They would've need better cooling and probably slightly better PSU - but that's not really what I meant - those 2 disabled CUs are disabled for better yields, hence lower price, if they went with fully enabled GPU (basically 7870 GHz edition) they would have Epic's 2.5TFLOPS GPU, but yields would be worse and price would be higher.

The PSU is over-engineered anyway as it should be, It would likely handle the extra power demands at the expense of some lifetime. (Due to Capacitor aging which reduces the max wattage of a PSU over time.)

The fan speed could likely be ramped up with just an update to handle the increased TDP demands.

The PS4 having a clock of 1ghz would likely have meant that all games would probably be hitting 1080P.
As for Flops, there are more important things to worry about.

I disagree. I find flops to be a terrible indication for gauging performance, unless of course your workload is *only* single precision floating point heavy... Like... Folding@Home.
Typically newer GPU's with less gflop can beat older GPU's with more gflop.
Besides Gflop ignores the GPU's Geometry, Memory, Texturing, ROP and more capabilities as well. If you exclude half  of a processor in a comparison, then how could the comparison ever be accurate?

And yes, I do agree that this generation's jump in graphics is pretty dismal, I always hammered that tune though... But you also need to keep in mind that games of this generation are also using waaaaaaay more dynamic effects which are simply more expensive, while last generation everything was pre-calculated/static/cheap.
For example it was fairly common to have light details baked into the textures in games last generation, that unloaded a ton of processing power to use for something else... People of course would walk away saying xxx game has impressive graphics when really it was thanks to great art and assets, rather than sheer amazing dazzling effects all running at once thanks to some magical and amazing optimization or the power of the Cell/Cloud/Cats.

That has also impacted the kind of "jump" people are seeing this generation.

With that said... You reach a point where every time you double your "graphics" quality, you need multiples more capable hardware.
This image explains it really well:
10x increase in polygons, you reach a point where an increase isn't as dramatic anymore.

I think the major advantage this generation is the "smaller" details.
Everything has geometry, not flat surfaces which "look" bumpy, particles,  smoke and other effects typically aren't 2D sprites anymore either (Except for Dragon Age: Inquisition, but that was cross-plat.).
Shadowing, texturing, shaders all got a bump, which is to be expected... Everything is dynamic, not pre-calculated/baked.

To put things into perspective... Starting with the Geforce 5 right to the Geforce 6, 7, 8, 9 and 200 series... Geometry performance increased by 3x, where-as shader/compute performance increased by 150x.
The Geforce series after that, the Geforce 400 series increased it by a farther 8x, roughly inline with the Radeon in the PS4, probably take awhile for developers to use that capacity the most optimal way though for the largest visual impact, which we are starting to see in games coming out over in the next few years.

I wish they came out more powerful and more expensive originally. I doubt I will upgrade to Scorpio anytime soon, if ever. Might just wait till the next one after that. Especially since they said all games will play with the original Xbox One that means Halo 6 will, too. I am not sure if Halo 6 will also be PC which will mean there will never be a reason to buy an xbox console again. 

That would have been a lot of extra $ because we would have hade a lot more malfunctioning consoles. Anything more powerfull than what the PS4 has would have hade a huge power draw.

Do gamers want to pay more on consoles? It's fairly obvious of what the answer is. The xbox one sold badly partly because of it's price and the PS3 sold badly at first because of it's price.

I'm completely content with the power of the current consoles for the gen. I never expect pc quality graphics when I buy a home console. If I wanted graphics comparable to pc, I would have just bought a gaming pc.

Nope. We aren't at fault, the greedy manufacturers are. This is the time to focus on games. The power is more than enough. This isn't the time for more hardware.

Sure, but that would mean shorter lifetime and noisier console - but improvements in PSU/cooling would not really add much to cost, it's the yields of fully enabled GPU that needs to run on 1GHz.

2.5TFLOPS is 35% more then what PS4 currently has, plus 8 more TMUs for total of 80, both them and ROPs (along with triangle setup) on 25% higher clock - it's definitely not all about FLOPS...but that said, those 2 disabled CUs and anemic 800MHz clock are there cause they've decided to price PS4 at $399, they just couldn't risk with higher price.

Yields don't really have much to do with clocks, you just throw more voltage at the problem.

I play consoles and i usually play games with my friends online. I rarely play co-op but i do let my sisters use my consoles from time to time.

OP- Yes