They're not even in the same ballpark - the PS5 is more than an order of magnitude better in GPU performance.

Despite how much it does matter, RAM is not the only thing you need for running LLMs - that N150 is not going to run anything but really tiny models at any sort of reasonable speed - certainly nothing that approaches using all of its ram. The GPU in the PS5 is ~25x faster. And if you're running games the RAM doesn't really affect performance at all once you have "enough" for a given game.

You're right that you probably could build something quite a bit faster than a PS5 for the same price though - if you can build/find everything but the GPU for ~250 USD and slap a 16gb 9060xt (~25tflops @32bit compared to the PS5 gpus ~10tflops @32bit) in it for another ~350 USD it should theoretically do a better job - the GPU in the PS5 was on par with mid-high end PC GPUs on launch, but that was like 5 years ago.

The switch and switch 2 are both just powerful enough that developers can release straight ports of their AAA titles that were developed for other systems, but at the cost of significantly degrading framerate/framepacing, visuals, nothing ever running at native resolution etc.

I would much rather it was more like the Wii and all their previous handhelds where the performance gap between it and the other contemporaneous systems was so big that developers had to develop bespoke games for the system, and ports had to be ground up rewrites.

Everything was so much more playable, and by buying those systems you had access to an entirely different library of games to choose from, rather than the current situation where it's just the first party Nintendo titles that differ from what's available on all the other more powerful systems.

This is the bit that seems insane to me. Some of the behaviour of C/C++ compilers when they encounter undefined behaviour seems less like 'this is undefined, we'll just do something vaguely reasonable given the context/produce an error' and more like 'ahaha, the user has fallen into our trap, lets fuck them up'.

I was previously using GLM-5.3 as the orchestrator, after switching to DS anecdotally there was an unnacceptable quality loss, mostly around not taking all the relevant context into account when making decisions, pulling new design out of thin air without discussion too often, and being way too wordy and rambly in documentation despite prompting to avoid it. There's a lot of docs, rulings, core concepts, design philosophy to uphold and DS was just not cutting it.

However, it's perfectly capable of being the sole agent for all of my well specced implementation tasks. I've gone back to GLM as the orchestrator.

You could give me the most well crafted, comprehensive document ever and I would still misread bits of it, or miss some crucial bit of information that contextualises the rest or whatever.

With LLMs I can ask endless dumb questions in a way that just would not be practical otherwise. The quality of the responses doesn't even have to be particularly good for it to be extremely useful - it's basically a turbo charged rubber duck for learning new concepts.