Te dejo aquí una cita de Jeffram, un forero de Resetera al que han felicitado muchos usuarios por este mensaje:
There are 3 reasons to question the implications of the leaked documents:
1. They are full of mistakes and inaccuracies
There are files in wrong folders, there are sub folders and wrong folders. Again, when people say these are legitimate, they mean that this is what is legitimately in the files, not that the files are correct or accurate all the time.
The biggest issue is that they claim Spakrman (Lockhart) is 56CUs. Every reason you have to believe Oberon is PS5, you have to believe that Sparkman is Lockhart. Sparkman BC mode indicates it can replicate a One S.
However confident you are that PS5 is 36 CUs, must must be equally confident that Lockhart is 56CUs. Or the other way around, how ever skeptical you are that these leaks confirm Lockhart is 56CUs, you must be equally skeptical these leaks confirm PS5 is 36CUs.
2. The leaks if taken at face value, fly in the face of every credible insider we have, including develeper sources and industry sources, that say the Series X and PS5 are very close in power.
We've had Jason Schreier News Editor of Kotaku, Andrew Reiner Executive Editor at Game Informer, Our own Mods, and Vetted industry insider and veteran Klee, and other insiders all say the consoles are close in power.
They specifically claim PS5 and Scarlett were close in power according to those sources. And All of that is in the same time window these leaks are from, which according to DF is the point where it's too late to make changes. None of them have come out and said the the tables have turned. The Github leaks are new to us, but they are actually older than the leaks we've gotten from insiders.
So, Actual insiders who actually know about the target specs of the PS5 and Xbox Series X (rather than drawing conclusions from indirect and uncontextualized data points) with a network of sources (instead of an interns notepad) are saying something to the contrary of what the leak indicates at face value.
3. The documents, if taken at face value, don't pass the sniff test, and an alternative makes more sense
The test were done without VRR and RT, when we know that at the very least PS5 has RT. This means that the tests we have access to are not the full PS5 in at least one way.
36CUs at 2GHz, is not a reasonable way to hit 9.2TFs, if that's the target. Every bit of historical and contextual data we have for consoles points to a wide and slow approach to console APUs. Efficiencies, Thermals, Cooling Costs, and reliability have all proven to be reasons that trump a lower sized and faster APU. Why would Sony feel any different? What technology would change the equation? I'm not aware of any, so I don't expect that approach to change.
36CUs would also make this the smallest APU Sony has made in a decade. In a world where Sony is dominating in terms of sales and profitability, where they've come out and aid that PS5 is going to be Niche product aimed at the hardcore who what the best and latest, where that is corroborated by their rumoured bleeding edge SSD tech, a small APU doesn't make sense.
Digital Foundry Stated in the article that many BC test are being done. If that's true, this could be a BC test right? Well, what would that look like. Presumably, they would want to test a Native PS4 mode, a PS4 Pro mode, and like the PS4 Pro had.... A PS4 Pro Boost mode. What would the Boost mode test look like?
A PS4 Pro Boost mode compatibility test would look like this: Exactly the same CUs as the PS4 Pro, An unlocked "full" clock, no RT or VRS hardware activated. What do we have in the leak? 36CUs (exactly the same as the PS4 Pro), 2Ghz, the rumoured full clock of the PS5, No RT and no VRS indicated.
The leaks makes little sense as the Full PS5 hardware, indicating you shouldn't take it as a certainty of the PS5s total performance, and a lot of sense that it's a boost mode PS4 Pro compatibility test so that possibility can't be dismissed.