Right but what difference in architecture?? This isn’t Cell, it’s two desktop level architectures (Zen and RDNA), those optimizations should carry over to PC, at least somewhat (and certainly relative to Nvidia!)
hUMA is the largest difference for starters.
PC has to load data into system memory and copy that over to the VRAM over the PCI bus.
This means that anything the CPU touches and GPU touches are largely separate. If there is a large parallel amount of processing that needs to be done on vertex data for animations or what not, the CPU is full responsible for this. As if we asked the GPU to do it, we would have to ensure the GPU had that data, do all the processing, and then copy it back to the CPU. And that round trip is much too long.
in hUMA consoles the CPU and GPU share the same addresses. So while your CPU could be extremely weak at large tasks, because the GPU is there, it can be asked to process the data where it writes the results and CPU can pick up and continue.
There are a great number of cycles saved not having to move data around. In fact, one could assume this is one of the primary benefits of console. Computation prowess can be magnitudes order slower, but data retrieval can be much faster in some aspects, they aren't spending hundreds of cycles copying data about.
Thus we see greater adoption of Async compute on consoles than we do on PCs, because while there are moments the GPU is not using it's CUs, the CPU can sneak jobs in there while it's processing the frame ahead to do some things.
That's the first big one, the second comes down to API. You can just do things on consoles that you can't do on PC. A good example is how we're introducing work graphs on PC in DX12. That type of design pattern existed on consoles for a very long time as far back as XBO. GPU driven rendering is further ahead on console than it is on PC for this reason.
Thirdly, data is moved directly into the shared pool memory on consoles. So developers will be taking advantage of streaming technologies and relying on that nvme to cut data over JIT.
PC's don't quite have a method to drop data from nvme drives directly into the VRAM. So they'll need a different solution that works over 2 pools of memory.
While direct storage certainly speeds things up, and PC drives can be faster, it's not quite the same in terms of how things work, thus porting could be more complex for solutions that are heavily reliant on streaming directly from the nvme.