The difference between X and S is far larger than the Switch Docked vs Undocked.

For example, the Switch doesn't loose 60% of it's Ram, it's Ram bandwidth doesn't increase by 150% going from undocked to docked... Which impacts the texture and pixel fillrate of the GPU.

I do agree that the Series S will be targeting a lower visual bar, so it can get away with less hardware, but the Switch comparison isn't even in the same ballpark.

We're already seeing games not have an option for 4k 60fps and the cross-gen period isn't even over yet so a game as huge and demanding as GTA 6 is gonna be will only run at 60fps on the PS5 and Series X at a resolution much lower than 4k. Because of that I highly doubt it'll run on the Series S at 1080p 60fps. Due to how anaemic it's gonna be a few years from now late gen there are gonna be cases of games that ran as badly on the Series S as games like Control and Cyberpunk did on the last gen consoles or at least close to that if Microsoft never stops mandating support for it.

The CPUs were weak last gen. It's the reason for the lack of 60fps games. That said, the last couple years, multiplatform games on base Xbox One were struggling. It was almost meme. "I wonder how this will run on the old Xbox One VCR." The gap in graphical power between base Xbox One/S was generational. The One X had over 4.5 times the GPU power of the base model. By comparison the Series X had double the GPU power of the One X.

When it comes to the Series S, memory more than GPU power is the biggest problem. Not only is the memory pool of the One X larger 12GB to 10GB. The One X has a unified pool of RAM. All the RAM in the One X has 326GB/s bandwidth. The Series S has a split memory pool. Something frowned upon by developers to begin with. In the Series S, 8GB of RAM runs 224GB/S and other 2GB of RAM has only 56GB/s of bandwidth. That's slower than the DDR3 in the base Xbox One (68GB/s) that developers were complaining about that last gen. The slow memory pool of the Series X (6GB at 336GB/s) is 50% faster than the "fast" memory pool of the Series S. The biggest complaint I see from developers is having to go from the 13.5 to 14GB of memory available in the PS5 an Series X to the 8GB of much slower RAM in the Series S. The Series S has half the memory bandwidth of the PS5.

As for developer optimization, it's always an issue. Most publishers are content with the bare minimum. It's why having multiple performance targets for a single platform is a problem. It leads to two scenarios. Games being built around the weaker platform and the stronger platform not being leveraged to it's capability. Or the weaker platform getting substandard versions of the games on the stronger one. The former was the case with the Xbox One. The latter is becoming the case with the Xbox Series. Developers that are allowed to go the extra mile are the exception not the rule. Giving them two significantly different performance targets for your platform compounds matters. It's bad enough most games require a day one patch to "optimize" game performance. 

It still result in 2 different specs with which dev have to deal with and they deal with it with very similar aproach. But yeah the difference X/S vs switch dock vs handeld is greater but so is 1080p/4k vs 720p/1080p. 

Also it does not loose 60% of the ram 10/16 is 62 % which is 38% lower not 60%

4k 60 is still the target config for the system, dev wont just start targeting 1440p 30 as the gen progress. If anything it would be quite the contrary with dev having an easier time targeting 4k just like 1080p for the ps4. And as long as the target res is between 1440p+ to 4k the series s should not have any problem with 720p+ tp 1080p+ at same fps.

Rubbish. 3rd party devs don't even bother fully incorporating RDNA2 features which both series X and S support (where some of the crucial ones PS5 does not) and which would greatly improve the performance. 3rd party XS games seem to be an afterthought, since most of the porting time was spent on custom PS5 API. It's especially apparent in games where PS5 port performs better than its series X counterpart, where on paper, it absolutely shouldn't. Xbox port? Oh, they use DX right? ... proceed with copy/paste of unoptimised PC port. And series S is an afterthought of an afterthought. If people can run modern games on a Steamdeck, there's no excuses why wouldn't they run decently on series S. The only positive thing I can think of is that those games were planned years ago, with some priorities in mind and it can get better. Time will tell.

Rubbish. 3rd party devs don't even bother fully incorporating RDNA2 features which both series X and S support (where some of the crucial ones PS5 does not) and which would greatly improve the performance. 3rd party XS games seem to be an afterthought, since most of the porting time was spent on custom PS5 API. It's especially apparent in games where PS5 port performs better than its series X counterpart, where on paper, it absolutely shouldn't. Xbox port? Oh, they use DX right? ... proceed with copy/paste of unoptimised PC port. And series S is an afterthought of an afterthought. If people can run modern games on a Steamdeck, there's no excuses why wouldn't they run decently on series S. The only positive thing I can think of is that those games were planned years ago, with some priorities in mind and it can get better. Time will tell.