Can you link to a source for that?
Because Xbox listed those as features they have. Not as features other's don't have.

The only thing they said on the subject was "Xbox Series X|S are the only next-generation consoles with full hardware support for all the RDNA 2 capabilities AMD showcased today."

That can very well just be referring to Direct X, which I've also explained why that would be the only thing Microsoft could know for a fact that PS5 doesn't have.

If you also want to talk about PR, they specified "showcased today". Did AMD showcase every feature of their chip on that particular day?
If they did, then again, that could just mean DirectX. If they didn't, then PS5 could have more of the features that AMD chose for their solution than Xbox.

Not that that matters anyway, because all three were developed alongside each other, at the same time, and all three chose the solutions that best suited their environment. With perhaps the exception of DirecX since that's Microsoft's tech.

Pot calling the kettle black lol. Custom is usually better than default, boasting about having the default feature set doesn't mean anything ;)

Sure we'll find out (later when we actually get next gen games) and yes on paper the X has more juice. However the 5 doesn't need to support a gimped little brother throughout the gen... One camp gets to optimize for one spec, the other has to make sure it runs well on both while not disappointing either set of users. Look at Cyberpunk, now delayed again because the base consoles are giving problems. The S is the new base console next gen.

If these things are indeed part of DirectX12, then that explains why MS would know for a fact that PS5 doesn't have these things. 
But regarding PR, they said "Xbox Series X|S are the only next-generation consoles with full hardware support for all the RDNA 2 capabilities AMD showcased today."

Did AMD showcase every feature of their chip on that particular day?
If they did, then again, that could just mean DirectX. If they didn't, then PS5 could have more of the features that AMD chose for their solution than Xbox.

Not that that matters anyway, because all three were developed alongside each other, at the same time, and all three chose the solutions that best suited their environment. With perhaps the exception of DirecX since that's Microsoft's tech.

Seems like you haven't read any of my posts?
Xbox is also custom RDNA2. And it doesn't sound like you know what 'full RDNA2' means here, so please read my posts, and refute anything I said if you think anything sounds inaccurate. And explain why.

Remember when Xbox One S won 2 NPD's in a row and they made that commercial stating "the best selling console in the US"? Even though PS4 had sold several million units more. Technically their statement was true. But it was all about what they left out of that statement. And it's essentially the same thing here.

AMD's chip is not a standard that Xbox and PS5 strive to follow. They all developed these technologies together at the same time. But because only AMD named theirs "RDNA2", it can sound that way when Xbox and Sony's chips are described as "RDNA2 based". In reality RDNA2 is also XSX and PS5 based.
Because as Mark Cerny pointed out, AMD may use some of the features that were developed for PS5 (and Series X).

They all chose what was best for their solution. Xbox and PS5 being consoles with set hardware gives them the opportunity to do things with their chip that isn't feasible for a PC GPU that has to account for a wide variety of hardware configurations. That's why Sony's and Xbox's chips have more features.

Custom could mean anything. Most industry people connected imply it’s a “RDNA 1.5” but if we gotta wait we gotta wait. It’s amazing how people say power doesn’t matter but I’ve never seen a fan group cling to the power narrative quite like what I’m seeing this year. Not you but in general. 

Well now we going into other territory. That’s FUD imo regarding Series S. CPU and SSD parity mean that only resolution, FPS, and some graphical fidelity take a hit. Much like PC games on Ultra settings vs medium settings. It was designed with scalability in mind.  

Can you confirm the recent delay was due to last gen versions? Just seems like unusual circumstances of crunch coupled with working under pandemic conditions. 

Microsoft released this statement yesterday. But Sony are 'being quiet' because they didn't respond within 24 hours?

How about instead of throwing shade on other people on other forums, you respond to the people that engage with you here first?
I responded to you a few times about some statements you've made. Namely regarding the meaning of RDNA2 and the notion that PS5 was somehow not involved in the development for as long as Xbox, but you just ignore it and keep making the same kind of comments instead.

Seems like you never had any intention of having proper conversation. But you really need to respond.

Let me also point something out about the Github leak. Or rather the theory about the 2019 PS5.
Aside from the fact that 'the leak was right about some things', the entire basis for the theory about PS5 originally being a 2019 system lost all merit in 2020.

The whole premise for that theory was to explain why PS5 had fewer compute units, etc.
Another theory was that it was because Series X would be more expensive than PS5.

Well, now everyone knows why. Sony focused more money towards the SSD and its controller instead. (Both the SSD controller and the actual controller.) Different priorities. But both are $500 systems with reasonable price tags for the hardware inside.

So the whole idea about the 2019 release is baseless nonsense (and for other reasons I've mentioned before), and was jumping to conclusions.
And in the case of this thread, isn't it obvious that PS5 would not have DirectX?

There's no mystery here.

The RX 6000 GPU line is going to perform better than the RX 5000 line no matter how you slice it. And that performance comes from all of those small adjustments and features that the RX 5000 was missing. If more performance equals "marketing fluff" to you, well, okay then.

No, they are not exactly the same as one offers better performance, and again, you keep repeating that as if better performance doesn't directly impact the end user experience.

If these things are indeed part of DirectX12, then that explains why MS would know for a fact that PS5 doesn't have these things. 
But regarding PR, they said "Xbox Series X|S are the only next-generation consoles with full hardware support for all the RDNA 2 capabilities AMD showcased today."

Did AMD showcase every feature of their chip on that particular day?
If they did, then again, that could just mean DirectX. If they didn't, then PS5 could have more of the features that AMD chose for their solution than Xbox.

Not that that matters anyway, because all three were developed alongside each other, at the same time, and all three chose the solutions that best suited their environment. With perhaps the exception of DirecX since that's Microsoft's tech.

I'm sure they're being quiet because they've created superior methods than AMD themselves. This is probably why DF didn't see any VRS in PS5 games, the custom solution is just too good.

Also JRPG, while you're quoting GeordieImp or whatever, make sure you also quote the many posts where he claims X|S does not utilize RDNA2 tech and that PS5 is actually RDNA3, which will be revealed in a surprise showcase at the AMD event. (narrator: it wasn't)

Not once have I talked about performance, I have talked about hardware features.

They are the same thing.
I have already elaborated on how the approaches differ prior.

It's just like Tessellation, AMD and nVidia approached the issue very differently (Truform vs Polymorph vs Evergreen Graphics Engine), they all offered the same feature in the end and yes they both had different levels of performance, but I am not talking about performance.

But these features are all about performance, each and every one of them was designed with one thing and one thing only in mind; performance. If you were expecting something else, you're going to be disappointed.