ok. Explain how you got from point 1 to point 2. Give sources to point 2 as well.

I really want to know that.

only if at the end they have more chips that pass the quality check per wafer - "super high clock rate" surely has a significant influence on how many of the chips per wafer are substandard for use in scorpio

It's kinda of pointless to arguee on rumours putting all good points in favor of one side and the other having only negatives. You aren't talking about a big company and a nobody (so that you could apply that only one of them know what they are doing).

We already have the processing capacity and architeture of Scorpio and the rumoured for Neo. If both uses the same architeture and Scorpio is an overclocked version and Neo an undercloked one of the same chip then either one is smaller than the other, or will have more failures to produce and consume more power. So unless you think MS system will run on unicorn rainbow and Sony on pigs fart them you can't seriously give MS smaller chip, higher processing, less consumption, higher die output success and cheaper to produce. It doesn't make sense in any way.

no, not all improvements apply to everyone. The chips may be similar, but there will be differences in setup and configuration, so not all improvements will carry over. And considering bulk production and cost of setup if Sony have 1 year lead to production and keep leading after Scorpio release Sony will always have a cheaper production on similar architeture.

I respect your knowledge on computation, but your scenario in this one is so one sided that would only work in the bizarro world and on "it could happen impossible situation".

I'm just giving plausable possible scenario's, nothing that's based on legitimate information on these upcoming devices anyhow.

I have no doubt that the Neo will actually be a slower device with a lower price point than Scorpio, unless Microsoft is willing to eat the costs to shift more units.

How is it plausible that Scorpio is smaller, cheaper, more powerfull, with better yield, generate less heat, draw less power using the same architeture?

That's not what I am getting at all.

That is what I'm getting with you picking all the pro to MS and cons to Sony, you are pushing for a favourable scenario for MS that doesn't sound remotely likely considering both companies consoles past history.

If the chips are designed by the same company (AMD) uses the same licensed technology (x86, HyperTransport, GCN etc'.), all fabbed at the same place (Global Foundries) then when it comes to the actual fabrication of the chips, then improvements will carry over.
Let's say Global foundries does a tweak to it's process which allows for better power characteristics or better patterning due to learning how the process works with the Neo, then that will apply to Microsoft's SoC as well. They are all using the same tools.

Of course that works in the reverse as well. If Global Foundries somehow manages to optimise it's fabrication whilst fabbing Scorpio, chances are it will also benefit Neo.

Of course Sony and Microsoft petition AMD for their own various touches and changes and such to the designs, which will have an impact... But overall, whoever has the smaller chip will have the cheaper manufacturing, to a point. - In some cases building a big chip on an old process can be cheaper than having it on a new process as an idle fab is wasted money and retooling a fab for a new process can cost billions, hence why Intel historically kept chipsets/eDRAM at an older fab, but CPU's on the latest to prolong the old fabs life, but that's not relevent when both chips are using the same process.

Also remember, Sony and Microsoft by law are not allowed to deal with the production of these chips.

what law prevent them? I'm not aware of it.

general improvements will carry, but we are talking about customized chips so the differences between them will block a lot of the improvements being carried.

but explain to me how they using the same basic architeture would end up with ms having a smaller chip, with higher processing power and better yield?

Disappointed when it doesn't get beaten?

How is it plausible that Scorpio is smaller, cheaper, more powerfull, with better yield, generate less heat, draw less power using the same architeture?

what law prevent them? I'm not aware of it.

general improvements will carry, but we are talking about customized chips so the differences between them will block a lot of the improvements being carried.

but explain to me how they using the same basic architeture would end up with ms having a smaller chip, with higher processing power and better yield?

Disapointed when the outcome isn't what they want.

Expect PS4 Neo to be a potato, and then you're happy when the true power is announced. Alternatively if they expect Neo to be 20 teraflops, they're going to have a bad time.

I have already outlined that, so would rather not repeat it again in this thread. (But I will again anyway... :P)

I think you are confusing me for a console gamer, I have no preference to any particular console platform.

Merely saying any benefits in fabbing that one company gets, the other gets also.

The x86 license agreement. Only Via, AMD, Intel and a couple of fabs are allowed to "look" at them there was a poster on this forum who hilariously thought that Sony built the SoC in the PS4.

Now how would a chip of the same uArch, which is smaller have a higher processing power and yield?

Well, it's all a game of balance really.
Essentially a smaller chip will use less energy due to simply having less transisters, which means if you choose the right transisters you should be able to increase the clockrate to make up for less hardware.
And that is true up to a point. At any process once you hit a certain clockrate and voltage, then power consumption/heat output starts to climb faster.

And we know that 14nm and 16nm has been able to clock pretty impressively without massive jumps in TDP.

Now the leak for the Neo calls for a 933mhz @ 36 CU chip. 36 CU * 4 SIMDs per CU* 16 ALUs per SIMD = 2304 shaders.
2304 shaders * 2 floating point operations per cycle * 933 million cycles per second = 4.3Tflop.

Now... Microsoft could take a 32CU chip which 32 * 4 SIMD's * 16 ALU = 2048.

That would make it a smaller chip than the PS4.

Now to meet Microsofts 6 Teraflop target Microsoft would need 2048 * 2 floats * 1.5 billion cycles per second = 6.1Tflop.
Is 1.5 billion cycles a second possible? Yes. Depending on the transisters used and voltages.

That would give you a chip that is not only smaller than the Neo and thus cheaper to manufacture, but faster as well.

That's just a possible theory, we need more information to go on.

MS pretty much destroyed themselves with the DRM fiasco and ps4 does have a power advantage. Plus Sony had that brilliant launch advertising campaign. 1) The one with the crowds and the girl who said 'All my friends who are gamers own Playstation.' 2) Followed with Greatness Awaits. It was a masterclass in marketing. I fully expect them to do it again. 3) Its why I said it could be 2 hamsters. Sony has a year and a good marketing team. Neo will sell millions.