Thanks. You may like having a look at SAE Technical Papers:Renesis did not make more torque with the side ports, they used higher static compression and intake plenum controls to do that.
Turner, J., Turner, M., Vorraro, G., and Thomas, T., "Initial Investigations into the Benefits and Challenges of Eliminating Port Overlap in Wankel Rotary Engines," SAE Int. J. Adv. & Curr. Prac. in Mobility 2(4):1800-1817, 2020, SAE MOBILUS.
Turner, J., Turner, M., Islam, R., Shen, X. et al., "Further Investigations into the Benefits and Challenges of Eliminating Port Overlap in Wankel Rotary Engines," SAE Technical Paper 2021-01-0638, 2021, SAE MOBILUS.
and 2004-01-1790 Ohkubo, M., Tashima, S., Shimizu, R., Fuse, S. et al., "Developed Technologies of the New R Rotary Engine (RENESIS)"
$33 to download from SAE.org Membership not needed. Mazda preferred the side intake ports because it provided more stable idle and better low rpm, low load functioning, good for street cars, but all experimental data indicate Peripheral Intake Port is better from performace point of view, this is the Aircraft Engine field.
The Renesis has several side intake ports, this provides more intake area, but a bended path in mix flow impairs MEP. Renesis exhaust ports are also on side, eliminating overlap, loss of fresh mix into exhaust, recirculation of exhauts gases into intake time.