Console GPU Power Compared: Ranking Systems By FLOPS

What is a teraFLOP?

Thanks in large part to Microsoft's upcoming Xbox One X console, we've been hearing a lot about teraFLOPS lately, but what exactly is a teraFLOP? And which consoles have the most?

We're going to answer those questions and rank the consoles by their FLOPS in this gallery.

[Jaypi03]

Oh boy, I can smell the console fanboy arguments incoming...

[MegamanXXX]

The laptop cpu is still the bottleneck for the PS4 pro and One X. What a waste in power. Oh well as least one console has more games and exclusives which matters the most

[MegamanXXX]

Come on bro the Jaguar cpu has been outdated for years. I thought you new. I guess you will figure out the hard way. 😊

[dcbronco]

We have yet to see the benefits of building dx12 into the hardware. This first generation of X games will most likely not use that feature to the fullest. If it does increase draw calls and drastically reduces CPU overhead as advertised the CPU on X won't be as much of a bottleneck as some think. One of the key features is eliminating the need for the CPU to even request certain things of the GPU. If the number of requests needed is significant, we will see a lot more 60fps games on X.

[Sircolby45]

"We have yet to see the benefits of building dx12 into the hardware."

Yeah, yeah, yeah...We've heard it all before. ESRAM was also going to be a magical performance boost as well we just needed to wait and see! *yawn* This is coming from what was an Xbox fan, this whole wait and see marketing crap is all talk. The simple fact of the matter is they put in a flashy GPU that is still going to be held back by a trash CPU. You need 2 parts to the equation for 60 FPS in everything and MS chose to only upgrade one of them knowing that they could sit on top of a mountain beating their chest about Teraflops.

[dcbronco]

Colby lack of bandwidth hurt 360. But the lesser GPU seemed capable of keeping pace. All indications are Microsoft is getting the most out of their architecture with X and that is because they simulated the architecture before making any chips. So if building dx12 into the architecture doesn't make a difference I'm not sure why they would go through the trouble of adding it once fabrication was about to start. This fear of Microsoft doing something right is said. Get over it. This is a new era and the old days when architectures were theoretical and mistakes didn't show till it was too late are over. If you plan to just go with premature Microsoft hate you're in for a long and frustrating gaming future. Good luck with that.

[xsta1ker]

@MegamamXXX lol x1x has the exclusives probably not your type but still have some dam good exclusives
and you speak of the cpu bottle necks in pro & x1x but pro will bottle neck 1st in every game
x1x also absolutely destroys the pro in gpu and memory department not even close
this means even when x1x is not hitting native 4k it will still be hitting ultra pc setting with all it's 4k assets
and unlike the pro witch scales up from a lower resolution like1440p 1800p and checkerboards up to hit 4k
the x1x always starts at native 4k and will scale down when the games get to demanding
and thats a big difference from the pro so lets all be realistic the x1x is far better then the pro
im embarrassed for sony to even having to compete power wise with x1x because realisticly
it is no competition and well worth the extra 100$.

[DiRtY]

I love it.

MegamanXXX in the comment-section at N4G.com knows more about building systems and customised chipsets than the good people at Sony and Xbox.

You know, the ones with the Master's degree at the wall and the $10,000 paycheck per month.

[babadivad]

It's not a laptop cpu(I keep having to say this). It's a netbook cpu, which is worse.

[dantesparda]

@dcbronco

"We have yet to see the benefits of building dx12 into the hardware."

Oh you mean the same one thats in the regular X1?

https://twitter.com/digital...

Read'em and weep, but people's ignorance doesnt stop them from believing in bs.

To all that dont know, the so called built in Dx12 hardware also exist is the reg. X1

[OB1Biker]

Indeed. The first comment on Gamespot set the 'I own the truth' tone haha

[OB1Biker]

yea my bad ; it wasnt the first comment.
It was comparing PS4 launch with the incoming X launch in a silly way

[dirkdady]

Jeeze who cares which mid gen refresh is more powerful when the PS4 is the most powerful from the base model. The pro and X are novelty items that devs won't really code from them ground up to take advantage of.

[OB1Biker]

@dirkdad
I tend to agree with your comment.
That brings up a few questions.
What is the life cycle for PS4 slim and Pro? Will they stop production at about the same time?
Will the X be in production for longer? Or will stop at about the same date though with a shorter life given its launching a year later? Possibly meaning either confirmation of a different approach to generation or a Uturn from Ms?

