Whilst what you're saying is entirely possible, it also isn't particularly logical. Why would Sony pursue a much higher clock frequency that would itself require many additional considerations (eg higher thermal dynamics, more demanding cooling design and costs, extra power usage, riskier longevity, yields etc), if not for the fact that in real world testing they found it to offer tangible benefits? And why would they not give it the relevant voltages or power considerations to unlock that added potential performance?
We're not talking about some teenager overclocking their GPU for the first time (hence forgetting to adjust voltages to account for the extra power load), we're talking about a multi billion dollar tech company that actually helped make the GPU in the first place.
Sony didn't "simply incorporate" an AMD RDNA 2 GPU into the PS5, it helped build it
Sometimes it feels like some of you are for whatever reason alluding to or implying potential worst cases with the PS5, almost to a level of naivete, as if Sony were floundering with the hardware side of things and had flagrantly, not carefully decided some of these hardware choices.
