Abstract: In different jurisdictions, performance evaluation system is commonly used to optimize the operation of prosecutorial power and the management of prosecutors’ performance. Based on contextual comparison, we find that America, France, Germany and Chinese Taiwan have chosen different modes of procuratorial operation: the principle of independence and the principle of unity. They share the same characteristics of “individual-based evaluation” regarding the evaluative method, while they are different for “quantitative degree of indicators” and “effects of social evaluation”. Both convergence and divergence indicate the infrastructure and logic of the two kinds of procuratorial systems: the American mode of “independence of prosecutors” is rooted in the cooperative structure of power, which focuses on the value of community participation; while the mode of France, Germany and Chinese Taiwan, “unity of prosecutors” is originated from bureaucratic structure of power, which emphasizes the “top-down” effect of quantitative indicators. Mainland China adopted the principle of “unity of prosecutors” and multiple prosecutorial functions. Therefore, the performance evaluation system characterized by “prosecutorial-function-based assessment” and “internal-assessment” may be maintained for a long period. In order to avoid the insufficiency of individual motivation and lack of external supervision, the reformers could think more about utilizing the classified, individual-based, and consultative evaluation methods in the future.