[mcstorm]

OB1Biker Microsoft have said they are not doing gens any more so we would see the Xbox one being dropped in terms of new games the X replaces the one and the Y will replace the X in terms of price and power where Sony have said they will carry on with gens so ide expect the pro to carry on getting limited support like the PS3 did. Only time will tell though

[MagicBeanz]

As if that wasn't the point of this unnecessary article in the first place.

[zackeroniii]

oh boy, i can smell the xbox one exclusives coming...

oh wait.

[Arnon]

Wrong comment placement.

[ABizzel1]

Why would there be any arguments, it is what it is. The newer the system the greater the FLOPS in most scenarios.

There are a couple of things that are wrong with 2 platforms on this list and that's the PS3 and the Switch. The PS3 had higher FLOPS than what is listed, but the list is based solely on the GPU FLOPS and not the overall system since the PS3's CPU helped carry weight for the GPU as well. Xbox 360 was a bit higher as well too, since it's CPU was also capable of doing offload GPU work, but significantly less than the PS3's.
(PS3 total = 408.8 GFLOPS Cell was 180 GFLOPS on it's own, and as capable as the PS4 / XBO current CPUs)
(XB360 total = 359 GFLOPS which I believe also had something to do with the name)

The other is the Switch which should be much lower than 1 TFLOP considering the clock speeds have been tested and shown to be dramatically reduced on the console, and the Tegra X1 processor is only capable of producing 1 TFLOP with it's original clocks of 1 GHz, which the Switch is running at 3/4 the performance when docked, and 1/3 when undocked making handheld mode around PS360Wii U performance ranges, but with 4GB of RAM vs 512MB and 2GB, and a more capable CPU than the Wii U.
(Switch = Handheld mode 310 GFLOPS / Docked 768 GFLOPS)

Everything else is pure fact.

[darthv72]

Dreamcast was ahead of its time and really held its own against others in that gen. I can only imagine how things would have progressed if Sega had not dropped out.

[Jaypi03]

True, I still want to see a dreamcast 2 with a lot of Sega's IP's they have enough to carry them i believe. Sonic, Jet set radio, Valyria Chronicles, Yakuza, and then some.

[DiRtY]

Oh, so you and the other guy who bought their games would be happy?

Seriously, not trying to be rude here, but neither Atlus nor Sega have the IPs that sell xx million plus copies and a crazy fanbase behind them.

And this is coming from a Sega fan. I loved my Dreamcast. Well ahead of its time and EA killed it. Too bad.

[Sciurus_vulgaris]

The Dreamcast was far weaker than the PS2, it would have had optimization issues with multiplat games.

[Shineon]

You might want to compare some multiplats Dreamcast textures were beautiful

[Allsystemgamer]

You might want to double check your statement.

[trooper_]

Uh....no it wasn't, lol.

[Segata]

lol DC did super high res textures. DC ports on GCN and Xbox kept the high res but ports to PS2 they had to muddy them down. PS2 did some things better but DC did other things better and some things PS2 just had real issues with DC didn't.

[Godmars290]

The Dreamcast failed because of Sega and nothing else.

Still, the argument is old tired and pointless. You're not arguing for a system but rather the style of games that were made on it.

[babadivad]

I remember the PS2 hype train hanging over it's head as well. Sony was telling everyone who would listen how powerful the new "Emotion Engine" was gonna be. Toy Story graphics, DVD player. I even remember Game Pro (my favorite magazine at the time) doing a lot of hype for the PS2. You couldn't escape it.

They were showing pictures of cloth physics on Dreamcast, and how much better and more advanced it would be on PS2.

I even heard rumors about the government might stop the sale of the PS2 because the "Emotion Engine" chip was so powerful, it could be used to launch missiles(GamePro article). Such nonsense. But it generated a TON of hype. Being the young idiot I was, I believed every word if it.

Needless to say, I was not impressed with what Sony actually did produce. I didn't get a PS2 until Vice City came out. MAN I loved that game.

The hype killed the Dreamcast, that and piracy.

Game Pro did the same thing for the PS3. They were making stories like the Cell was going to be so powerful that every player in NFL 2k (my favorite game at the time) would have a CPU/SPE dedicated to them. So they would perform like their real life counterparts.

Thinking back on ut now, I can't believe they actually printed crap like that.

[Shineon]

Dreamcast already had online gaming via Sega net still remember the 50 free hours on NFL 2K1

[Sonic_Vs_Mario]

Dreamcast was using Microsoft's Windows CE operation system and DirectX

[Sciurus_vulgaris]

The Wii, was really just an up-clocked GameCube in terms of specs.

[Shineon]

Lmao with motion

[badz149]

Not even 2 GC ducktaped together like many have claimed before

[letsa_go]

Seriously! If it was released today, it would be the Gamecube Pro Edition with added motion controls!

