Star Wars Vs. Star Trek Infographic Lays Out Each Side Of The Argument

fb share tweet share

Star Wars vs. Star Trek. This has been the biggest rivalry in sci-fi since Star Wars captured the imagination of geeks in 1977. It’s not really a question of which is the better series and universe, it’s a question of how much fantasy do you want in your sci-fi. It’s true both franchises take place in space and have super-futuristic weapons, but Star Wars is more entrenched with the mystical and spiritual unknown than Star Trek.

Luckily, there’s a new infographic from BestOnlineEngineeringDegree.com that breaks down what makes each series special. It highlights the weapons, transport vehicles, and political affiliations of Star Wars and Star Trek, while showing some similarities of these two very different franchises. When it comes down to choosing which is better, it’s just a matter of taste. Check out the infographic after the jump.

When it comes to personal weapons, while a lightsaber looks cool and elegant, it’s not as practical as a phaser particle gun. When it comes to starships, the clear winner is Enterprise-D. It’s another case of function over form. When it comes to weapons of mass destruction, the Borg Tactical Cube wins over the Imperial Death Star. The Death Star is so vulnerable to attack, whereas “resistance is futile” when it comes to the Borg.

While this infographic isn’t going to put an end to a debate  that’s been going on for decades, it will most likely appeal to both Trekkies and Star Wars fans for its design. Although we have to question its conclusion that Star Wars wins out over Star Trek. Its logic is faulty because everyone knows Star Trek is leagues better than Star Wars


  1. heronymo says:

    The Enterprise vs Slave 1? What? That doesn’t even make sense. Also, using the “Borg Tactical Cube” from Voyager nullifies the whole thing. You don’t use things from Voyager to make a point. haha.

    If you took all of the species in Star Trek and put them together they could easily take on the Empire.

  2. Zack Murray says:

    Seriously? Slave 1?

    • Kent Miscoe says:

      Agreed, even an Eradicator class Star Destroyer would annihilate any Enterprise. This infographic is obviously Star Trek biased.

      • James Gates says:

        um, no it’s not, look at the power output of the slave 1 vs the enterprise. it’s saying the slave 1 has better firepower and speed.

      • It’s clearly not – if it was a generic comparison, the Enterprise should be compared to the Super Star Destroyer. Given that it’s established early in TNG, lasers can’t even penetrate starship navigational fields, one could even compare the Enterprise to the Death Star, as it’s been established the Enterprise is capable of destroying planets.

        • In these comments, several people have said that the Enterprise can destroy planets. Where does this idea come from? In the original series, the Enterprise could depopulate (kill everyone on) a planet, but I don’t recall seeing anything about them being actually able to destroy a planet like the Death Star can.

          • 1) The Doomsday Machine: A weapon created by unknown persons wich fires an
            Antiproton beam capable of destroying a planet. It then uses the planet
            as fuel. It is immune to almost all known weaponry, and was only
            defeated by shoving a Constitution class starship down it’s throat and
            overloading the Fusion reactors. http://memory-alpha.org/wiki/Planet_killer

            2. Genesis. Commonly believed by fans to be a refinement of the
            transporter process, it’s Canon effects include the ‘conversion of life
            to lifelessness’. In addition, if used on a world already harboring
            life, it will ‘replace’ this life, much like copying random data onto a
            report it took you hours to make. http://memory-alpha.org/wiki/Genesis_Device

            3. Phasers are known to be capable of drilling deep into the planets
            crust, and from there, it is reasonable to assume that they could then
            use a variety of means, mostlikely antimater weapons, to destabalize the
            planet enough to depopulate it. The episode evidencing that should be
            found here. http://memory-alpha.org/wiki/Inheritance_(episode)

            4. Trilithium can be used to destroy stars. http://memory-alpha.org/wiki/Trilithium

            5. The Krenim Weapon. Through unknown means, it wipes it’s targets from
            history, it is difficult to survive this weapons effects, even if not
            turned on you. http://memory-alpha.org/wiki/Krenim_weapon_ship

            6. Subspace weapons, capable of ‘ripping a whole in the universe’. http://memory-alpha.org/wiki/Subspace_weapon

            7. Finally, the Xindi weapon, which was seen destroying the earth in an
            alternate timeline. Note, the weapon was finished, and destroyed with
            only a few moments before it could reach earth, leaving reason to
            believe that it’s capabilities are Canon. http://memory-alpha.org/wiki/Xindi_weapon

            8. Tractor Beams. Federation starships are able to pull objects many
            times their mass, wich means they could pull asteroids or even comets
            into impact trajectories. I can’t find any specific instances easily, so
            discount this one as you wish. I think that by now, the point has been

  3. Rhinostic says:

    Lightsabre vs Batlith maybe or Millenium Falcon vs the Defiant: some of these comparisons aren’t apples to apples. Star Destroyer vs Enterprise. What about sheild Tech?

