109GB/s min and 204GB/s peak is from MS slides... 264GB/s was a mistaked caused by the low quality of the first slides.

Hi quality.

Well, to answer your first question - from the Sony PS4 reveal.  I did watch it and did pay attention.  What they announced that day is a decent chip, but still significantly smaller then what Microsoft is showing.

The secondary lower power mode is that is not the same thing as co-processors.  It's good that it can go to low power mode.  But they didn't want to get into the same problems as will the cell - i.e. cumbersome to program.  It was a concern of mine that Xbox has made the same mistake. It looks like Microsoft is keeping the co-processors and programing as part of their DirectX and OS systems, so the developers do not need to concern themselves with them.

I hope it's true the PS4 have an easy to program co-processors for sound and other things..  But why are there reports that they are asking people to use the GPU for sound processing? Plus, they don't have the same resources physically according to Sony's own statements.  There just isn't and much extra stuff on the chip.

Also, from the article you sent: "All the focus on general-purpose GPU computing suggests the console's CPU component is relatively weak, which isn't a big surprise."

Sony and Microsoft went about the next gen system in different ways.  Microsoft enhanced the CPU as part of their strategy.

I have more faith in Sony for sound then MS. The ps3 can handle all audio formats, upto uncompressed 192khz 24bit 7.1 and even transform Dolby True HD to 1.5 mbps DTS optical output on the fly to work with my older amp. MS has some catching up to do, 360 can only handle 640kbps DD 5.1

It would be nice if we get some games with 96/192 khz surround sound with all this dedicated sound hardware.

Both Cpu are relatively weak. Even with MS upgrades. I paid attention at the reveal too, and I have no idea what you're talking about. It's right there in the article. The secondary chip will process sound and voice chat. 

Ok, good luck with that then.  Don't read the articles though, you might not be happy.

Agreed, I don't think sony is going to go backwards. Ps3 was the best media center blu ray player on the market and i don't expect that to change with the ps4

In regards with your first statement - good luck with that.  My Sherwood receiver has lasted twice as long as my Sony one.  But my Sony speakers are still going strong.  I would agree with the 2nd part if it was completely accurate, but that is only true if go you 2 channel.  I like 5.1 or better - so they are both about the same.  (http://manuals.playstation.net/document/en/ps3/current/settings/audiooutput.html)

In response to your second statement.  Yes, I absolutely agree.  I would hope they both do 192 khz sound.

I remember the day I played a CD and an LP back to back.  Even I could hear that the LP sounded better, more 'alive' if you will.  It was a sad day where I felt betrayed by technology.  Those 'old guys with the golden ears' weren't making stuff up.  But I did notice a nice improvement with DVD over CD for sound quality.  Higher sampling rates are better.

I also think 60p is to slow.  If you want to start another thread and we can discuss 120P and 192 khz and how even mere mortal would probably enjoy it better.

PS4 has a sound processor too.

Just leaving a comment so i can read it a bit latter. Should be an interesting read.

I think you need to go back and read and actually understand what they are talking about. Pay attention this time, during the press conference Cerney said nothing about sound processing. 

http://www.gamechup.com/mark-cerny-ps4-contains-a-dedicated-audio-processing-chip/

“There’s dedicated audio hardware,” he revealed. “The principal thing that it does is that it compresses and decompresses audio streams, various formats. So some of that is for the games – you’ll have many, many audio streams in MP3 or another format and the hardware will take care of that for you.

“Or, on the system side for example, audio chat – the compression and decompression of that.”

He also added that the GPU can be useful to do different types of audio processing.

“It really does come down though to the amount of parallelisation that is natural to perform for that algorithm, and that does vary greatly depending on what you are doing specifically in your audio processing. I think that as you go forward we will see a hybrid approach in a couple of years where certain aspects of the audio are being done on GPU.”

Earlier he revealed that PS4 GDDR5 RAM latency was not much of a factor since the GPU could handle it.

Again, it's right there in yet another article, He's saying the GPU can be useful in some types of audio processing like ray casting. Not that Devs  need to use the GPU for sound processing.

So before you respond with another "good luck with that" comment, you should provide a source, cause right now it seems you don't know what you're talking about.