[InKnight7s]

The same thing goes for Switch toward Wii U. Alctually, if we dont count changing names and the way of playing, Nintendo is the first company came up with mid gen console idea.

[Africa4ps4]

I disagree. The Switch was more than two times powerful than the Wii U and with entirely different operating system; not like GameCube and Wii.

[Segata]

Well no because Switch uses different hardware and API. Wii was literally just Gamecube Pro with sime added features like Wifi and SD card/USB. Switch is totally different chip set. Wii ran the same API Gamecube did, GX. Wii U ran GX2. Switch uses Vulkan.

[Vits]

The author made a really "noob" mistake when talking about the Switch. The console uses a Tegra X1 and this SoC in its stock form actually offers 512 Gigaflops or 0.512 Teraflops

But the one inside the Switch have it's clock speed customized (underclocked even when docked) so it ended up offering less than that. Most likely something between 0.350 and 0.450 Teraflops in docked mode and even less when undocked.

[Omnislashver36]

Exactly. If the Switch were 1TFLOP they would be getting multiplats, which they're not. Mario would look 2x better as well with Anti-Aliasing.

Also, I would have bought one with that kind of power. In it's current state? Not so much.

Had they used the Tegra X2 it may have been possible- but they didn't.

[Vits]

Even the Tegra X2 is not that powerful. According to Nvidia it offer up to 0.750 Teraflops in single-precision floating-point (FP32) so even if the Switch used a stock version of that SoC it would still be far from offering 1.0 Teraflops.

The Tegra family will most likely be able to deliver those number in the future, but right now they fall short.

[EddieNX]

Its definitely significantly more than wiiu when docked though, it runs rings round it. The Switch is about portability and exclusives though. If u want cheap performance its a pro or an X. If u want PS5 performance, then just buy a 10 Tflop PC . Splatoon 2 demo looks way way better than splatoon 1.

[Vits]

Not really. The Wii U GPU suposed offer something around 0.350 Teraflops and the Switch when docked should be around 0.400 Teraflops. So that's only a 15% improvement in raw power.

That small improvement plus the faster memory and more modern architecture are the reassons why the Switch can run Wii U ports at better frame rates and bigger resolutions, but still struggles to offer 1080p in some ports like BotW and Pokken.

What the Switch really have over the Wii U is a far more modern and suported architecture that allows the console to run a bigger spectrum of engines and tools. Also while is true that the Switch offer portability and will offer exclusives along the way. Both this merits have zero impact in a discussion about raw power on consoles.

[EddieNX]

@ Vits I agree/undestand

[Princess_Pilfer]

Can we stop using Tflops like we know what it means? Or like it's in any way an accurate measure of performance?

The *only* time Tflops actually matters as a performance metric is when it's a direct comparison between GPUs using the same or very similar architecture. So, between current gen consoles and the current RX lines using AMDs Polaris, yes. Using that same metric as a comparison to literally anything else, no.

Example. The R9 390 has 5.1 Tflops. The RX 480 Caps at 6.0. The RX 580 caps at 6.2. The GTX 1070 caps at 6.4. When actually plaing games however, the 390 is consistently within ~ 5 FPS (in either direction) of the 480 and 580, despite their large "power" advantage. The GTX 1070 consistently plays games at about a 20% higher framerate than the RX 580, despite the miniscule power advantage.

[cartoonx1]

while the switch is an incredible portable console and worth the price perfectly, its not significant more thn wii u while docked. the article weirdly listed tFLOPS of switch in fp16 and other consoles in fp32. switch is around 512gFLOPS if it can run to max possible clocks but switch even in dock mode is underclocked so its much less thn 512gFLOPS.

@Princess_Pilfer - comparing tFLOPS between nvidia and amd is useless while comparing tFLOPS between same vendor makes more sense.

[Princess_Pilfer]

@CartoonX1

No, it doesn't, for the reason I just described. Using TFLOPS as a measure, the RX 480 is a 20% power increase over the R9 390. Except performance wise, they're about the same, because despite both being AMD is the actual archiceture of the card that matters, so using TFLOPS to compare between archetectures will give a highly inaccurate picture of the performance of the parts.

It's like saying your mustang has 500 horse power and there for your cars is better while ignoring torque and gear ratios and the efficency of delivering that power to the wheels and the weight of the car and the shape of the car

I'm not even tech savvy, this information isn't hard to come by. Google gaming benchmarks and then check the giga flops of the card on wikipedia (1000= 1 TFLOP) and compare. It becomes quite obvious.