    • the enterprise has higher output than listed, not to mention its targeting systems, range, and manouverability. besides, i do believe that there were only a few force users and the enterprise would not be facing down the rebellion. with the superior scanning, and science facilities, and the fact that they seem to be thinking that it would only be the enterprise vs the empire, bias is here.
      I love both franchises, but i find it much more interesting to read the EU books for Star Wars. I am among many who believe its time to bring back the enterprise in some way to television.

  4. The Galactic Republic/Empire is considered a stage 3 civilization on the Kardashev scale. The United Federation of Planets is a stage 2 civilization. The Star Wars universe is therefore, from hundreds to thousands of years more advanced in every way.

    • Daniel A. says:

      I will always chose STAR WARS, because the story it`s truly appealing. STAR TREK(though I liked the J.J. Abrams`movie) it`s very boring. It may have science, but it really lacks the heart and poetry of the hero`s journey shown by Lucas` Galactic epic. Only THE LORD OF THE RINGS surpass it as an epic adventure, and yet, you will always get as a popular refference the journey of Luke, Leia, and Han to defeat the Empire

  5. Katamanda says:

    I sense some bias in the writing of this article…

  6. Troy Avidano says:

    Ok whoever wrote this did not take into account the superior
    technology the Federation has: (These things alone could tip the balance)



    Deflector Dishes



    Cloaking Tech (Because they don’t have a treaty with them
    not to use it)

    Also they forgot to measure in the Klingons, Romulans,
    Cardasions, and every other major species in the Star Universe. The
    fighters in the Star trek World have Shields too so one on one I think
    Federation Ships would rule the Sky’s. I
    do think the ground battle would be ruled by the Empire Droids, Land Vehicles
    and sheer man power.

    But either way this was a really bad example of Star Wars
    vs. Star Trek and I like both more Star Trek but still..

  7. Andrew Reese says:

    The writers are just pulling weapon’s energy outputs out of their butts…for both series.

  8. Sanokumo says:

    I am not really biased one way or the other I really like both. One problem comparing the two is terminology, for instance SW-lightspeed (obviously must be faster making planetary travel possible) and ST- Warp speed (i don,t know how fast that is but much much faster than light speed) SW- turbo lasers vs ST-Phazers (Phased particle beams or Forced Plasma beams?). SW- Ion engines vs. ST- Antimatter reactors. Ect. Ect. But Star treck tech seems much much further along in most areas, for instance Transporters, Replicators, Cloaking devises. Where as Star wars seems only to be way ahead in one tech Artificial intelligence.

    I cant believe that the numbers listed in this thing are accurate, it seems highly implausible that Slave one’s firepower is 21000% higher than the Enterprise’s.

    I personally always theorized that the Star Wars Galaxy must be very very condensed galaxy compared to the milky way making Space travel possible much earlier for all the civilizations there. And perhaps this proliferation of star systems so close together made life possible on more planets, thus making life very abundant, and perhaps that could explain the “Force” being in that galaxy but not ours.

    • Sanokumo says:

      one thing I forgot to mention is The Federation is only about a century old by ST:TNG time and humans are only a space-faring race for a couple hundred years. Star wars Civilizations have been space-faring for a couple of Milleniums,

      • James Gates says:

        I agree with several of your points especially that the time frame is vastly different. Think of how powerful the federation might be if they had a couple millennia to advance. Plus in Trek the shields were developed very early on to be impervious to lasers of any kind, that’s why phasers were developed. So I don’t think it would make much of a difference how much power slave 1 has… 🙂 the warheads would be pretty comparable to torpedoes though.

    • Trevor Stove says:

      star wars has cloking devices,the falken is to small to have 1, ep 4

    • Joshua says:

      Just wanted to point out one thing regarding the AI: Data. Not a common version of ST AI, but a valid one. Much as I adore SW, they have nothing like him.

