Great detective work guys.
Yop I would have never suffer going through all those GPU pictures my-self.
So despite all the apprehension, it looks like the GPU is closer to 2 TFLOPS and not the 1 TFLOPS bgassasin was suggesting from his source.
I would not make any conclusion just now from a alpha dev kit. Though it seems MSFT is aiming high let's not forget that those cards consumes a
bunch of power.
Definitely the HD5870 the HD 6870 and the Hd 6950 offer almost the
same perfs. That's using the gross average method.
FLOPS don't say the whole picture or one has to be careful let say.
You can compare the HD6870 to the HD5870, the former achieve ~90% of the later performance (no AA, x4 AA, x8 AA) with a lot less MFLOPS (2720 vs 2012). The gap in power consumption is sound too, one peaks @228 Watts the other @150 Watts.
HD 6950 as far as FLOPS are concerned is not a straight comparison so it performs almost exactly the same.
Out of those three cards the one that offers the best perf per watts, it's also most likely the best in perfs per Dollars (of BOM).
Anyway I would expect to have use the most up to date in card in those alpha dev kit which is the Radeon HD6950.
I don't expect MS to use anything not based on GNC for a system releasing in late 2013.
Things the HD7850
outperforms those three cards. It's even worse if you use a more techreport methodology (imo most site should not adapted Techreport takes but give the average and the spread), /OT). That's a card only (so to speak...) worse 1761MFLOPS.
It also consumes less power than aforementioned card.
The thing is MFLOPS are by far not the most telling metric to define a GPU performances.
If there would be only one metric theoretical metric to guesstimate their performances it would be:
Fillrate with blending.
It's a bit sad after all those years, the crap that was last gen wrt to FLOPS that people are still hell bent (with no objective reasons) on FLOPS. People never learn I guess.
Overall I expect MS to undershoot even the HD7850 in raw arithmetic throughy much put but to remain really close in the ROP throughput department and if there are embedded memory in the system possibly to outperform it in real world applications (better fed ROPs).
Pretty much what I would call a "bartization" (in refernce to the jumpo from hf 58xx tp 68xx) of Pitcairn. A long with a bit slower clock (akin to the HD 7750) and less ALUs that should get the power consumption down as imho 105Watts is still on the high side.
I never believed MS would launch a console significantly weaker than the competition and just let Sony take over the core audience, (especially when Sony's the one bleeding red)
Well I hope other wise, I hope Sony ship a core system for chip even if it's less powerful, though I've no hope though Sony has been acting dumbly for a while now...
Anyway that's an empty statement as FLOPS doesn't allows to rank GPU in real world application.
Given what we know of the Orbis specs:
http://www.vgleaks.com/world-exclusive-ps4-in-deep-first-specs/
Does the 720 look like it will be the more capable machine, given it has more memory and more CPU cores with a similar GPU?
With more specific info on the CPU types, their clock speed, it's tough to say (for durango I mean as your link assume quad core stream roller @ 3.2GHz for Sony).
On the GPU side it's not clear either.
On the memory side MSFT seems set to have an clear edge (that's if Sony is stuck with 2GB).
But honestly this early that kind of guess is irrelevant and more a bad omen about the upcoming FB wars to plague the interweb next year...
