I can use the same argument and suggest Cerny tell only what PS fans want to hear.
seems you must open your eyes and correctly read.
When i said Microsoft tell what MS fans want to hear that's related you're quoting me an article from dirt 5 dev on MS blog. It's like the same dev had done the interview for Sony Blog. We had have the same sentence.
And concerning Cerny if you are better placed than him to talk of his architecture i'm impatient to read you.
When it comes to software vs hardware approach, Sony usually try to build hardware for every problem they encounter (they even build PS2 chip into PS3 in the past), while MS prefer software approach. If both methods can achieve the same goal then I dont care how exactly they are doing it.
But that's insane you can achieve by software what is done by hardware.
For SSD for example explain to me how can magically you will have a RAW data transfer up from 2.4Gb/s (XSX) to 5.5Gb/s (PS5) just by software method. That's weird to read.
MS has the upper hand in software without any doubts and they dont even need to build GPU with the same CUs multiplier just to run BC games (thats the reason why PS5 still has 36 CUs). Xbox one x runs BC games (xbox one games and x360) even better than the real hardware and I bet it will be the same on XSX. After reading countless articles about XSX it looks like MS enginees have also adressed I/O bottlenecks in their console (just in a different way). For example directstorage API only require 10% of one CPU core and probably achieve what a dedicated chip on PS5 does.
What you're telling that CU are there for BC. you are just hilarious?