By using this site, you agree to our Privacy Policy and our Terms of Use. Close

FLOPS alone are not a very useful metric of judging relative performance when comparing chips of different architectures, made by different manufacturers, released years apart. 

As for the speculation of power, this isn't 2016, the Switch is a known quantity at this point at we can say with certainty, that no, it's not close to even the base Xbox One in power, however, it is significantly more capable than Wii U/PS3/360. Not only do we know the exact specs, but there have been numerous multiplatform games that ably demonstrate the difference.

Nate4Drake said:
jonathanalis said:
0.393 when measuring FP32
0.79 when measuring FP16.
If you are comparing to 1.3 TF of Xbox One, use FP32.

But still, every game must work on portable mode, so the number we have to use for switch is around 0.15

0.15 TF ?  That's why the best looking Game on PS3 or XBox 360 still look better than anything on Switch, right ?  Games like The Last of Us or Uncharted3 look more impressive than the best looking game on Switch from what I remember; I should see them side by side to be sure though.

Couple of things here. 

First, you're likely remembering those games as looking as amazing as they did back in 2011/2013 rather than how they look today.

Secondly, there are no games on Switch that attempt a similar visual approach to those games and invest the insane amount of money, manpower, and talent that went into those games.

That said, games like FAST RMX, Outlast II, and even cut-down ports like Doom and Wolfenstein II eclipse anything PS3 or 360 ever produced on a technical level.

Bet with Liquidlaser: I say PS5 and Xbox Series will sell more than 56 million combined by the end of 2023.