Of all the race engines through here, there is very little evidence that this will actually cause any problems in the long run, it is quite miniscule in percieved effect. If I was to guess, I would say that they probably adjusted the size of the block to head coolant holes. The Gen-3 engines had the same size holes front to back, while the Gen-4 has smaller holes in the front than the back to push flow rearwards. I would bet that they changed the hole sizing to to adjust biasing cylinder to cylinder.
All that said, the Gen-4's had headgasket problems in some cases, that SRT has apparently credited towards the cooling system "hot spots"- but I don't agree. It was a bad gasket design, I saw possible issues the first time I saw them. Cylinders running a few degrees warmer than their sisters dont cause head gasket failures unless there is a head gasket weakness, or a major cooling system failure upstream.
This could be fact or fiction, but, at VOI the SRT engineers said something like this:
"We found the Gen IV engine had an issue with uneven block cooling, leading to some cylinders running hotter than others. We spent a lot of time on the GEN V engine so that it would not have the same problem"
He spent quite a bit of time explaining the pains they went through to achieve the new cooling scheme. I am fairly sure he indicated that since they were pushing the envelope further they wanted to improve the cooling gradient across the block.
There is another issue, I am sure since they went to the composite intake, the heads and therefore the combustion chamber would have seen some temp rise from the reduction in heat sinking. This could have been the main reason they looked at the cooling efficiency.