[Vits]

@Princess_Pilfer; Teraflops is a way of estimating the processing power of a unit or if you are talking about consoles the "raw power" of that unit. The reasson why you see Nvidia taking the lead in almost all benchmarks is because they use their tech in a "smarter way" than Amd.

Nvidia optimization is historically better, as well as driver support and access to unique enterprise-wide technologies that make AMD users' lives more complicated. A classic example is the PhysX technology offered by Nvidia. Take a look at old Arkham series videos about the subject if you want to know more about it.

Now something you said is true Teraflops alone do not make an console. The company's development kit and range of supported tools and engines can make a brutal difference. And as I said before that what the Switch truly have over the Wii U.

[Princess_Pilfer]

Way to actually read my comment. I specifically compared AMD cards with wildly different levels of TFLOPS but similar levels of performance. IE the R9 390 with it's 5.1 and the RX 480 with it's 6.0, yet similar performance.

So no, you're wrong. Nvidia may or may not do things more efficently, that's irrelivant, what is relevant is even between parts made by the same manufacturer it's not a good comparison because architecture changes change the TFLOP/real Performance ratio dramatically.

[Servbot41]

I also liked that the list of graphics intensive games included two Wii U ports, one exclusive... and that that's pretty much the entire current library for the system.

[Gemmol]

actually you are wrong Vits about Pokken on Switch......its not a straight up port, they added extra stuff, even modes that use more power for example 3 vs 3 mode, which use a bit more power, its not just about resolution

[Vits]

Even if they added new content that game was originally developed for the Wii U and therefore the Switch version is a port. Maybe a "Deluxe" port like Mario Kart 8 but a port nevertheless.

[Africa4ps4]

Switch uses FP16 mode which is 1024 gigaflops.
Also, the clock speed varies in dock mode not reduced (DF).

[prankster101]

Given your comment of "The Wii U GPU suposed offer something around 0.350 Teraflops and the Switch when docked should be around 0.400 Teraflops. So that's only a 15% improvement in raw power": Does that mean that in docked mode, which essentially means that the Switch is acting as a home console, that people are paying $300 for a machine that is essentially a "last gen" (where the Wii U was not that much more powerful than a 360), but at "next gen" prices (ie PS4 Pro)?

[Vits]

It's a little more complicated than that. If you really want to get into the subject, you would have to take into consideration other components like memory as well as development tools that are completely different on the Switch because of its architecture and manufacturer.

Also I do not think it's fair to talk about price without taking into consideration the portable aspect of the device. Since the components that allow it to act in this way are responsible for something around 1/3 to the total production cost and the sole reason behind Nintendo choosing to use a Nvidia Tegra is because they wanted the console to work as a handheld device as well.

[Gemmol]

second problem you made a mistake with, that many on here make mistake with.....nividia flops even ones lower than AMD always outperform AMD, so benchmark numbers are not read the same, I am pretty sure you seen articles on that before, here is something from a post

"Take 680 benchmarks vs 7970 benchmarks. AMD/ATi seems to have improved the performance of their GPUs compared to comparable class GPUs from nVidia, but they still lag behind when looking at the FLOP rating.

The 7970 is rated at ~3.8 TFLOPS and the 680 at ~3.1 TFLOPs. Yet in most benchmark comparisons I've seen (including the ones in the following link), the 680 still edges out the 7970 in most tests.

http://www.tomshardware.com...

And as I've seen it nVidia's FLOP rating has been considered "real world performance" or more accurate."

Not only you wrong about pokken saying its a striaght port when they added things that use more power, and then you was also wrong about Zelda, if you look at past articles, Nintendo said from their mouth its a straight port, its why the game do not use hd rumble or any new features from the switch. If they had delay the game to make it 1080p it would not of came out in March, instead of making people wait, they just did a straight port, which they also said it does not even use close to all the power in the Switch, so the next zelda will look much better.

I am helping you to understand because not everyone read all the articles posted on here, I remember when people think zelda was the best the switch can do, if you go back to old articles you will see many people say that on here, but all those people are selective when it comes to reading, they do not want to read articles that have actual facts from developers

like the developer said switch in handheld mode is way stronger alone than the Wii U, its not a 15 percent increase.......Mario Kart do not use all the power.....and etc, none of the games out now show its potential, no one is expecting xbox one X graphics on it, but it is better than what you saying

[Vits]

Flops in general is a measure unit that estimates the computational "gross" power of a component. You can directly compare different generations of components as well as different manufacturers and the results will be percentages that show just that, the "gross" difference between the components compared.

