@ HappySqurriel
One can say the PS2 is more powerful at certain things and the Nintendo Wii is more powerful at others. For example the PS2 allows for a higher Pixel Fillrate than the Wii (2,350 Megapixels/Second for the PS2 and 942 Megapixels/Second for the Wii) and the PS2 allows for a higher Textured Fillrate (1,176 Megatexels/Second for the PS2 and 942 Megatexels/Second for the Wii).
An interesting question would be "If this is so why do some multiplatform GameCube games run better than the PS2 version?". IMO the answer to this question is simply due to the game engine.
For example the best multiplatform AtariST/Amiga games were mostly technically far less impressive than the best Amiga-only games. This was often due to developers needing to take notice of the Atari ST weakpoints while
creating their game engine, with Amiga -only games this wasn't needed and developers could fully tap into the Amiga's potential. To make matters
more complex the AtariST did have a slightly higher clocked CPU by default and therefore some early games not
using custom chip advantages at all even ran slightly better on the Atari ST.
It's hard to objectively determine which platform of the last generation was the most powerful. For this
generation it's much easier, the gap between the Nintendo Wii and PS3/XBox 360 is huge. IMO there's clearly a significant gap between the PS3 and XBox 360 as well, in favour
of the PS3. I could go into great depths why the PS3 is significantly higher specced, but I will leave this for another thread.
