....as for PS5 and (non-embedded) ReRAM...
It's actually somewhat possible it can happen. I mentioned before but let's do it again: Intel sells DC Persistent Memory (DRAM-style implementation) Optane memory to server markets at 128GB for about $842 (low end) to $893 (high end). Per GB breaks down to $6.58 - $6.97. If we liken the pricing model to, say, modern GPUs, we can assume that Intel sells to server markets for 2.5x increase over the actual BOM. So the potential actual production costs per GB of DC PCM is more like $2.63 - $2.77.
However, since these are enterprise big data and server markets, they may actually pay a larger premium for the components, so let's reduce the per GB MSRP by 3x. That would potentially leave production costs per GB to $2.19 - $2.31. And let's assume ReRAM, being a comparable technology with somewhat better performance, has a max 5% additional cost to that. So that would leave per GB cost of ReRAM production for a company like Sony (who likely wouldn't need to license out an IP since IIRC they already make some ReRAM of their own) to around $2.29 - $2.42.
$2.29 to $2.42, for one GB of ReRAM. Now let's say Sony has a BOM per PS5 set to $600 (and they're planning to sell at $499). 64GB of ReRAM would only cost them about $146.56 - $154.88 to implement. Comparatively that's not TOO much more than they're looking to pay for, say, 24GB of GDDR6, and would still leave them with between $445.12 and $453.44 to cover the rest of the system components and production costs. That's likely more than plenty.
And I'm simply being conservative with the cost per GB to manufacture; at the quantities Sony would produce ReRAM for, and the fact they could likely handle most of the production themselves and won't need to license out an IP, they could probably see closer to a reduction on MSRP by 3.5x in terms of actual per GB production costs. That would see actual per GB production costs down to $1.97 - $2.08. (factoring in a 5% additional cost vs. Intel's tech). So in such a case, 64GB of ReRAM would cost them about $126.08 to $133.12 which in turn would leave them with even more of the BOM for other components, maybe even a bit more ReRAM if they felt like it.
Anyone still saying ReRAM for PS5 is virtually impossible (or even something analogous to it for XSEX; MS still hasn't revealed all the specs yet) isn't seeing the forest from the trees. It's a real possibility, and would offer a hefty bump in overall system performance while also offering something that is not present on the PC side at this moment and likely won't be until after these systems launch. For reference, the only similar offering in the consumer PC space is Intel's slower storage-style Optane memory that's closer to NAND than DRAM in terms of performance, but still notably faster than NAND. It's offered in 32GB and 64GB capacities but has only seen "very soft" uptake from PC consumers, mainly because of the fact there aren't any games or multimedia software designed with its use in mind, leaving it appealing mainly only for content creators.
Don't be surprised if you see a ReRAM implementation in PS5 around reveal time and/or MS mentions something like it present in the XSEX (possibly in partnership with Intel). I think the problem some are having in comprehending this being a possibility is that they're thinking of ReRAM like another take on conventional RAM. No, that's not quite what ReRAM is. It doesn't compare whatsoever with HBM, GDDR6 or even upcoming DDR5 in terms of speed and latency, which is why it's viewed more as "hovering" closer to a cold storage solution but still "hot" enough in performance to line up with older volatile memories like DDR4. Of course, it has the permanent storage capabilities of a SSD or HDD, just with much better endurance levels, read, and write capabilies than the NAND in general SSDs.
If you don't view it as an "L5" cache similar to what GDDR6 will be in the upcoming systems (I'm assuming they'll have some off-chip L4 cache in MBs; if not then the GDDR6/DDR4 etc. you can just say are the L4 cache), but as an "L6 cache" sitting between the GDDR6 and NAND-based SSD (which would be the "L7" or cold-storage cache level), then that helps a lot in seeing its role in the system architecture. And again, we're just talking non-embedded ReRAM in this (embedded ReRAM is something of a different topic).