Can't say the audio on PS4 is worse than PS3, but Cerny was clear that they pushed less for audio on PS4 than on PS3 but at PS5 tempest engine they came full on it. He also said that tempest engine is designed similar to SPE (without cache, dump direct on it) so that may be where he understood that the audio on PS3 was better.

And about very few of the data being duplicated that also contradict what Cerny said. He explained that is the reason why even some small patches had to reinstall the whole game, and that because the HDD was slow several of the assets had duplication and that with SSD the file sizes should be a lot smaller.

PC instalation size doesn't disprove it since PC ports are developed to address HDD configurations as default.

Pema is the most vocal user on saying Tflops is an useless measure and that even on same architeture you can have lesser Tflop outperform higher because of other aspects of the card. So I guess you aren't understanding his point that Tflop is a direct theoretical maximum that always means the same (so 1 Tflop is always 1 Tflop, instead of a AMD Tflop is 0,6 NVidia Tflop or anything the like) but of course the real world perfomance will vary greatly and that is the gain in efficiency every gen see.

So you get a performance drop for intense games, whether it’s the CPU for games that heavily utilize the GPU or an actual TFLOP drop for games that utilize the CPU because the GPU needs to be throttled down. You can bicker about exact numbers even though Sony provided none, the person I quoted and myself have the correct understanding of what Cerny was saying.

It remains to be seen how often the system can actually run at full power. Logic would dictate not often, otherwise there would be no need for a boost mode and variable frequencies. Remember this is the same guy who said like 8TF would be required for native 4K. It’s not like he’s infallible.

People smarter or at least more knowledgeable than us on this have said that if MS used the same method of varying frequencies, the XSX could get to like 14.6 TF. They aren’t, because it’s not smart. Sony will either have a very good, very expensive cooking solution in the PS5, or the console will not run at the max frequencies often.

Unfortunately, the relative cost of RAM is higher now than it was up until a few years ago.  Taking these systems up to 24gb would make a noticeable difference in production costs.  So, they've had to figure out how to make do with less (than we might prefer). 

Nope. Not correct.
Cerny specifically mentioned SmartShift.

The GPU boost clock can certainly be run at 2.23Ghz... Indefinitely. Provided the rest of the system isn't taxed to 100%.

https://www.anandtech.com/show/15624/amd-details-renoir-the-ryzen-mobile-4000-series-7nm-apu-uncovered/4

Otherwise it's not a boost, it's a base clock and a failure on Sony's behalf in advertising that particular aspect.

The DSP in the Playstation 4 is based upon AMD's TrueAudio technology, it's a step-up over the PS3's implementation.
Just wanted him to provide the evidence for his claim.

https://www.anandtech.com/show/7513/ps4-spec-update-audio-dsp-is-based-on-amds-trueaudio

Patches forcing entire reinstalls of games happens on PC, mostly because enough of the underlaying dataset got changed that you might as well discard the old, for the new.

And the Playstation 4, Xbox One, Playstation 3, OG Xbox, Xbox 360 games aren't!?!?

Pretty much... Haha
He is backtracking on his statements now, so nothing to see here.

It can maintain 2.23Ghz GPU clocks indefinitely, provided that developers have opted not to peg the CPU and I/O at 100%.

Anyone who has played around with a Ryzen notebooks understands this...

Basically the Ryzen notebooks have a 15w TDP. - In an ideal world the CPU and GPU will be given equal split if pegged at 100%. That is 7.5w each.

But if you reduce the CPU demand by 50% by reducing clockrates (which in turn reduces voltages), then you are reducing the CPU's 7.5W TDP to 5W, which means the GPU can increase it's TDP demands from 7.5W to 10W. - Then the GPU can drive up it's clockrates.

That can mean the clockspeed difference of 900Mhz to 1.2GHz.

And it can maintain that indefinitely. - But once you start increasing the CPU load, the CPU is going to want to take some of the GPU's TDP.

Either way, developers will have all of that in mind when building games.

GDDR6 is relatively new, hence the costs. Which is why me and CGI made accurate predictions on this front years in advance.

I know. I just hope it's no later than when E3 was supposed to be. This has been the longest wait for any real information for a Halo game, measured by how many months until release. We already had information on and footage or screenshots of gameplay at this point for every Halo game by this point, but we've had no real information about the how the game plays other than the return of split-screen. Plus by time Infinite releases it'll have been five years since Halo 5. Somebody who was in seventh grade when Halo 5 came out will be a senior in high school when Infinite comes out. That's a long wait, and I crave info.

