Except that Mark talked heavily about how closely they worked with AMD on those "vanilla" parts and that their partnership is likely to influence AMD's approach to future GPU/CPUs, Mark explicitly predicted that whatever new technology the PS5 has at the moment will be the standard for many PCs in the near future.

1 CCX on a chiplet.

Do it SNY. Do it.

It would be cool if that is the case but I will be skeptical since as far as I know and I could be wrong but none of the Zen 2 based cpus are designed that way. I think Zen 3 is where they will start to use 1 ccx per 8 cores. With that being said, it is custom so could be possible.

I dunno I'm getting "2nd GPU" vibes from this rumor. The CPU is already very competent. I don't really see them pushing things that far. Has there ever been a case where a device had next-gen features on a last-gen cpu?

Nah. And lets not delve into assertions that have zero evidence to back it up.

These consoles aren't using chiplets like the PC, so the latency "issue" is an entirely different ballgame.

The issue with talking about Hypothetical's is we don't actually know how Zen 3 performs, for all we know it's another Netburst/Bulldozer moment where there is a regression in performance per clock. (Unlikely. But you get the point.)

There is an R&D cost as features need to be rolled back into older designs, although AMD seems to be a little more flexible on this front than say... Intel or nVidia where AMD has never shied away from making hybrid architectures like the Radeon HD 6000 series/Radeon RX 5000 series with VLIW4/RDNA.
Part of that is due to AMD's design approach which leverages "libraries" to make development of various pieces of silicon more modular.

wccftech is to be taken from a grain of salt, their issue is they are a news aggregator, so they take an article from another outlet, fake or not and thus build an article around it.. And are thus a source to be taken with a pinch of salt.
wccftech is a fantastic outlet for the fake news/conspiracy theorist though... But generally they are far less empirical and reliable than say... Anandtech or Digital Foundry.

The CPU and GPU differences between the consoles are noteworthy. Will they matter? Let the games do the speaking, but there isn't going to be a generational difference between any component in the Xbox Series X or Playstation 5, not the SSD, GPU, CPU or Ram. But there are differences.

What interests me is if Microsoft is offloading API calls onto the command processor again, that provided an massive uplift of CPU capability on the Xbox One X, but will need more system level information to find out.

The issue there is... The PC isn't a single hardware vendor.
AMD RDNA2 and Zen2 are not the defacto "standard" in the PC world.

PC is about to get second generation Ray Tracing, AMD are about to drop Zen3, so it will already be a step ahead of the next-gen consoles before they release.

Nah. Usually what is done is a fixed-function block gets added in order to do some offloading from the CPU... Or there is an increase to clock rates/caches or something... And sometimes an extra CPU core.

This entire thread is talking entirely in hypothetical's, there is zero evidence to substantiate anything at this stage.

If you think we'll see 4k 120fps games,you are in for a rude awakening.

It's either 4k 30fps with eye candy or 4k 60fps with (noticable) shortcuts.

Or 4k 120k with basic graphics, arcade games for example.

Valorant isn't very demanding to be honest. It gets 350fps in 1440p on a 2070super, if the XSX GPU is a bit weaker, with a bit of optomisation 4k120fps isn't inconceivable for a game like Valorant. 

(But yes maxing AAA games out at 4k120fps isn't possible with any amount of money) 2 $1200 GPU's barely get SOTTR to 4k120fps and that is a very well PC optimised game. 

I don't doubt that Sony and Microsoft have a lot of input into AMD's development roadmap, but in practice GPU features are specified by standards bodies like the Khronos group.  A whole load of companies participate there, as it similarly makes no sense for AMD to invest in features that will never be in Nvidia and Intel GPUs and so forth, as game devs mostly avoid non-standard features...  

Don't get me wrong: Sony and Microsoft are huge in the GPU industry, but actually many features are ultimately guided by the requirements of end software developers.

Not just Khronos, but Microsoft as well.
AMD and nVidia work with Khronos and Microsoft to define various standards... Which then later gets rolled into these graphics API's.

That isn't to say that AMD and nVidia don't go out on their own and invent their own propriety technologies... Back in the Playstation 2 era ATI/AMD GPU's had Tessellation which didn't become a standard hardware feature until Direct X 11/Playstation 4.
However the Direct X/OpenGL implementation of Tessellation was not-compatible with AMD/ATI's implementation, it was just different enough to break compatibility.

But then you get things like 3dc+ compression, which ATI/AMD rolled into their own GPU's first, which then later got adopted by Direct X and OpenGL.

It's an industry wide effort that isn't dictated by any singular entity.