Some techtubers debunked that almost instanly. Even if it was better they say that it still has 12 memory channels against 8, and over 2x the speed. And the cpu can acces data directly from the ssd unlike the xbox. Add to that not all data can be compresed, means that the gap is actually bigger than the numbers shown, as data is being able to be used in diferent ways just not possible on xbox. Some are saying that background applications like os and such can be accesed directly freeing up ram. Some also say the 3d audio and more stuff that dont require the rams high speed can also be accesed directly. So the ps5 could use in theory the full 16bg of ram for pure graphics and that would explain the 2 diferent  memory pools on xbox, the slower ram would be used for all that and leave just the 10gb of fast ram solely for graphics and then what ever is left over the slower pool added to that. Some of that is said in the digital foundry video, wich the guy talked directly to cerny. 

It still means not much, its up to sony to prove it and until they do, most third partys might just ignore it. But the devs might have the extra ram acces as they want to make it seamless so it might be automatic and devs just have the full 16gb with no restrictions. 

I don't see why this is still a debate. On paper the X is more powerful while the PS5 is faster. However stuff we are still learning is MS is rumoured to have a better compression solution and might be easier to develop for in comparison to the PS5 etc.
Like most console generations, hardware is only as good as the developers using it. 12 TF or a super fast SSD is useless if devs don't optimise for it.

Also wanted to add, those saying you cannot tell the difference between resolutions is debatable.

As TVs get bigger, so does the differences. 1440p vs 4k on a 32inch monitor will look almost identical, however 1440p vs 4k on a 75inch TV, you will start noticing the difference.

nobody is claiming the ps5 is stronger. at most people are claiming the gap is not that big. What most are saying is that these consoles are very diferent, on paper it wont be reflected but games will probably show what all these promises actually translate to. 

That's really the puzzling thing...

The MS tech is busy "improving the BCPack software" according to his own tweets. However, the SoC is done and goes into production (if it hasn't alread been). So there is no way to change the compander hardware inside the SoC. Are MS using a hybrid software/hardware solution? Who runs the software? If it's the Zen2 core(s), then MS has lost, totally. No matter how "better" BCPack is compared to Kraken, Kraken runs on its own, the Zen2 cores in the PS5 are doing whatever the are doing, noone shoots into their cache (though I guess MS engineers have thought about that. Shooting the cpu cache with useless (de-)compression data is the last thing you'd want to happen, particularly when the cache size is significantly reduced in the consoles).

There really is a lot of information missing on how many "extra gadgets" the XSX SoC has. So far we only know that Cerny has added multiple key gadgets into the PS5's SoC. (In that context I wonder if the sound hardware can play from the ssd, freeing even more memory and cpu cycles. There must be good reasons why they have 6 priority levels in the ssd setup).

Ok... the Raw data throughput of these SSDs is 5.5GB/s for PS5 and 2.4GB/s for XSX. Now even if you take XSX compressed throughput nominal figure (for which includes their better texture compressor) they still end up with 4.8GB/s bandwidth equivalent of data going through that 2.4GB/s pipe. 

All that is still below the raw PS5 data throughput. PS5s compressed data throughput equivalent is 8GB/s - 9GB/s using their own not as good compression but better suited for general-purpose compression, Kraken.

As for resolution... this is one of those areas where for some reason people like to exaggerate or make the thing seem a more than it is. Like how if you listen to the average PC elitist on forums you would quickly think that every PC gamer is gaming 4K@60fps-120fps when in truth only under 5% of them actually have hardware that capable. Or you would think they all have $600+ GPUs when in reality the sweet spot for their GPUs is in the $300-$400 range where most of te GPU sales reside.

How all that relate to consoles? The majority of the TV sales fall into the 55" to 65" size. But even at sizes of 75" you will not be seeing a difference between 1900p/2052p and 4K. Cause yes, thats the worst and best it can be respectively from an 18% compute difference. So i don't even know where the 1440p vs 4K argument comes in with regards to these two next-gen consoles cnsoles because that willNEVER happen. 1440p vs 4K is like a 100% difference. 

I'm going to split the difference here and point out again, third party titles aren't going to have all that much difference for the first couple of years when it comes to either next gen console. Depending on how hardware and software sales go, pubs very well could push devs to put more emphasis on one console brand over the other. We'll have to wait to see how that all plays out as things progress.

In terms of SNY first party exclusives for PS5, it's likely that more than just a few of their studio's are going to put the SSD to better use in terms of load times compared to XBSX, right off the bat, which will be noticeable. After a few years, the SSD load times will improve beyond that, and will also be put to good use in terms of actual game play, so that load times and visuals will be noticeable to gamers.

In terms of MS first party exclusives for XBSX eventually, it's likely that if a studio is given the opportunity to just do whatever they gotta do, to make a game that really puts a well optimized heavy load on the hardware, that it's visuals are going to be noticeable to gamers.

There's more to come however. Lockhart, if it exists and how it's designed compared to XBSX, is quite important in terms of the hardware and what it means for the games. Whether or not Lockhart could hold XBSX back is something that may have to be considered. Maybe MS hit the mark and it's no worry, we'll see.

Both potentially have the opportunity to outshine each other slightly in certain area's when it comes to exclusives depending on how things unfold. When it comes to third party titles, the differences are going to be so small it won't matter to the casual audience whatsoever. The hardcore will be able to choose which slight advantages they prefer, and the brand fans are going to stay the course as per usual.

You're sitting incredibly close to that 32 inch monitor though. I notice the difference on my 55 inch tv sitting at some distance away... Maybe 1.5 metres.

I do intend on getting a 4k monitor eventually when the price/performace ratio is better. It's still not worth it in my opinion. My old 28 inch 1080p monitor is getting on though.

Personally I find more value sitting at 1440P on PC and just driving up the framerates to 120/144fps.

****

Can't believe people are still debating the PS5 vs Xbox Series X specs.
Xbox Series X has the hardware edge that will drive graphics and framerates, it has a faster CPU, faster GPU, faster RAM, it has the overall technical edge.

Playstation 5 has a faster storage system which will allow it to have more expansive worlds that could impact draw distances and the number of on-screen objects, texture quality and so on.

In the end, both platforms are amazing pieces of kit... Now it just comes down to pricing and games.

My thing with all this is that third parties won't have to do shit for the most part. These next-gen consoles have natural benefits. Things that are just better on one platform over the other. And if you run the exact same code on both you would see those natural benefits.

The XSX has a better GPU. To the tune of 18%. What this means is that if you're running platform-specific exact code, that game would maintain its target 4K@60fps more of the time than on the PS5. The PS5 would either drop frames more, or drop to a slightly lower resolution more often. And this drop in rez is going to be to the tune of a 10% - 18% drop in resolution, which would mean that at times the pS5 version would drop to around 1900p/2052p. Everything else in the game would remain the same between the two. There aren't enough differences hardware to allow for a much larger difference than that. Devs don't have to tweak the XSX to get it to perform better in this regard. It just will.

Now the PS5 has a better IO throughput. Two times better throughput. Period. Nw that means that anything they have in od that has to do with moving data (which includes loading and streaming), would simply happen twice as fast on the PS5 than on the XSX. This is not something they have to code for either. Its just a natural benefit of the hardware being there. 

I'd probably do something similar if we are given more choice on how we play next generation. If I could pick a 1440p with higher detail, effects... whatever, I'd most certainly go that route over 4k.

For single player games, for an example, Senua's saga, I'd even go to 30fps.