Not necessarily, but I do think that if you take the wrong path, you need to backtrack and try a different path. Halo 5's "Spartan abilities" mechanics simply didn't feel like Halo to me. Infinite sprint, rapid dodges with a thruster pack, high-impact charging melees, and so on were core attributes of the player character. It was simply too fast-paced and twitchy, and was also a more maximalist "look at everything you can do!" approach. It had significant impacts on things like weapon balance and level design. Spartans were always "walking tanks," but in Halo 5 they're more like fighter jets than tanks. And I didn't like it. I've tried to give Halo 5's multiplayer a chance, but I hardly touch it anymore (since the start of September 2019, I've played only 33 matches in Arena). Once the MCC got fixed, I default to that now. I've played more MCC in the past week than I have for Halo 5 in the past six months. Halo has a certain "feel" to it that Halo 5 completely overturned. Halo 2 Anniversary multiplayer is to me probably the best Halo has played in a long time.

Some recent games have seen the developers make conscious efforts to go back to the series' roots, often times while still finding ways to change things up. RE7 went back to more traditional survivor horror, but moved the perspective to first-person. Doom 2016 went back to a more classic-style fast-paced gameplay centered around killing demons with big guns and moving really fast, but still added new mechanics that meshed well with the traditional. Super Mario Odyssey moved back towards a more Mario 64-esque approach for level design and core 3D platforming after two Galaxy games and the 3D World/Land games, but still added new mechanics (namely Cappy and his associated abilities) that meshed well with old-school 3D Mario platforming.

What I'd like to see in Infinite is a similar "return to the roots" approach to the core mechanics, while finding new ways to innovate that don't drastically overhaul the core formula.

With Halo 5, 343I decided to focus on changing the base abilities of the player character, but in older games the innovations almost always revolved around some sort of sandbox element external to the player, either with new weapons, vehicles, and gadgets or some new form of interaction with those things. In Halo CE, there was the simple but effective and innovative "golden tripod" of guns, grenades, and melees. In Halo 2 & 3, they added new mechanics that revolved around elements in the sandbox, such as vehicle boarding, dual wielding, single-use deployable equipment, and detachable turrets. They weren't base abilities (i.e., core abilities usable at any time with a press of a button, like a melee attack or jumping), but rather abilities centered around interactions with things external to the player character. Armor abilities, introduced in Reach and carried over into Halo 4 (with some slight changes), were often treated as base abilities (and sprint did become a base ability in Halo 4), but weren't necessarily so, and only a handful of them (sprint in Reach, thruster strafe in Halo 4, and jetpack in both) affected mobility. For one, you were limited to one ability at a time, so maps had to be designed to function well if nobody has sprint, or if nobody has a jetpack. Furthermore, in campaign you found modules to equip to use an armor ability, and even in Reach's multiplayer you could add those modules to the map in Forge instead of having players spawn with an ability. So, while you normally spawns with an AA in Reach and Halo 4, they were functionally more like reusable versions of Halo 3's equipment. And while Halo 5 did focus more on changing the core attributes of the player character, it did have one gameplay change I liked that was an interaction with the sandbox, and that was seat switching in vehicles.

Infinite should innovate along similar lines to those older Halo games, namely through new sandbox elements and interactions with them, such as interesting new weapons or disposable gadgets, or dynamic map elements. They should innovate through AI design. They should innovate through level design and new play modes. But the core abilities should preferably stick to "walk," "jump," "crouch," "shoot," "punch," and "throw grenades," with the combat in general having the slower, more methodical approach of earlier titles instead of the fast-paced twitchy approach of Halo 5.

YouTuber Favyn did a more in-depth video on this subject a couple of years ago if you want to watch it:

XBox One SX / Memory: 10 GB @560GB/s (20% faster than ps5) + 6 GB @336 GB/s. (25% slower than ps5)

Overall Performance : 7,616GB  (10 x 560 GB/s + 6  x 336 GB/s / 16)

------------------------------------------

PS5 / Memory: 16GB @448GB/s (20% slower than Xbox SX) 

Overall Performance : 7,168GB  (16 x 448 GB/s)