Could someone find a chart for me scaling the ratios of different key hardware values of the PS1/N64 to those of Gamecube/Xbox to those of PS3/Xbox 360 to those of PS4/Xbone?

They are simple numbers that people can relate to, that's where those numbers came from. Would it be better if I used vehicles as an example? 

jet-powered car - A current gaming PC

700 HP Charger - PS4

670 HP Mustang - Xbox One

500 HP Subaru - Wii U

All different machines that offer different things. In the end, all of them on a straightaway the Charger would be slightly faster than the Mustang, and defintely faster than the Subaru. With tuning in 5 years It wouldn't be that hard to put each of these "cars" at a +100 HP ahead of their current targets. All these things are still slower than a Jet powered car.  

This is pretty much explaining things so anyone could read and say "oh, okay I get it". It helps having a background in marketing. I can easily explain this stuff in laymens terms. 

Comparing consoles to PC is just useless, even if consoles share the same architecture. You won't be able to run brand new games in 2019 on a PC you buy today for 500 bucks, not even on minimal settings. PS4 and X1 will have no problems with that, and I can guarantee you that the graphics will be surprisingly good.

Of course the consoles are by no means supercomputers or anything, but they are powerful enough and offer some hefty advances over PCs like unified RAM, sleek Operating Systems and so on. You just can't compare the two directly, apples and oranges you know...

Try finding a PC from 2005 that runs GTA5. Good luck with that. Hint: You won't find one. Even high end machines from 2005 are pretty much useless for today's games. With a Xbox 360 you can play GTA, Titanfall, Destiny and what not no problem. If you seriously think that it will be any different this time around, you're just delusional imo. While there are some advances in optimizing PC hardware with Mantle and so on, it will never get to the level of consoles, there's just too much hardware around for that. So while your PC hardware might be 300 % more powerful on paper, you can be happy if that translates to 100 % more power in reality.

I feel the same about your opinion as I do about your writing.

And I do have access to expensive hardware, so I'm not biased in that way.

Once again, your writing is really nice. But that might just be because it looks so grande in contrast with the aggregate.

You do realize your only feeding the fanboys, they won't listen. Fanboys have self esteem issues and some people in the industry feed off that. Best to leave it be and focus on what you enjoy the most from gaming. I only bought a PS4 for the exclusives and its a cheaper way to play the indies. 

Those numbers are misleading. Raw teraflop counts are the best benchmark you can use to gauge console performance. That was true for last gen and every gen before that and wont change now. Your numbers push the Wii U up way higher than it should be. The disparity in RAM, clock speed and CPU cores alone makes that even more evident.

In PC terms no one would ever consider the Radeon 7770 HD(X1) to be just as good as a Radeon 7870 HD(PS4). And saying that the Radeon 5550HD (Wii U) is almost as good as either of those two is a straight up lie as evidenced by the 720p -> 792/900p -> 1080p heirachy in most 1st and 3rd party games on those systems. And in case you didn't pay attention 720p60 and 900p30 require significantly less resources than 1080p60

Lol... maybe a little of both.

OT: I find these console PC arguments increasingly counterproductive. Its literally like saying; because a really good looking car costs $30k and does 0-60 in 6 seconds anyone who buys it is stupid cause they could have bought a really good looking car for $100k that does 0-60 in 3 secs. 

PC(some) guys look at consoles and start crunching numbers. If this game looks like this on a console that has this amount of teraflops and ram and badwidth...etc, then on a PC with this and that it should be this much or that much better looking. While conveniently completely ignoring the fact that the game ACTUALLY LOOKS GOOD on the console. Or the look at a game like destiny, infamous or killzone and say.."meh, doesn't look that hot and its only running at 30fps" as if 60fps somehow makes a game look next gen or whatever. 

The way i see it, if a PC guy takes a GPU that in of itself costs more than a PS4, then starts comparing it to the PS4.... that PC guy has got a very serious inferiority complex. I mean pick on someone your own size. Once upon a time the PC games fought with themselves, cause consoles couldn't hold a cndle to them. If you ask me, its a compliment that every PC fanboy or fansite feels the urge to compare their stuff with the PS4/XB1.

I'm not sure what you're saying here. If the ps4 isn't "next gen graphics" then what the hell is lol? Sure, game wise it's a bit slow for the early adopters, but that's always the case when a new console generation starts. However, I'm pretty sure we will see a ton of big budget, quality games that are designed from the ground up around these new consoles. I'm also sure they will look miles ahead of anything we seen before on last gen consoles and even pc. Hopefully most of them will get ported over to pc but, unfortunately, you will need a NASA super computer to run them at decent settings. And I don't care what the guy in the video said, Watch Dogs is a pretty good example of a game that most pc gamers can't play at a decent framerate because they don't have a gpu with 2 or 3 gigs of VRAM and a 8 core cpu.