      And for the record, I grew up on both, and could never choose between them.

  9. That’s one hell of a nice infographic. Anyone know what creates these?

  10. Aaron Smith says:

    Yoda vs. The Traveler. Let’s see it.

  11. Zack says:

    Enterprise vs Slave 1? HAHAHAHA that’s when I stopped reading. 1 kilometer length ship vs a 25 meter ship? Laughable. Lightsaber pwns Phaser, plus they can Force Pull the guns away from assailants, so there’s that.

  12. Didn’t someone already calculate this outcome based on actual power output generated by weapons and spaceships. Slave 1 destroyed the Enterprise easily.

  13. Tyrosine says:

    Cite sources. The Enterprise-D’s technical manual is readily available. Where do you get your info about Slave 1 and the Death Star? And what’s this about Slave 1, a ship barely bigger than a shuttlecraft packing weapons that are orders of magnitude more powerful than those powered by antimatter reactors and artificial singularities? Has the science and theoretical technology *ever* been worked out for these ships in the Star Wars universe? Just because an author slaps a gigantic number on a page doesn’t make it canon, realistic, believable, or even theoretically possible (the three areas in which the Star Wars universe is most lacking). If the calculations are worked out in detail, from top to bottom, as they have been for Star Trek, then I will accept this on the basis that the Empire has had thousands of years to advance its technology, whereas most civilizations in Star Trek have done it in a few centuries. Until then, the Star Wars arguments remain utterly lacking in hard data to support grandiose claims.

  14. Kaz Alkilani says:

    This is bullshit, Star Wars is for small children. The Borg would assimilate the shit out of the empire. End of.

  15. Rand says:

    … You can’t compare the two – what the frell is wrong with you?
    Star Trek is in our galaxy 200 to 300 years away, Star Wars was along time ago in a galaxy far far away…
    Star Trek was a TV show – Star Wars is a movie!
    Star Trek is submarine warfare – Starwars is a Jet fighter dog fight.
    Star Trek had researched scientific principles, and theory – Starwars was a fantasy that was inspired by science.
    Star Trek was from the 60’s – Starwars was from the 70’s
    A much cooler geek war is ‘I Dream of Jeanie’ vs ‘Bewitched’

  16. Dave says:

    Q would be slightly amused by the force then put all the Jedi in dresses except the girl Jedi who would be wearing Lederhosen perhaps. Darth would get pretty pink new armor and Yoda would be incapable of talking backwards anymore. Even if Q stayed out of it the Federations temporal agents would not allow any major losses against a star wars galaxy fleet and would do anything to win in order to survive themselves.

  17. While lightsabers are undoubtedly one of the coolest weapons ever imagined, blasters are equipped (for the most part) with a “stun” setting & have the ability to destroy heavy masonry (just watch the escape from Mos Eisly in New Hope & see what kind of damage Hans DL-44 was doing to the architecture), which makes them a far more fair comparison for personal weaponry. They may not be equipped with a disintegrate setting, but that’s only relevant if you’re going for an espionage approach & don’t want to leave evidence behind of your murderous activities, other than that, dead is dead. That said, a phaser probably has better longevity as Hans blaster only held enough power for 25 shots (according to the RPG).
    For the fighters & vehicles, the TIE may be more maneuverable, but it lacks shields & the target tracking systems of the tac-fighter, not to mention the fact that it is FTL-capable make it a clear winner in any engagement between the two. While the Feds may lack ground vehicles, transporter tech make APCs & the like irrelevant. Should have been a win for Trek there.
    On a larger scale, since the Enterprise was the flagship of the federation, wouldn’t a more sensible SW analogue be the Executor, which is going to have even bigger numbers attached to it (apart from sublight speed)?
    Finally, superluminal speed is a crucial factor. Since Trek got more precise about travel times*, it was supposed to take Voyager 70 years to travel home, which would be a distance of at least half a galaxy, wheras a class 1 military hyperdrive in SW can cross their entire galaxy in under a week. Even if the SW galaxy is a dwarf galaxy one tenth the size of the Milky Way, that’s still 730 times faster than Trek. Wars vessels would be able to strike across the Federation (& every other Trek civilisation ever mentioned) before any reasonable response could be mobilised. As such, in a straight-up fight, the Empire would crush everything in the Trekverse (apart from Q, Dowds & other god-like beings) in short order.
    *In the original series, the Eneterprise reached the edge of the galaxy, then in ST5, they reached the middle. I’m not sure of the cronology, but it wasn’t that many years & they were hardly going in a straight line for all that time.

