overhead of running compute and graphics task at the same time, due to two additional enhancements to GPU.

"There are many, many ways to control how the resources within the GPU are allocated between graphics and compute. Of course, what you can do, and what most launch titles will do, is allocate all of the resources to graphics. And that’s perfectly fine, that's great. It's just that the vision is that by the middle of the console lifecycle, that there's a bit more going on with compute."

Full article @ http://www.gamasutra.com/view/feature/191007/inside_the_playstation_4_with_mark_.php

DUDE.  I think he was being sarcastic-ish.   He's making fun of "the cloud" by equating it to the "teh cell" in his statement!

And to add...

Any advantage in terms of OS that Xbone will have over PS4 is not due the memory used but because MS is a software company way better than Sony.

In fact the Xbone APU is the new CELL.

Huge, complex and expensive.

They've actually likely equaled out development costs due to the more complex solution. Also a very good reason they are likely having yield issues and certainly won't have anywhere near the same number of produced units as Sony will near launch.

From what I can tell, Xbone without Kinect would be the same price as PS4 due to these differences. PS4 is aligning itself with typical PC architecture only with one type of RAM vs two. Xbone is forcing in an embedded ram solution and removing all graphics ram, this is a big difference.

Fact is, PS4 will be more streamlined and internally faster for developers to move resources. It will likely reduce price quicker as well due to a simpler APU design and only one type of memory.

Sony made the better overall choice IMO. MS will have to have better SDKs to make up the difference in code development but in the end 3rd parties will likely put no extra effort into PS4 builds so its not like we as the consumer will largely see any difference. Which really is the only thing any of us should care about.

My points are still valid

Honest question. Has anyone actually CONFIRMED anything from Microsoft regarding the benchmarks of the GPU, which is part of the APU, etc.?

Being such a custom chip, how do we all know so much about it?

However, the cloud will be lifted higher in the skies with 700 million dollars holding it up!