The emphasis on the word "gross" is there because this comparison does not translate directly into real-world applications. A classic example is the battle between Nvidia and AMD in the PC Gaming culture. Even though the latter offers the theoretically more powerful components when we translate to real applications, Nvidia usually has the upper hand.

This is because historically Nvidia has a smarter component format with much better support in terms of drivers and integration with graphics-oriented technologies. As well as a wide range of proprietary technologies that create a barrier between its components and those of the competition. And as I said before this range of tools and tech is what the Switch really has to offer over the Wii U and against any other device.

Now I've never said that Pokken is a direct port I said it's a port. Even if content was added the game was not originally developed for the device and therefore ranks as a port. In the same way as Bayonetta on computers, even with its improved visuals and 4K support is a port of a X360 game and Mario Kart 8 Deluxe with its new Battle Mode is a port of a Wii U game.

And again, the Switch can not be more powerful (gross power) than the Wii U in handheld mode because this would be illogical (talking about GPU). But it can outperform the Wii U due to its smarter and more modern SoC design, as well as the range of tools and optimization that the new console have/provides over its predecessor.

[Gemmol]

i respect the last response Vits

[Omnislashver36]

The sad part is that generations are lasting longer and yet jumps are becoming weaker. I miss the days when you got a new system and were immediately wowed by how much they'd progressed. Now you have to wait a few years for optimization as well. Hopefully AMD's 7nm node allows for a 9-10 TFLOPS PS5, although that's still a relatively small jump(only 4.5-5x as powerful as PS4)

[tyasia0]

"The sad part is that generations are lasting longer and yet jumps are becoming weaker. I miss the days when you got a new system and were immediately wowed by how much they'd progressed"

This is fairly inaccurate. The consoles still get more powerful and the growth has accelerated. But the thing is what more power brings people aren't able (trained) to see.

The other day there was an article about how GTSport could use the same car models in the next GT game. And it had a lot of arguments but what I said there is apt as a reply to this comment.

"At some point you have enough console power to simply model a car and more poly's can't make the car model look better."

At that point the things you get from more power are better lighting and particle effects and ambient occlusion and higher res shadows ect. But most people aren't trained to see those as easy as they can see the difference between a low poly car model (PS2) and a higher one (PS4).

[Omnislashver36]

Actually, you are factually inaccurate. The jumps in FLOPS were 20-40 times between generations in the past, now we're looking at 7 times and probably less with PS5 unless they drag out gen 8. The jump between 360 and XB1 was 5x. The numbers simply don't lie.

You also have Nvidia saying that they're reaching the limits of silicon and AMD with countless delays on releasing new processors.

Even with effects and other settings that aren't poly-based are taken into account, the jump between PS1 and PS2, and PS2 and PS3 was higher than the jump between PS3 and PS4. We simply didn't get 40x the power of PS3, we got 7x the power of PS3. Point, blank, period. Raw power taken into account, the jump has gotten ~6x weaker.

[dcbronco]

Omni but we are also reaching the limits of what is needed to make a difference visually. We will see real time photo realism in a generation or two. What then? The changes needed to push gaming forward will be architectural. More efficiency in the OS and the CPU and GPU. More efficient parts offset the need for brute force advances in flops and IPC. The move to APUs and unified memory are the things that will make a difference instead of more flops. AIs built into chips will bring better efficiency. We need to evolve computer technology just like we evolved manual labor. We need to invent the computer architectures "wheels and pulleys" instead of adding people to do the heavy lifting.

[rainslacker]

There's a point of diminishing returns where just throwing more power at something doesn't really show that much more of an improvement. The improvements we are starting to see with the start of this gen, beyond resolution, are more subtle than before.

It's also worth nohing that that 40X jump of the past, and the 7X jump of today, actually have more significant power jumps in terms of raw power today than before. However, the actual graphical, and performance jumps, were much more apparent because of how much could be done with that extra power.

[Princess_Pilfer]

@dcbronco

No, we are not reaching the upper limit of what will make a visual difference. Not even close. Now, it's good to remember that true photo realism is a pipe dream that, barring some big advancements in how computers work, is never going to happen, but you go play The Witcher 3 and then hold a screenshot up next to a photo of a person and you'll see exactly how obvious it is that one of those is real and one of them isn't. That's not even getting into things like resolution (we're at less than half the resolution it would take to be unable to tell the difference between an image at that resolution and any higher resolution image) and framerate (30 FPS is passable at best, 60+ is ideal, and many games simply don't run at 4k/60 even with 2 of the most powerful consumer GPUs in the world running at the same time.)

[fenome]

It's called diminishing returns, we're hitting a plane with the uncanny valley now. At the end of the day there's only so much you can polish a turd though, it still looks like shit at the end of the day. 4K, teraFLOPS or specs or numbers can't cover that up.

