Their architectures are sufficiently different that it's impossible to distill their "power" into a single number. And even if you could, that number could only be valid for one particular piece of software.
The PS4 seemed more powerful before MS made these changes, and it still seems more powerful afterwards. But you can't just add up FLOPs. Well, okay, you can, but that leaves out a bunch of other stuff.
Longer, more hand-wavy answer: Based on what we know, the XB1 now has a CPU that is about 9% "faster" than the (speculated) one in the PS4. Not a big jump, but better than a poke in the eye. The XB1 is also purported to have some audio co-processing that the PS4 may lack. That may on occasion free up another ~10% of the XB1's CPU for other uses. On the other hand, the XB1 (or PS4) may be reserving more of the CPU for apps. Or, maybe it's the opposite. Maybe it'll change over time. We just don't know.
On the GPU side of things, the PS4 started out with a big advantage, and The XB1 has only closed the gap marginally. The PS4 started with a 50% advantage in GPU FLOPS, and the XB1 closed that to 40%(?) with their earlier clock bump. Of course, that's just a vague theoretical scorecard based on a naive counting of the CUs and assumes that all else is the same. All else isn't the same, since both companies added their own tweaks to the GPU. But that hopefully gets us in the ballpark of reality.
Then there's the memory architecture. Totally different. The PS4 has much more bandwidth to its main memory. On the other hand, the XB1 has some on-chip memory that should be faster still, latency-wise. How do those two differences offset? No freaking idea. It might be another case where the XB1 is only able to close a gap slightly, or it might be that the XB1 will actually be faster at certain things. (Not all things, certainly, but maybe some important things.)
Shorter answer: The PS4 is probably still more powerful. Hard to say how much more.