Good exsample Archangel.
But thats just 1 card, from older card series with old tech.

here is a newer one: 
 AMD 5700XT (9.75 Tflops) vs  Geforce 2080ti (13,45 Tflops).

5700 xt is ~9,75 Tflops  and about ~30% slower than Nvidia 2080 Ti (which is 13,45 Tflops as you said).

That means in terms of performance, AMD GPUs can basically match performance to Tflop rate, with nvidia cards.
It varies from card to card, and technology inside.

Nvidia lead isnt as insane as people make it out to be, atleast if your useing the newer 5700xt (RDNA1 series).


Edit:

The technology inside the Playstation 5 and Xbox Series X, will both be RDNA 2.
Newer card architecture.

If Xbox series X, is really 12 Tflops, its performance will probably be reeeeeally close to a 2080ti.

1) Teraflops is bullshit in trying to gauge performance.

2) The lead nVidia has is substantial... Remember AMD is an entire manufacturing node smaller than nVidia, that advantage disappears this year, both will be 7nm.

3) Teraflops doesn't tell us the performance of the Ray Tracing cores... Which is the big new next-generation graphics feature coming to a console near you.

4) When the Xbox Series X finally releases... The Geforce 2080Ti will be last generation graphics technology and will likely fall to around the mid-range in terms of performance.

I agree, but the big question is what these new Nvidia gpu's will be priced like. If mid-range performance comes with a $500 price tag, like we've seen with the RTX cards, it might take a while before the masses upgrade.

1) Teraflops is bullshit in trying to gauge performance.

2) The lead nVidia has is substantial... Remember AMD is an entire manufacturing node smaller than nVidia, that advantage disappears this year, both will be 7nm.

3) Teraflops doesn't tell us the performance of the Ray Tracing cores... Which is the big new next-generation graphics feature coming to a console near you.

4) When the Xbox Series X finally releases... The Geforce 2080Ti will be last generation graphics technology and will likely fall to around the mid-range in terms of performance.

Basically yes.

They're minimum requirements and they don't change a lot. Why? Because PC games, including ports from console games, have the magical ability of having a graphics options menu. Which means any PC game can be toned down a lot depending on the user's needs. For example you will not see an SSD as a minimum requirement for any game, not even at the end of next gen. Here is a great example:

https://www.techspot.com/news/82281-call-duty-modern-warfare-system-requirements-revealed.html

This is the latest COD game. We are at the end of the current console generation and every console has had 8 full CPU cores. Now look at those recommendations. The minimum required is a 2C/4T CPU with an operating system that predates the current gen. It also names an 8 year old GPU that predates current gen. And even though it says minimum requirement, those things are just suggestions and you will be able to run the game with even lower end and older hardware.

Now let's have a look at the recommended specs. Here we see an 8 year old CPU with 4 cores. The GPU is only 5 years old now. That is the recommendation, it doesn't say anything about what kind of performance you can expect from it. I'm gonna assume 1080p/30fps.

This is just one example, requirements vary a lot between games and they climb steadily at a slow pace continually, not just whenever a new console comes out. The next console gen won't be any different. Consoles have about as little of an affect on those specs as the yearly updates of graphics cards. Once the consoles come out they will already be comfortably below the current high end gaming PCs and PC games will still be able to be played with bottom shelf hardware. That's the great thing about PCs, you can basically play every game on as low or high settings as you want. That's why those minimum and even the recommended specs requirements are so low.

When the new consoles come out and new gen games hit the PC market you will see the same low CPU core counts, slow HDDs and year old graphics cards on there. They might give high end hardware a run for their money for ultra settings but nothing like that will be necessary to run and enjoy those games on PC.

The things you are imagining with high powered consoles and developers who know what to do with high power is a utopic scenario many PC players wish would happen but it never really will because consoles will continue to be the lowest common denominator we will have to stick to. I mean PC gamers have been begging for games to be more optimized on more than 4 CPU cores even before the current gen came out and despite having a console lineup of 8 core machines we're still waiting on that.

Good exsample Archangel.
But thats just 1 card, from older card series with old tech.

here is a newer one: 
 AMD 5700XT (9.75 Tflops) vs  Geforce 2080ti (13,45 Tflops).

5700 xt is ~9,75 Tflops  and about ~30% slower than Nvidia 2080 Ti (which is 13,45 Tflops as you said).

That means in terms of performance, AMD GPUs can basically match performance to Tflop rate, with nvidia cards.
It varies from card to card, and technology inside.

Nvidia lead isnt as insane as people make it out to be, atleast if your useing the newer 5700xt (RDNA1 series).


Edit:

The technology inside the Playstation 5 and Xbox Series X, will both be RDNA 2.
Newer card architecture.

If Xbox series X, is really 12 Tflops, its performance will probably be reeeeeally close to a 2080ti.

Console games aren't going to suddenly become 10x more graphically demanding, it's a transitional process, so it will take a couple years.
By then... The Xbox Series X and Playstation 5 will be on the lower-end of the performance spectrum.

We would possibly be even looking at 5nm parts by then. (Even if 7nm and 5nm is just advertising numbers rather than actual geometry size shrinks.)

I'm not sure it will take years. Sony's exclusives should already make pretty good use of the ps5 from the start, and this gen we already had games like Batman AK, Witcher 3, Dying Light, AC Unity etc pretty early on. Most of those games had a minimum requirement of a GTX660 (which is in current gen) and some recommended a GTX770. 

When the ps4/Xone came out there were already a ton of budget options to get console like performance on pc with cards like the GTX750Ti or the $80 AMD 260X. Also, there was the $199 GTX960 which pissed all over the GTX660. Next gen it looks like we won't have those kind of budget options, though. At least not for a while.