RC:
Funny that you are talking about a higher rev figure on a turbo charged car.
I told the same to the 991 Turbo S development team when I provided my "feedback" and you know what they asked me? "What for?". They claimed that higher rev figures are not necessary and even counter-productive on turbo charged cars. They may have a point but of course I cannot verify it, I'm no engineer.
I wonder why McLaren is doing this and why Porsche would consider it to be "counter-productive" and "unnecessary". 
At a guess I'd say that higher revs are deemed to be counter-productive in turbo engines because Porsche is probably aiming primarily for optimised brake specific fuel consumption when developing its engines, and the best bsfc figures are achieved in the intermediate rev range.
(Brake specific fuel consumption is measured in terms of grams of fuel per hp hour, and varies considerably for a given engine with changes of certain parameters under which the fuel is burnt. These parameters include engine revs and boost pressure).
Porsche needs to do this to reduce CO2 emissions, which are directly related to fuel consumption.
CO2 emissions now directly influence the annual taxes due for operating cars in many important markets, so their reduction is much more important to a manufacturer of 200,000+ cars/annum over a large price range, like Porsche, than they are for a manufacturer of just 4,000 cars/annum in a market segment where the level of annual operating tax is not of such great significance to the cars' buyers, such as McLaren.
--
fritz
and I can hear the engine screaming starting from 4,500 rpm and before you know it, I'm changing gears and the noise is already gone 
