Thermal bricks / Poroton and insulated clinker - Is that optimal?

Blood sausage or liver sausage is indeed a difference ...

Yes, however, it does happen sometimes that one accidentally writes Poroton instead of aerated concrete. They sound similar, after all. Especially since I later also touched on thermal bricks (Poroton) and praised them as a good compromise between aerated concrete and calcium silicate bricks.

I discussed Thermobrick (Poroton) and praised it as a good compromise between aerated concrete and sand-lime brick.

When I think of "Thermobrick," I specifically mean the filled pore brick. And a "good compromise" between aerated concrete and SLB does not really exist, as both camps like to zealously advocate the "pure doctrine."

I hardly see pore bricks and aerated concrete as comparable: aerated concrete is produced as a homogeneous block of artificial stone foam, whereas pore bricks are made as a chamber profile. There is a big difference, and accordingly little scope for ecumenism.

Sand-lime brick follows more the building pattern of the solid "brick," possibly with a grip hole, and is therefore a whole reformation stage more Catholic than the other two. Perhaps that is why it is best entrusted with exorcising the sound devil.

From my perspective, differences in manufacturing are rather irrelevant. It is more about which advantages and disadvantages a particular wall structure brings with regard to relevant properties:
- Insulation (cold protection)
- Heat protection
- Soundproofing
- Solidity/ safety
- Costs
- Durability (wind, weather...)
- Appearance
- Risk of construction defects

Since aerated concrete naturally has good insulation and weak soundproofing, and sand-lime brick has good soundproofing and weak insulation, the thermal brick is tendentially a compromise of both. It is better in terms of insulation than the sand-lime brick and better in terms of soundproofing and solidity than the aerated concrete.

From my point of view, differences in production are rather irrelevant.

But only from your point of view, because it is no less production than that of apples and pears. A homogeneous foam on the one hand and a chamber profile on the other lead to an uneven comparison.

Since aerated concrete naturally

Naturally nothing at all, since it is synthetic.

has good insulation and poor soundproofing

Regarding soundproofing, I cannot confirm that at all, neither in residential nor in commercial buildings.

Good insulation values are achieved by lightweight building materials with air inclusions. Good sound insulation is found in building materials with high density.

For comparison, typical exterior walls:

Kalksandstein RDK 1.8, 175mm, has U=2.88 at 315 kg/m²
Ytong W PP 1.6-30, 365mm, has U=0.211 at 110 kg/m²
Poroton T8, 365mm, has U=0.211 at 219 kg/m²

Kalksandstein has poor insulation. Therefore, it is combined with insulating materials in "functional walls," or however you want to call it. Proponents then say "the best of both worlds."
Ytong and Poroton are processed monolithically, at least the variants mentioned in the example. Poroton has a significantly higher weight at the same insulation, so in my opinion it is already better than Ytong.
But: Money Money Money! Our house would have been about 40,000€ more expensive with Poroton according to a price indication, so that was quickly off the table. The only advantage, namely the allegedly lower risk of algae growth, is purely a cosmetic issue and can be switched off for many decades for 40,000€. In addition, the KFW 55 wall structure with Kalksandstein+ETICS was thinner = space gain and I wanted Kalksandstein as an interior wall anyway. So it was obvious to stick with one building material.

So, among all the properties a wall structure has, thermal insulation or required wall thickness (=space gain), sound insulation, and price are really important to me.
The other properties come last or don’t matter to me at all (e.g., the mysterious indoor climate, which all manufacturers claim as particularly great for themselves).

The perfect wall structure for me would be: calcium silicate brick - mineral wool - facing brickwork. Basically, a cross-section separated according to functions, where the calcium silicate brick provides an acceptable overall thickness and is ideal for fixtures. Our general contractor does not offer that, so the load-bearing wall is made of 24cm Poroton. We have thick windowsills sound insulation and thermal insulation are top.