As for bias, if you can't see that DF is obviously biased for MS, that probably says a a lot about your own biases. During the 360/PS3 era it was all positives for 360 in comparisons. Looking at any fine detail on PS3 games to show how they were inferior. When the PS4 was on top we got excuses for the XBO, questioning if resolution was really that important. An ever slight frame or two advantage on the XBO was more important than a increase in resolution from 720p/900p to 1080p. Usually ending each comparison by saying you'll be happy on either console, when before they were saying which console they recommended to get the game on. The 2nd the XBO X came out, it was here to "save the day."

Now we jump to this gen. DF were helping spread the FUD about PS5's variable clock rate, even having a flawed comparison using RDNA1 chips. When MS showed off their poor looking flagship title, Halo Infinite, quickly they had an excuse vid out, claiming most of the problem was a lack of raytracing. When people pointed out many other things, Alex said he was just too tired to go into it all. Keep in mind, this was just after zooming in really close on PS5 footage to show the raytracing reflections were lower quality or were missing objects. And now after we've had a few next-gen comparisons where they seemed pleasantly surprised about PS5 outperforming XSX, in this video they sound more troubled by it. It's almost as if they either realize that they shouldn't be excited by a system punching above its weight or they were told it's something they shouldn't seem excited by.

Just ask yourself, where are any of the videos making excuses for the way any game performs or looks on PlayStation?

If you honestly think that DF is Xbox biased, then you are probably too far lost to be helped at this point.

Digital Foundry regularly sings praises for the technical ability of Sony's 1st party studios, they particularly love Guerilla's Decima engine, praising it's capabilties in both their Horizon Zero Dawn and Death Stranding analysis videos. They praised the performance of multiplats on base PS4 for pretty much the whole generation, and recently have been highly critical of the poor performance of multiplats on base Xbox One (and rightly so, it has fallen to 720p-900p with less than 30 fps on many games the past year or two). Just recently they released a video singing praises about how good PS5's back compat is.

On the other hand, they also praise the technical ability of some of Microsoft's 1st party studios, particularly The Coalition's mastery of the Unreal Engine. They rightly point out the significant performance advantages of Xbox One X over PS4 Pro.

In other words, they are pretty balanced in their coverage, not really biased one way or the other. Rightly calling a console that is more powerful than another console, be it PS4 over Xbox One or Xbox One X over PS4 Pro, does not make them biased. Participating on the discord for a popular Xbox podcast does not make them biased. 

Even if they claimed that, it seems highly doubtful based on their results here. There is nothing in the specs that suggests that the gap in performance on a multiplat should be in favor of the PS5, the latest stats have the Series X beating the PS5 in just about every on-paper metric, CPU speed, RAM speed, bus width, pixels per second, texels per second, triangles per second, rays per second. At the very least Series X and PS5 should have near identical performance. The only thing that can explain a performance gap like we're seeing on these launch games is simply bad optimization on Series X, and the best explanation for poor optimization, on games like AC and Dirt 5, which Microsoft had the marketing rights on, is that dev kits and dev tools released too late for developers to optimize properly ahead of release.

Digital foundry said it was likely a bug.

I would assume the Playstation 5 was supposed to take a visual hit in that mode and didn't... And will likely be rectified at a later date.
The Playstation 5 also has another bug which impacts the dynamic range... Hopefully that gets fixed as well.

Are you referring to someone here, or people from other sites?

I can't say I know about most game engines, but the latest graphics cards at the upper end of the spectrum, and not really the standard yet.

As for the SSD, when it comes to building worlds without having to create extra walls, mazes, ladders, etc, I would rarely ever expect that from third party multiplatform games, because it would literally be designing two completely different games in those areas. But for quickly streaming in and offloading expensive assets like high res textures, as you normally would with RAM, I can't say because I don't know how easy or difficult that is made to be on PS5. I only saw one developer theorizing about it.

The rumor of the later dev kits may be accurate. Though the Dirt 5 developer seemingly said they got both dev kits around the same time, so I think the weird last gen looking geometry is due to something else. Final Fantasy 7 Remake also has a similar glitch with some of its textures.
Though if SX is going to play catchup with making it more easy to develop for, the question is how long that will take since PS5's development tools will keep evolving at the same time. Though if SX has more leeway to make up for, their development may be more rapid.

Even if they claimed that, it seems highly doubtful based on their results here. There is nothing in the specs that suggests that the gap in performance on a multiplat should be in favor of the PS5, the latest stats have the Series X beating the PS5 in just about every on-paper metric, CPU speed, RAM speed, bus width, pixels per second, texels per second, triangles per second, rays per second. At the very least Series X and PS5 should have near identical performance. The only thing that can explain a performance gap like we're seeing on these launch games is simply bad optimization on Series X, and the best explanation for poor optimization, on games like AC and Dirt 5, which Microsoft had the marketing rights on, is that dev kits and dev tools released too late for developers to optimize properly ahead of release.

Yes it's still early in the console generation, on specs it seems like xbox should atleast be on par if not slightly better. However ps5 has the ssd advantage, has unified ram but not split, and supposedly better i/o system. if ps5 does indeed have the better i/o, then it may over come the cu count advantage/teraflop of the series x.

The Series X has unified memory, it's not split pools.
It has different memory locations which operate at different speeds which are exposed to developers to prioritize depending on need. Or not. Entirely up to them.

The SSD will assist in streaming of texturing and meshes and other assets... This has been a "thing" in consoles for generations now, it's not a new concept, just the storage has gotten faster.
The Playstation 5 has a higher pixel fillrate due to it's ROP's being clocked higher.
I expect the Playstation 5 to have a few notable advantages because of those hardware advantages.

Otherwise in pure compute scenarios the Xbox Series X not only has the brute-strength advantage but also some efficiency advantages such as Variable Rate Shading which gives it the edge for things like global illumination lighting and shading.

So it really depends on the game and the developers goals and even the game engine on which hardware platform will have the edge visually.
It's going to be a very interesting console generation that is for sure.

In the end... An SSD isn't a replacement for Ram though, computer systems have a hierarchy of memory ranging from smallest+fastest+most expensive per byte to largest+slowest+cheapest per byte... And that hierarchy exists to hide latency and bandwidth limitations.
The SSD improves that lowest common denominator, excited to see what it means for geometric complexity going forward.

What about the ps5 having double throughput?  What will that mean for games in the future? Also we still don't know much of the i/o complex on the ps5, or how much L cache it has.