Satechi does a terrible job of specifying what this dock can and cannot do.

But they advertise it for 2 screens on Macbooks, which means it will very likely built like the Plugable https://plugable.com/products/tbt4-udz.

And that dock needs 2 separate DP connections via TB in order to drive all 4 display outputs.

And AMD’s USB4 implementation only offers a single DP connection, not 2, so only half of the ports can be active at a time.

No, probably not, not with AMD.

See my longer answer here https://www.reddit.com/r/framework/comments/1822ufm/amd\_ryzen\_13\_of\_docking\_stations\_and\_mst/

Have you actually measured any performance difference?

According to my understanding, there should be no performance difference at all (hardware should not care). If there is, it would be caused by games & applications treating the iGPU wrongly, as if it was a dGPU and hence using that value in wrong ways that improve or worsen the performance.

~ 2,14ns difference from the CAS alone. Other timings are also shorter.

Given that total memory latency is often above 80ns not that much of a difference. And that assumes that AMD supports CL40 5600 Jedec. At least those Dimms should also support CL46 5600 Jedec, so that they should still work either way…

Intel supports routing all the available display pipelines through a single DP MST connection (any DP output). While AMD does not themselves publicly document this, they do support the same, just as Nvidia does.

Depending on involved peripherals, you might run into bandwidth limits. 4x 4K60 for example is possible over a single DP connection and Lenovo for example even lists that as supported with the right dock for their AMD laptops.