I don't imagine the GPU of PS4 being as powerful as they say, given the tablet CPU, low power consumption and incredibly low power efficiency (75-100W from 120W to watch youtube, wtf). I don't say it only because I have to wait before I can build proper PC since I am international student and I feel ripped off for 2000$ 2011 gaming PC being surpassed by stupid overpriced 350$ console, though. Anyway waiting for NVlink or AMD HBM, although as a physics student, CUDA is preferred. PS4 image quality seems like shit - as a photographer: ghosting, low dynamic range, blur, etc; as a tech enthusiast: terrible field of view, colors, extreme blacks whites to hide textures, some blurring, cheap out of focus filters, etc. etc. It sounds like conspiracy theory but I still think they lie about PS4=660 only to sell more GPUs. I was able to run Watch Dogs at playable framerates, 4MSAA, ultra everything but shadows, no vsync (120Hz monitor, not needed), and no depth of field (unwanted effect anyway - it is stupid, because it doesn't know where you are looking). I know my GPU sucks, but I have the freedom to make acceptable compromizes, 1080p on 17" screen can be good even without AA, and to use such setting that I get better quality than PS4. Don't get me wrong, as soon as I graduate I will build a expensive gaming PC. Before I saw the PS4=660 comparison I tought I was above consoles looking only at screenshots and uncompressed gameplay..... Don't hate me, pls. I am not ignorant, I might be biased as I can't buy PC now since I am moving out with graduation and it sucks.