    • In this entire, exhaustive and detailed description (good work, by the way), you’ve missed out one major point: as pretty much all SW ships are equipped with lasers, they’re nowhere near capable of “crushing” everything in the Trekverse, as it’s established early on that lasers cannot even penetrate navigational shields, hence why phasers were invented.

      • Chris says:

        But they’re not lasers. They don’t look like lasers, they don’t act like lasers, they’re not even called lasers (blasters or turbolasers, which, in the fluff, are ironically nowhere near being lasers).

  18. This is totally Trek biased. A phaser cant beat a light saber, how many times have we seen Jedi deflect energy weapons with their sabers? What about Star Destroyers Vs. the Enterprise? How can the Borg cube withstand one shot from the Death Star?

    • daniel says:

      Definitely! Trekkie goons has a visceral hatred for STAR WARS since its release in 1977!!…it`s a long time rage

      • That’s a load of shite. I’m a science fiction fan, I love the whole lot. That whole “lightsabre beats phaser” thing is bollocks, though, when you read what the science is.

        What they need to be focusing on is that Star Trek is more realistic, but Star Wars is much cooler.

  19. The real argument is about realism. Star Wars has none, and Star Trek does. Star Trek has practical uses in modern society (like current research into warp drive) while star wars had one look into Light Sabre’s and realized it was impossible to trap light in a defined space without refraction. It’s really like comparing Lost to Band of Brothers. There is no comparison.

  20. ZodzillA says:

    Umm, who cares? The Federation has a Teleporter……..

  21. Joshua Hyatt says:

    This is the worst friggin’ infographic ever.

    First, X-Wings > Tie Fighters every day of the month. X-Wings have shields, hyperdrives, and proton torpedo launchers.

    Second, Slave One vs the Enterprise? Ridiculous, but Slave One would probably still win due to it’s speed and maneuverability. That said, where are the friggin’ Star Destroyers? The symbol and might of the Empire incarnate. And the fact that there were 25 000 of them at the height of the Empire.

    Second, or third if you’re keeping track, if a lightsaber can deflect a Ssi-Ruuvi Paddle Beam I’m sure it can deflect a Phaser beam.

    Fourth, a Borg Tactical Cube as a WMD? No way. It doesn’t stack up against a Death Star. That’s as bad as the Slave One vs Enterprise comparison. And Red Matter? What a joke. Worst. Plot device. Ever.

    Fifth… I need a girlfriend.

    • Someone is blatantly biased in favour of Star Wars.

      You do know that, according to ST physics, the Enterprise is capable of destroying a planet, right? Slave One would have no chance whatsoever.

      Wars vs. Trek is a perfectly fine rivalry to have – give credit where it’s due.

  22. You never saw the Federation get defeated by a bunch of aboriginal Koala Bears. ‘Nuff Said.

  23. baby fart mcgeeziaks says:

    haha, this was fun to read. Like many others the Enterprise vs Slave I comparison has me scratching my head. The Enterprise is a science/military starship with a crew of hundreds, the Slave I can be operated by one person and was designed (if I remember correctly) as a police vehicle and then heavily modified. This is almost like comparing a really tricked out Police SUV to a Navy battleship- the match up doesn’t really make that much sense. Now I have always dreamed of seeing some sort of dimensional rift causing Picard and friends to end up in the Star Wars universe and helping the rebels in an epic Enterprise vs Star Destroyer battle

  24. asdasd says:

    Star Wars fan boy nonsense. Old arguments that have no basis in reality (as far as you can get when talking about science fiction). The SW guys basically pull numbers out of their butts, and where are transporters in all this? Oh that’s right, not accounted for.

  25. As much of a fan as I am of both franchises, I can only really say one thing: GET A LIFE!!!!!!

  26. How the Slave 1 can have those stats verses the Enterprise is beyond me. I LOVE Star Wars, and that match-up doesn’t make sense. Maybe Star Destroyer verses Enterprise, or if your willing, Millenium Falcon. Aside from that, the rest of the infographic seems sound, except for the fact that the Death Star is infinitely larger than the Borg Tactical Cube.