Kind of

PS4 is capable of a feature that Cerny calls "asynchronous fine-grain compute". On older GPUs you have a command processor that has a graphics pipeline for rendering and a compute pipeline for GPGPU. You can only do either rendering or GPGPU efficiently, both at the same time is pretty ineffecient.

AMD's GCN GPUs have asynchronous compute engines (ACEs). Basically, these ACEs are like additional compute pipelines for GPGPU. You can use them instead of the compute pipeline in the command processor. As a result, the latter will be able to focus on maximum rendering performance. A HD7970 has 2 of these ACEs, it can take care of 2 compute jobs at the same time. PS4 has 8 ACEs and can take care of 8 compute jobs at the same time.

To minimize the overhead for graphics rendering, you want to split your compute load into as many small jobs as possible (fine-grain) and "feed" it to your shader cores when they're not fully utilized during rendering jobs (which happens all the time on modern GPUs). Therefore each ACE has compute queues. A HD7970 only has 2 queues (one queue for each ACE), a PS4 has 64 compute queues (8 queues for each ACE). That means programmers can queue up to 64 different compute jobs at the same time in PS4. The 8 ACEs will choose the right jobs at the right time based on pre-defined dependences and according to Cerny you will not notice a penalty for graphics rendering since the ACEs wait until some part of the GPU is underutilized.



PS4 has 8 ACEs/64 queues. AMD's HD8000 series GPUs have a maximum of 4 ACEs/ 32 queues. Xbox One has 2 ACEs with something between 2 or 16 queues. I can't tell for sure since Microsoft doesn't go into detail on this topic.

The problem for Xbox One is that PS4 has 500 GFLOPS more processing power in its GPU, anyway. PS4 will outperform its competitor very easily when it comes to GPGPU.

Not exactly.
And I quote:

So there aren't two type's of "pipelines" I.E. Shader arrays, but instead two different types of command processors, all the work is done on the same pixel shaders groups.
However, like VLIW the shaders have "branches" which are better suited to some tasks over others.

AMD's Whitepaper on GCN: http://www.amd.com/us/Documents/GCN_Architecture_whitepaper.pdf
That can tell you more than Cerny ever would. :P

You heard it hear folks, ps4 is one gamecube duct tapped together with 1/10 of another gamecube.

the ps4 soc most likely is over 1.6 GHz

this site had the AMD CPU number's for each system.  this was even listed before the xboxone was released.

http://www.cpu-world.com/CPUs/Jaguar/AMD-XBox%20One%20APU.html

DG3000FEG84HR is an OEM/tray SoC

1750 MHz[1]

[1] - Information is not confirmed

what did ifixit find in their teardown?

X887732-001 DG3001FEG84HR (includes AMD "Jaguar" 8-core CPU + AMD Radeon Graphics GPU).

why what do we see?

"DG3001FEG84HR" in a teardown that was done by another company that confirmed that indeed  http://www.cpu-world.com/  listing on the xboxone APU specs on that APU were correct on it..so look at the PS4's APU on   http://www.cpu-world.com/

here you go.

http://www.cpu-world.com/CPUs/Jaguar/TYPE-Custom%20APUs.html

DG1000FGF84HS is an OEM/tray SoC

whats the clock rate listed?

1600 MHz [1]

The DG1000FGF84HS part number is not confirmed

but the one in the PS4 IS NOW CONFIRMED TO BE

The DG1000FGF84HT

SO THEY HAVE THE PART NUMBER RIGHT FOR THE XBOXONE, BEFORE THE TEARDOWN, BUT NOT RIGHT FOR THE PS4. REMEMBER THEY DID THIS BEFORE TEARDOWNS. SO this is not just some random site...its like i stated, if it was indeed 1.6 GHz it would have had The DG1000FGF84HS engraved. 

So it's more powerful than my Geforce 650ti OC, noooooooooo

a middle range RIG that's the ps4. if graphics are the selling point well a pc from 2 or 3 years ago is more powerfull and can produce better graphics.

Bottom line is:

There is nothing much more to do in comparison with the XOne.
To improve IQ and effects PS4 games will also have to sacrifice either resolution or frame rate.

But you can't compare them directly, console games are optimized for a certain hardware environment, whilst the pc games are not.

One could objectively test that statement by simply running something like Battlefield 4, CoD Ghosts or Assassin's Creed 4 on a PC from 2-3 years ago (or just looking up performance numbers on Tom's) and comparing the performance numbers to the posted performance numbers from the PS4, which are readily available. 

My guess would be it would take a middle/high end gaming PC from 2-3 years ago (using a VGA card that was probably in the $300-400 range) with a total build cost of around $800 to provide similar numbers, and that's being generous. 

If anyone wants to look it up, be my guest; the info is already out there. 

So comparing an $800 box (just the CPU, as builds never include the cost of input devices or OS) in 2010-11 dollars to a $400 all inclusive box being sold in 2013 is an iffy comparison at best. 

Well a Radeon 5870 even today is no slouch, They're about 4 years old now too.

However, if you wanted to make the comparison fair, you need to lower the image quality downwards so it matches the consoles. - Thus using Battlefield 3/4 probably isn't the wisest of choices as even on low they still do some effects that aren't on the HD twins.
Comparatively, the Playstation 4 isn't even running Battlefield 4 at max graphics either, merely just high equivalent settings and at a lower resolution.

Still a high-end/enthusiast class PC from 4 years ago is still substantually faster than the PS4, mid-range is a differen't matter entirely where the Radeon 5770/5750 (Also re-badged as the 6770/6750) is certainly showing it's age, but still handles pretty much all games fine at 720P.

From a quick look around youtube, the 5870 can pull anywhere from 30-40fps with a mix of high and ultra settings at full 1080P, considering it's 4 years old and is still handling games that are running on a PS4 but with better graphics, it's not a bad showing.
Those cards were also pretty darn cheap before being replaced by the 6900 series, like $200-$300 cheap.

Lets not forget that over time the PC can be cheaper anyway if you play your cards right.
Basically if you bought/Built the PC in 2009, you would have had 4 years of extra "Next generation level graphics" out of it when compared to the new consoles, to some that's worth the extra initial outlay, but everyone is different.