It's all in developers hands now to utilize all this extra space to make things better. Specs don't make good games, developers do, that's how this all started. Sure it can make them smoother, prettier and faster but it still all lays in the creator's hands in the end.

We've seen great examples and bad examples this gen, and a bunch of stuff in between and some other things that were just rushed out the door, 'cause "business". More power isn't automatically going to make everything better, that all depends on the time, effort, passion, budget and creative freedom developers are allowed.

[EddieNX]

Deminishing returns is basically the theory that tech will reach a peak, and leaps become increasingly less impressive. Once we reach the uncanny valley, it wont even be a thing anymore. The next step will be like neuro immersion with cables in our brains, like The Matrix.

[SierraGuy]

Thank you.

[vega275]

I feel soo ashamed of myself for clicking the link and giving gamespot a hit.

[Protagonist]

Same, did not notice it was gamespot.

[Artemidorus]

I've just realised this article is more of a history lesson.

[Segata]

An inaccurate one. Switch is about 400 Gflops. Wii U is 176 not the 350 or so .

[kakashi81]

I just wished that we had a PS3 pro and Xbox 360 X.

[Deathdeliverer]

People want the Nintendo switch to be more powerful but don't realize it would have ruined the portable vision. The switch already dies relatively fast with breath of the wild. With more power comes more power consumption. Nobody wants a portable that you can only use near a wall outlet. Not to mention how much bigger it would have got. Better even hotter parts, even better and possibly bigger cooling solutions. Then the bigger price. I'll pass. I think the system is perfect where it is and I love the hell out of it.

[stupidusername]

I agree. I see my switch more of a handeld than a home console. When I'm home I play the PS4 but as I'm traveling a lot I'm always carrying the Switch with me playing at hotel rooms, cars and airplanes.
I can't get over how impressed I am with the switch, to be able to play games like Breath of The Wild and Mario Kart 8 on the go is ridiculous considering the jump from 3DS and even the Vita, which I earlier looked at as a extremely powerful handeld.
I think the reason why people see the Switch as underwhelming is because they mainly see it as a home console, and as that it surely falls short compared to PS and Xbox which already came out about 4 years ago.

[kevnb]

Let's not, it will end up like android devices where people compare meaningless theoritical performance and ignore real world performance.

[pingthing]

Wow I didn't actually realise how much more powerful the two mid gen console's were than their vanilla counterparts until I've just seen it in relative terms in the last page of this article.

[NextGenCeo]

Playstation 3 Cell CPU offering 230.4 gflops not the RSX GPU! RSX GPU almost 400 gflops if I'm wasn't wrong! Xbox 360 CPU was 112 gflops and GPU 450 gflops something!

They are making mistakes with article or we was wrong all the time :)
(ESL guy here)

[rainslacker]

That sounds about right. Although I recall it being closer to 420 for the 360 GPU. Been a while though, and don't care to look it up.

Ultimately though, these are just theoretical limits of the processors. Actual real world performance is determined by all the parts of the system, and how they work together. A 1TF GPU may never reach it's peak on a regular basis if the rest of the system holds it back.

Typically, CPU's aren't rated in flops either. Flops are a measure of floating point operations, and CPU's are never really that great for those kind of calculations in abundance. That's why GPU compute is used more nowadays, because a good chunk of a game's programming logic falls into the floating point variety.

[XStation4pio_Pro]

I'll continue to play PS4 exclusives on my pro but the one x will be my go to console for everything else considering around one out of every 10-15 games released is actually an exclusive and I want those games to run their best too.... MOST games aren't exclusive to either console. Games like anthem, assasins creed etc are really going to tax systems so want the best performing versions.

[Heavenly King]

then you should have a PS4 and a PC.

[aconnellan]

Or maybe he prefers consoles and doesn't want to game on PC?

[Nexus530]

I don't care about Flops, or which company's logo is on the plastic box. I care about games.

[starchild]

Good for you. Some people care about the quality of their experience. I love good gameplay, but I also love good storytelling and immersive graphics and smooth performance.

[Princess_Pilfer]

Then you shouldn't focus on Tflops because it's a really, really crappy performance metric. The AMD R9 390 has 5.1 Tflops. The RX 480 has 6. Their performance in most games is about the same. Why? Because what the architecture does with it is what matters for performance. That doesn't make the 480 bad or mean it's using resoures poorly (it requires less power than the 390 despite it's higher flop count,) it means it's using a different way of getting the gaming performance.

[Kallisti]

Where's the Ouya? That was a massive flop

[GNCFLYER]

What was this about?

