Switch is clearly alot weaker than the base PS4 model (probably like you say 4.5x).
Yes theres more to a GPU than flops.... but they still matter (esp in this case, PS5 vs XBSX, were both are same architecture).

enough with the derailing Nu-13, its not a switch thread.

So it seems that the PS5 is quite a bit weaker than the Xbox series X. The only specs being reported are the fastest it can run. Thst doesn't say it will always run at that level. So in the end I think the PS5 is at least 30% less powerful than the X series X, its 1-0 for microsoft unless the PS5 is € 100,- cheaper.

These arnt boost clocks.

These are the normal clocks it runs at, as long as its not over heating.
It "will" always run at this level (unless it gets too hot).

I also think your right, Playstation 5 will likely be 100$ cheaper than the Xbox Series X.

Can you explain this math? 

Hes makeing a wrong assumption.

Hes assumeing the "varies" mentioned about clocks, work like a intel cpu that boosts up for a short while, when it doing things.

Mark Cerny explained that wasnt the case.
Its the normal speed, but it will downclock abit if it uses too much power/gets too hot.

I think cerny mentioned it was a few %'s in the talks.
So if it drops like 5% in cpu or gpu speed, to keep to a certain amount of power/heat, then thats not enough to make the differnce between the two that big.

I am fine with all of this, especially if the price is between XBOX SS and SX.

There's no derailing in calling you out. It's aways been obvious that flops are just one aspect of gpus but only now you and others conveniently say that.

So based on what we know so far it seems like multiplats may have slight resolution and/or frame rate advantages on XSX vs. loading and LOD advantages on PS5. Exclusives, while harder to compare fairly, may show the differences in design more dramatically. I'm very curious to see how Sony will harness all that extra throughput in the games they develop (that Spider-Man speed demo sparks the imagination). The big variable for MS on the other hand is the purported Series S. Will it limit what they can design or merely cut back on resolution?

And they said that... where exactly? It's nice if some of you realized that this was gonna be livestreamed when the GDC was supposed to take place. But Sony themselves didn't say any of this.

Even if theres "differnces" between flops to performance, between AMD / Nvidia and cards + architecture.

All that bullsh*t goes out the window when the differnce is big enough.   (this is the part you ignore)

Switch is 397 Gflops (0,397 Tflops docked)
Playstation 4 is 1,840 Gflops (1,840 Tflops)

Does switch punch above its weight? maybe.... go ahead and give it another 10% or 20% in score, when compaireing it to the PS4.
The playstation is still like 4x more power.

Now can we drop it? yes flops arnt be all end of all, but they do still matter in compairisons when we know about the performance ranges or certain architectures and how they meassure up against one another.

Its like you refuse to admit that the Switch is alot weaker? it just is. 

End of disccussion, no  "flops arnt flops" will change that.