This is gonna be a comparison of how fast the console was VS a top of the line, computer, that existed when the console first launched.

NES¹ - about 50%
SNES² - about 25%
PS1³ - about 25%
N64⁴ - about 45%
PS2⁵ - about 30%
GC⁶ - about 30%
XBOX⁷ - about 60%
360⁸ - about 80%
PS3⁹ - about 80%
Wii¹⁰ - about 5%

¹I'm not sure where the NES falls into line with home PCs of the time, as nothing was documented well, and I dont feel like spending more time trying to find 1 bit of info.

²The SNES wasnt as fast as the NES when it launched, however it had enough kick to keep it in the top spot.

³The PS1 when it was launched, it really wasnt that amazing in terms of hardware when it launched.

⁴The N64 when it launched had alot more power than the PS1, and becuase of it's power it had much better graphics. It came out a year after the PS1, but it was much close to a modern PC when it launched.

⁵PS2 When the PS2 launched, the chip was not like a PC chip, it was smaller, cooler, and used less power. However because the chip was so special it cost alot more than it was worth.

⁶The GameCube when it was released was overshadowed by the release of the x-box. The GameCube had more power than the PS2, but it was never said much because the x-box was the winner in the power battle.

⁷The X-box was a beast when it first came out. The thing was a litteral brick. It weighed a ton, it was huge, it was massive, and it was fast. It was actually a home PC in a console box.

⁸The 360 when it launched was amazingly fast. Even today, a year after it launched it is well over 75% of a home computer.

⁹The PS3 has amazing power within it as well. It is a little faster than the 360, but due to the fact it is a year newer, it is about the same number as the 360.

¹⁰The Wii. This is where you get mad at me. The Wii has roughly double the processor and roughly double the graphics speed of the GameCube. This puts it right beside the original x-box in actual power. The Wii is roughly 2/3rd of a 6 year old computer. The Graphics chip on the Wii is close to a GeForce3 in performance. That is about 1/32 of a 8800GTX. Or about 3%. Giving the Wii 5% is giving it more credit than it deserves.

Correct my numbers where I am wrong if you will. I will fix them if you can prove your numbers. (I pulled most of these numbers out of my arse, so their not 100% accurate, I would love to make them more accurate) 

In terms of processing power, the PS3 is far quicker than a home computer

If people hate my opinion, why do I get PMs about how much people like what I say?

EDIT: My wife is asleep, so I cant use my sound system and I dont feel like playing games today. 

 The one thing that matters is graphics power/ability tho. I am also trying to aim low for the PS3/360 because I'm already getting trolled by the Wii-boys. Imagine if I put 150% for the 360, and 400% for the PS3 becuase of the 8x faster processor.

400% vs 3.5%. ROFL. That's funny. But the actual processor... is that much faster. The graphics chip is around 20x faster tho. 

 Hahahahaha Quote of the day. Can we see some screenshots of these PMs?

ioi said: Now chose the consoles out of that list which were most successful...

 So far, the PS2, but lets wait a couple of years to see

Where are you GETTING these numbers

The PS3 uses one PPC (like) core running at 3.2 Ghz, 7 "special single purpose cores" that dont get used all the time, and a Graphics core in the range of a Gforce 7800.

How can that be considered 4 times as strong as a Top of the line desktop, OR 8x faster CPU?!

ioi said: Now chose the consoles out of that list which were most successful...

 Are you telling me less power is better? :P

Nah, the PS3 is out there to stay out there for longer than they have in the past. Sony wants to keep the PS3 for 8-10 years. Microsoft... They just wanna loose money. And Nintnedo is there just to make money.

Let me list the biggest flaw and advantage each console has/had.

NES - Nintendo brand games. Horrible 3rd party relations.
SNES - Nintendo brand games. Horrible 3rd party relations.
N64 - Power, Nintendo brand games. Horrible 3rd party relations.
GameCube - Power, Nintendo brand games. bad 3rd party relations.
Wii - Controls+Nintendo brand games. lack of power Power, 3rd party game sales.

PS1 - Use of CD for data storage. Lack of power.
PS2 - Massive array of 3rd party support. Difficulty to program for.
PS3 - Super Fast machine. Difficulty to program for. (and for today the price but in 3 years that wont be horrible)

X-Box - Super fast. Horrible reliablity, and buisness practice.
360 - Super Fast. GARBAGE build quality.

 The PS3 cell processor runs (in the real world) about 8x faster than a top of the line CPU. (on paper it is about 20x faster)

The Graphics chip is more like a GeForce 8800 with 7800 feature set.

It's roughly 50% faster than a top of the line 7900.

Also, If you look at my top numbers. I say the PS3 is 80%. Not 400%. (Count 75% for GPU and 800% for CPU, you get a average of 300-400% faster) 

Not a single technical comparison rates the cell processor as anywhere NEAR 20 times faster than an Intel Q6800, not even REMOTELY close.

Stop pulling numbers out of your ass, and start citing sources.