Star Trek and Star Wars: The Battle For Technological Supremacy
Whatsapp Pinterest

One of the coolest things about science fiction 3 Examples of Amazing Science Fiction Tech That Became Reality 3 Examples of Amazing Science Fiction Tech That Became Reality Technology is difficult to predict, because it often develops in response to new needs or changing situations that are difficult to imagine. There are, however, a few sci-fi books that were particularly prophetic. Read More is the technology. Things that just can’t exist in the real world (at least, not yet) are possible in imaginary worlds filled with space battles and aliens from distant galaxies.

Two of the most famous science fiction universes are Star Wars 3 Of The Best Star Wars Video Games Ever Made 3 Of The Best Star Wars Video Games Ever Made Over the years, Star Wars has seen a practically never-ending supply of video game adaptations. Some of them are terrible (I'm looking at you Yoda Stories), and some are absolutely incredible. Read More and Star Trek Your Own Holodeck: Will The Star Trek Fantasy Become a Reality? Your Own Holodeck: Will The Star Trek Fantasy Become a Reality? Will advances in virtual reality technology make the Star Trek holodeck a common room in every household in our near future? The "holodeck" fantasy is getting much closer to reality than you may think. Read More . Both franchises feature massive fan-bases, and both are still seeing films and video games made around them today. But which science fiction giant had the better technology? If they were put head-to-head, which sci-fi universe’s gadgets would carry them to victory? That’s just what the infographic below aims to figure out.

Which do you think would win? Which do you prefer, personally? Let’s battle it out in the comments below!

Via Best Online Engineering Degree

Click To Enlarge

wars-vs-trek

Enjoyed this article? Stay informed by joining our newsletter!

Enter your Email

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

  1. Anonymous
    September 25, 2015 at 9:32 pm

    Damn interesting still people love Star Trek :-)

  2. oldskool
    April 6, 2015 at 5:00 pm

    Star Wars happened a long time ago, in a galaxy far, far away. I imagine that their current tech would be vastly superior to the tech we saw in the movies.

  3. joe belkin
    April 6, 2015 at 8:55 am

    ST also had the Genesis torpedo - much cheaper than a giant Death star ANd you wind up with a planet with an atmosphere ... sure, it's not very stable but better than blasting a planet to pieces.

  4. StarLord
    April 6, 2015 at 2:55 am

    It is quite simple. They are both a differing point of views for the global, nay, space economics of a society. Star Wars portrays the government as an evil and corrupt empire, a Republican point of view. Star Trek is about the positives of an advanced government, that has found a mostly peaceful resolution with other species, like the Democrats. Advanced weaponry does not win wars, but an effective use by an experienced operator can turn the tide. Take the best of both worlds and create a better one. Elementary my dear Watson!!!

    • oldskool
      April 6, 2015 at 5:06 pm

      Actually you've got that wrong. The Old Republic would be Republicans, and the Empire would be the Democrats (Total control over everything that you do and think).
      Star Trek is utopian fantasy --highly unlikely. However, one should notice that even in Trek, where there doesn't appear to be currency, only the elites get luxury, everyone else gets a more spartan existence.

  5. AustynSN
    April 5, 2015 at 12:17 pm

    Actually, although The Empire of Star Wars has better tech and a much larger society, The Federation of Star Trek has a much stronger social advantage. While their society is smaller and less advanced, they are also far more stable. The Empire is essentially mired in a civil war and once it collapses, the new republic isn't too dissimilar from the society The Federation has already established. It wouldn't be unlikely for some of the worlds of Star Wars to instead join the federation, which would almost immediately negate any technological disadvantage The Federation might have.

  6. Christopher
    April 5, 2015 at 1:10 am

    Star Trek conceptualized the flip phone, video chat, portable data storage and tablet computers - 'nuff said.

  7. Kenneth DeVries
    April 4, 2015 at 4:06 pm

    Star Wars is not Science Fiction, it is Space Fantasy. There is no science in Star Wars, and its technology is essentially magical. Star Trek at least maintains a scientific pretense, but Star Wars does not. So, magic versus pseudoscience - who would win? You can imagine anything you want.

    • dragonmouth
      April 4, 2015 at 9:52 pm

      "So, magic versus pseudoscience – who would win? You can imagine anything you want."
      As Arthur C. Clark famously said: "Any sufficiently advanced technology is indistinguishable from magic." :-)

    • Finvana
      April 5, 2015 at 2:20 pm

      I'd love to see all jedis and sith trying to defeat Q. They would be Q new puppets.

  8. Khai
    April 4, 2015 at 3:04 pm

    and we can take out the death star with a single GENESIS device, anywhere on it's hull...

  9. Pat
    April 4, 2015 at 1:23 pm

    Star Trek weapons (both phasers and torpedoes) lock on to targets and almost always hit. Star Wars weapons have a hard time hitting the broad side of a death star and seem to always be manually targeted. Also, the replication armour used in the final episode of Voyager should have advanced Starfleet tech by 20 years, giving them replicated armour that can protect a ship or be removed at the press of a button. Star Wars looks big, but I'd wager that the dyson sphere that the Enterprise D found would hold a few thousand puny death stars and eat them for lunch.