I clicked, then when I realized I would have to click 16 more times I just came back. I hate when websites pull that.

Is it just an article on power history of consoles or another ,x1x is the console to end all console evolution as nothing will ever reach it, piece?

[Africa4ps4]

You're wrong, it's a classic web design.
You don't need to click 16 times, but open the pages even at offline it opens!

[GNCFLYER]

Oh ok.. It's just the way my phone (mobile) opened it..

[Nybz]

Inb4 rankedboost makes a console tier list

[jznrpg]

Have a Switch , PS4PRO, 3DS and Vita I play atm and a lot older consoles and I am not concerned what FLOPS they have just the games

[Armyntt]

As the power grows, the games can look more real but at the same time they look less realistic at the same time. For example I remember playing madden 92 and bill Walsh college football. Had a great time playing with myself or vs friends. Today's games look and play better obviously. But as they look more real we start to notice things like the way the move and how their eyes don't look just right. Or how this player looks kinda like that famous qb but his elbow when he throws doesn't flare like that in real life. The more real it gets the more fake it gets too.

[thelaughingwiseman]

Doesn't the PC have the most exclusives? They have tons and tons of games which can't be found on the X-Box or Playstation. Yeah, there are tons of misses but also tons of hits.

[Kallisti]

Weird, could have sworn this article wasn't about PCs or exclusives.

[thelaughingwiseman]

It is a round about comment. This article ranked the most powerful GPU's in console. People on these comment boards are now saying that the specs in the console don't matter anyways. Its about what games the console can produced (Exclusives). I think it shouldn't be about that. And I'm wondering why even talk about consoles all together in a "us vs them" manner. Why exclude PC's from the discussion of games (exclusive or multiplat) and specs?
It's good to see what the consoles of different generations were able to produce from a spec- perspective. I kind of liked seeing the information about flops and trying to understand their ramifications for the machines that used them.

[Bronxs15]

Interesting article and cool comparison. Shows how much of a miss step the original Xbox one was in terms of power. Xbox has always been about power. Xbox killed ps2 and cube and even the Wii which released after it. And 360 beat the PS3 even tho 360 released a year ahead. That's very impressive hardware design. Looks like the one x is putting them back on track!

[GNCFLYER]

Really mismanagement of MS all around. PS2 killed Xbox in sales. PS3 came back and beat 360 in sales, and the PS3 was a console developers didn't want to touch. PS4 is murdering xbox1.

It's all about games library. It's always been that. Until MS gets that they are gonna lose that battle.

[Bronxs15]

@GNCFLYER
Interesting POV. I kind of disagree w/ you. PS2 was a juggernaut. A perfect storm coming for the market. They hype of PS2 alone killed Dreamcast. Which by the way had an excellent games library. Sonic Adventure, Powerstone, Crazy Taxi, Soul Caliber etc.. As well as the Gamecube, whose library was no slouch etiher, Star wars, RE4, RE1 Remake, Sunshine, Killer 7, Wind Waker etc. For a new comer to the market Xbox in this case, it’s hard to see it beating PS2, when entrenched names like Sega and Nintendo also didn’t stand a chance.

I don’t criticize MS too much for the XBOX generation. It was their 1st attempt and they learned a lot. See their relationship with NVIDEA and why they couldn’t price drop their system. As well they delivered a pretty big game with Halo CE. That’s where it all started. Frist console with a hard drive, broadband connection and Xbox Live infrastructure was laid. It could be said that their management had a good vision where the market was heading.

Many things introduced in the XBOX gen, became the standard the following generation. PS3 and 360 having broadband connections and online services, but again MS was ahead with functionality, think cross game chat. As well after getting decimated the previous generation PS2’s 125 million to XBOX’s 25 million (still ahead of Gamecubes 23 million btw) the fact that they gained huge market share on sony while sony LOST huge market share. PS3 currently at 83.8 million and 360 at 84 million https://en.wikipedia.org/wi... i think more criticism of mismanagement should be pointed at Sony! They did do a good job after of letting go of Ken Kutaragi and brining on Mark Cerny. Sort of what MS went through ousting Don Matrick and brining in Phil Spencer. Also, MS management introduced Kinect, and while I bought one to try out and ended up returning it because I didn’t like, the Kinect did go on to become the fastest selling consumer electronic device ever or something other accolade like that.

Also bare in mind that before xbox did MS have any real consumer products on this scale? Unlike Nintendo which is a videogame industry veteran, multiple home and portable consoles and Sony, a company that had the mass scale hit the WALKMAN and TVs VCRs stereos phones etc. That fact alone, aside from it being a difficult market to penetrate makes them underdogs.

