Given how Sony handled the PS4's development they most likely asked developers what kinds of improvements they would want over the launch system. Given the capabilities of AMD's latest GPU tech and potential of the CPU Zen architecture or some mobile version of that I doubt Neo has the level of performance that the rumors state it to (keeping the same core Jaguar CPU architecture never made any sense when they were shooting to improve hardware performance in general).

The very people that have leaked details about Neo prior to Andrew House's confirmation of Neo's existence have also said that Sony has more than one option for this updated PS4.

Leaks of the RX 480's power consumption and performance tests show it to be capable of 5.8Tflops, running on only 100 watts, so with improvements to the CPU architecture in Neo and incorporating this new Polaris GPU Architecture Sony could easily have a 5.8TFlop system, with at least a moderate improvement to the CPU, if not 2+ times the performance of that part in a system the same size as the launch PS4.
If Sony wants to overclock things and the system's case design isn't set in stone then they could build a bigger box and push for 4K in PS4 level games or maybe 1440p at 60FPS, with the RX 480 and a Zen mobile CPU from AMD.

Sony doesn't have to wait, the tech for this could go into production soon and Sony could still meet a Fall 2016 release window.
Given that Microsoft has shown their hand Sony has nothing to really worry about, especially considering the level of games they have coming this year and beyond, the addition of a new, better device is just another platform to run PS4 games to appeal to an even bigger demographic of people.

I honestly believe Sony cut the PS: Neo reveal from their conference after MS announced. They are now going to wait to find out the specs they are going to have to compete with. Kind of bogus on their part imo. IIRC their 2016 presentation was 78min give or take. As their show last year, 2015, was over 90min.

Sony officially said they were not going to talk about the Neo about a week prior to E3.

If it's Polaris based that's not happening. And if it's Nvidia based, it's going to be supremely expensive. GTX 1080 can just do that on most games.

That's quite the sensationalist article you quoted.

Anyway, it's not like Microsoft can say anything about it, right?  Not after Spencer said pretty much the same thing at the start of the generation.

When I asked him about the GPU differential and consequence on long-term performance for Xbox One in an emailed follow-up to our interview, he wrote:

"The Xbox One architecture is much more complex than any specific feature or component. The proof is ultimately in what gamers see and experience, and with the diversity and quality of games we have at launch—games like Ryse: Son of Rome and Forza Motorsport 5—we are delivering experiences that demonstrate the power capable only on Xbox One."  http://kotaku.com/whats-next-for-the-xbox-one-1471212785?utm_campaign=Socialflow_Kotaku_Twitter&utm_source=Kotaku_Twitter&utm_medium=Socialflow

AsGryffynn said:   

Zen based, since it seems to fit perfectly with projections for it and AMD reports... 

Sony brought the industry in a direction that pushes more violence, more sex and more glamor.

When I played games, we played games that immersed us in a world of adventure. Nowadays, if you look at games that sell, they are filled with sex, violence, vanity and often lack gameplay! If the number of gamers goes up, it doesn't necessarily mean that it's a good thing!

More people nowadays watch movies today than ever before. Yet the movies are getting worse and worse: more remakes, more sequels, it's a money-making machine.

I'm not making things up, you can look at the numbers. When gaming was at its height for me, I was playing games like Zelda, Donkey Kong Country, Final Fantasy II, Star Fox, Starcraft, Mario 64, Final Fantasy VII, F-Zero, Street Fighter, Megaman, Tetris.

Now if you look at the games in the top spot, they are all dark or violent. CoD, GTA, Watchdogs, TLoU, GT.

Sure the audience got bigger, but the games, to me, are less interesting.

So "More people play games thus Sony is better", to me, is not a good argument.