  10. Fik of borg
    April 4, 2015 at 1:13 pm

    Apples to Oranges. Ok, both fruits, both SF franchises. But Star Trek es technically beliebable, while SW just throws numbers.
    Why say that the Slave-I has 64GW when you can add a zero and get another order of magnitude over a Federation ship? Why spend days travelling at warp 5 from one planet to another when you can say that your ship does the kessel run under i-don't-remember-how-few parsecs and be there in hours? (I know, I know... Cumberkhan now can teleport to planetary distances... sigh)

    • Doc
      April 5, 2015 at 1:16 pm

      12 parsecs. Which, rather than being a measurement of time, is a measurement of how badass Han is at finding shortcuts. :)

  11. Buffet
    April 4, 2015 at 12:31 pm

    Viacom?? Negative. Try Paramount.

    • Johnny
      April 4, 2015 at 2:52 pm

      Paramount is a subsidiary of Viacom

    • Buffet
      April 4, 2015 at 6:14 pm

      Nice to know. Thank you sir.

  12. Lulz
    April 4, 2015 at 12:17 pm

    It's obvious the writer leans toward Star Wars.

    • likefunbutnot
      April 4, 2015 at 1:34 pm

      This stuff is actually drawn from first-party, published sources. It's a greatly shortened version of the arguments made at StarDestroyer.net, where you can also find citations on both sides.

      The short version is that if the Federation meant to have any hope of competing with the Galactic Empire, a Star Trek writer should've taken the time to imagine a reason for its numbers to be bigger.

  13. Mats Svensson
    April 4, 2015 at 8:34 am

    Worst.... info-graphics.... ever!

  14. Anonymous
    April 4, 2015 at 7:03 am

    Who needs ground forces? One guy on sensor lock, one guy loading photon torpedoes, one guy using the transporter to teleport a bomb inside the Walker cockpit. Sensor lock the next target, lather, rinse, repeat.

    Three Federation Red Shirts just took out the entire army that attacked Hoth.

    Transporter technology. The ability to make food and supplies out of thin air. Logistics wins wars, not weapons.

    • likefunbutnot
      April 4, 2015 at 1:30 pm

      You can't transport anything through a shield. The Empire is willing to shield objects that mass as much as a small planet.

      Both Star Wars and Star Trek have had "technical readouts" of specifications for various ships published. You can see a more detailed comparison at Stardestroyer.net if you'd like, but Trek's made-up numbers are so lopsided in comparison to Star Wars that any fictional engagement would be like a guy in a rowboat throwing rocks at a battleship.

    • yourmomshouse
      April 4, 2015 at 2:25 pm

      I hate people that use the term "rinse, repeat.." they should be lightsabered right in the dick. Likewise for: "all day" and "is beast."

  15. Callmejace
    April 4, 2015 at 5:01 am

    Haha I laughed when they compared the Slave one to the Enterprise. Scale would be a huge factor in this equation. Though the Slavs 1 would be nimble, the enterprise's lasers would tear through its shields. Whereas if the enterprise's shields are still up, the slave 1 would be like a pesky mosquito. The power comparisons are totally off. Place a star destroyer against the enterprise. Much better of a size comparison.

  16. Doc
    April 4, 2015 at 3:52 am

    And yet a ragtag fleet of Rebel ships took out the Death Star not once, but *twice.* Go figure.

    The infographic mentions the Red Matter from JJ Trek, yet still compares Slave 1 to the Enterprise D, which was destroyed *ten years ago* and replaced with the Enterprise E, which was featured in three movies after that.

    I doubt even Slave-1 could stand up to the future Enterprise-D featured in the last two-part Next Generation story "All Good Things," in which the Enterprise, Admiral Riker's personal ship, had been fitted with a third warp nacelle and a powerful phaser cannon that ripped through Klingon cruisers like paper.

    • likefunbutnot
      April 4, 2015 at 1:21 pm

      Look at the energy outputs associated with The Star Wars engines, weapons and shields. Every category is at least one order of magnitude better than the Federation. The graphic doesn't mention FTL travel, but the problem Voyager faced with getting across a quarter of the galaxy would only be an afternoon trip for the Galactic Empire. Another aspect of this is weapon range, where it turns out that phasers and photon torpedoes need to be at single digit numbers of kilometers apart to be effective but the Empire can build single ships (Star Destroyers) that are effectively planetary siege weapons.

      It's entirely possible that the Enterprise D would have a real problem dealing with even a small group of TIE fighters given how ineffective it would be against Slave-1.

    • Doc
      April 5, 2015 at 1:12 pm

      Yeah. It wouldn't be like the Empire at all to lie about their energy outputs to keep the masses docile, or anything, right?