As well, we know in this industry consumers are passionate. And once they decide to support a system or not like one there’s little management can do to sway that. Despite MS’s early efforts with the 360 and japan market they never could break through. They released some critically acclaimed games and 360 had a good library of games but it never took up. Japanese are loyal to their country’s products. As well you may not like Gears Halo or Forza but those are some of if not the biggest franchises in their respected genres. And though their sales have been subpar this generation do due to low xbox one install base they were massive hits last generation, so to knock MS’s game library is also an argument with holes in it. Last generation wasn’t there stories like Halo 3 sales surpassed all the uncharted games sales. Or Gear 2/3 sold more than ps3’s combined exclusives that release year or some such facts? You can make a arugment now that those franchise are not handled by Epic, or Bungie they aren’t as well regarded (even thought many of the same people that worked on the games at Epic/Bungie head up the new studios). But are you making a blanket statement for Xbox’s game library.

[Bronxs15]

Lastly your argument overall isn’t a strong one. Your making an argument that says because MS is second to Sony in videogame console sales, they are mismanaged. That’s like saying Pepsi is poorly run because they don’t sell as much as Coke. Or Burger King should exit the fast food market because McDonalds crushes them in sales. Hopefully you can see the error in that line of reasoning. As MS are releasing systems and games that are exciting to gamers and xbox fans and they continue to make profit they are good, I don’t think need to bring on N4G commenter GNCFLYER as a consultant for their xbox division.

[GNCFLYER]

Bronx 15

Mismanaged in the games dept. Sony has always had a pretty consistent flow of games releasing.

MS seems to be lacking in that area. This gen as well as the last couple years of the 360.

[windblowsagain]

1.21 gigawatts.

Need about 50teraflops to simulate life.

[Bismarn]

We didn't hear a lot about FLOPS from Microsoft's Scorpio reveal, we heard it once and then heard it afterward a lot from anti-MS people making fun of it.

[RMoog88]

Do any of these render games @ 60FPS?

[Segata]

And? When did flops determine your enjoyment of a system? My favorite console ever has 1.4 Giga flops. My second favorite doesn't even measure on the scale. Why do people focus so much on this? It only matters to the developers. It means jack squat for a consumer putting their disc in the console.

[rainslacker]

My favorite was probably in the Kiloflops....and a fraction of a whole percent at that, although floating point wasn't really used that much back in the day. PC-Engine.:) Sorry, I know you're a Sega fan, but PC-Engine was so much better. :-P

Anyhow, flops don't determine enjoyment, unless people are more attracted to the shiny things, as opposed to the meaningful things. To me, pretty graphics are just icing on the cake of a good game.

I remember when the 486 came out, and it was a big deal that they had an option for a FPU. It was something like 9MIPS, and 1 MFlop in some versions.

[Nathan_Hale53]

Just so people know, "flops" doesn't reflect real world performance.

[Iras_]

Wii U is 176 glops and Switch won't reach 1 tflops even if docked

[Segata]

yeah they down clocked it for better batt life to 400 or close to it.

[babadivad]

The Switch is not 1TF. The X1 chip it uses is capable of 393FP32 max. But Nintendo down-clocked the chip. So it doesn't even get that fast

[Copat]

I knew Gamecube was number one

[DELTABOY04]

um why?

[Fist4achin]

Wouldnt this argument be better handled by having a bellyflop contest berween the executives of each company?!

[Bjorn-c-blocker]

The number 5 console weighs 300grams the number 4 console weighs 4kg.

[Razuel]

apples to oranges.

[Rhythmattic]

Xbox has more flops, with more flops :p

[xetiro]

The calculation is very inaccurate even for just raw Flop performance. There is no distinguish between n-bit floating point operations.

For instance, whereas the 1.8 Teraflops of PS4 is the count of 32-bit Floating Point operations performance, the 1 Teraflop of Switch is the metric of 16-bit Floating Point operations. In fact, Switch should have something like 0.5 Teraflops of 32-bit Floating Point performance, which is still significantly better then WiiU but much less then current gen home consoles.

In any case, this is just raw FLOPS...what counts the most is the balance of the architecture between CPU/GPU/VRAM, etc...

[Fritzwochel]

The RSX in the PS3 does 1.8 TFLOPS, and combined with the CPU the PS3 can do 2.18 TFLOPS. Custom hardware like that is nice on the paper, too bad the CELL was a mess to program.

[ultimize]

Mobile GPU can't compared with Desktop GPU

[AndreR]

they should have comared every console ever made. from Atari to now.