Tflops are Tflops, it's math it's not wrong......Some architectures are just more efficient than others, so some pull more performance at the same TFLOP count......Effciency could be hardware based and software based...….NV had more performance in the past because it did things like lowering, texture detail, color samples in it's games to boost performance, sometimes imperceptible to a player in motion...….If a GPU supports VRS and one does not, you will see improved perf on the one with VRS....
As and example; Vega had lots of raw performance, it did none of the things NV did to push perf, so it worked harder and all it's TFLOPS went into raw rendering....Vega had the raw throughput but the architecture, it never really got the most out of the architecture because devs favored Nvidia, yet if Vega had the efficiency of Pascal it would run circles around it, I think some games on Vega gives credence to that fact, some games performed better on vega, more suited to the architecture, but that still does not negate the fact that AMD was not as efficient......Look at this then, in the latest 4000 APU's, AMD was able to pull 59% more efficiency out of old vega arch, so it goes to show, a higher TFLOP count is always better, it all depends on the engineering relative to efficiency and how easy it is to utilize 100% of the architecture...……..
From the rumormill, Sony seems to be winning on both power and ease of development, so it's really those two combined that will make what you see on your screen all the more impressive......Even the Black Tiger devs should put out something not stuck in 1994......