4 ms·

I think it's safe to say that these flops are different. One is not higher quality than the other. It's possible to conjure up examples where one is more fit fo

I think it's safe to say that these flops are different. One is not higher quality than the other. It's possible to conjure up examples where one is more fit for purpose (double-precision and irregular tasks on CPU), massive memory access for GPU. Both architectures have different types of cache which also complicates matters. An example that tortures the CPU (by being 'not much data parallelism or heavy conditional logic') will torture the GPU much worse, but this example will likely not really be "flop" dependent in any case.

Const-me 8y ago
They're different but the differences are quite complex. CPUs can be faster for RAM bandwidth-bound code, if there's not that much data and it fits in caches at least L3, CPU cache bandwidth is very good. GPUs can be faster for heavily conditioned code. If it's the condition on RAM value, a CPU will stall or mispredict branches, both slow, a GPU will switch to another hardware thread which is very fast. Despite these differences, I find flops quite useful in practice to compare performance of different computers across architectures of generations. Computers compute, flops measure how fast they do.