Clarifying the 1.5TFLOPS of the SWITCH for those who just see the numbers.

[vivster]

Solid-Stark said:

vivster said:

I think from all the specs that exist, FLOPS are the most descriptive for power comparison. Because they are a logical combination of the two most important factors in gaming graphics, cores and frequency. It's the best buzzword we have so far. Certainly better than MHz or bits or the worst one of all, RAM.

We should be happy that we're getting ever closer to real world performance.

But i'd say FLOPS give you a ballpark estimate, a rather large one. The best measure of real world performance are literal examples. We know what the Xone and PS4 can do, and until we have a Switch example it will be hard to draw accurate conclusions. Especially since we only have the FLOP number.

Another take on this FLOP topic is how many FLOPS were required for an ARM chip to compare to last gen consoles (230ish FLOPS). 500 or so? And even then it's with environmental assumptions. 

The problem is we do not have real world examples and probably won't get until it releases. So FLOPS is the closest we can get for guesstimates.