Now?

To the lower part: yes, memory and graphic card on Switch are clearly superior to PS3 and X360. I'm not sure about the CPU-power, but the effect of that is in modern consoles usually negligable. So on paper, sure Switch is superior to PS360 and inferior to PS4/X1. But the real thing happens in what game developer do with that.

Look closely on the Last of Us Picture I posted above. The backpack and clothes have a lot of three-dimensional detail. But the actual polygon-model will not reflect this. The 3D is applied by clever usage of textures and some trickery. And that is what really makes a difference. A great dev makes a lot of difference. Hence the picture of Life of Black tiger: all the power of the PS4 for naught at the hands of a completely incompetent developer.

Besides you have the effect of diminishing returns. If you have an object created with 10 polygons and you up that to 20 polygons, the difference is mind-blowing. The difference on the same object upping from 100 polygons to 200 is a lot more negligable. You can see it in direct comparison, but it doesn't change the world anymore. Ha, this picture illustrates that:

Therefore the push for higher resolutions. But even that, 4K has 4 times the pixel number than 1080p. 720p is somewhat around half the pixels. SD is a bit more than a third of that. But the jump from SD to 720p is pretty noticable, the jump to 1080p still somewhat noticable and the even bigger jump to 4K is only visible on a really big TV if you look closely.

So yes, basically is Switch in between PS3/X360 and PS4/X1. But the differences are harder and harder to notice. if you want to detect it, look for framerate and resoultiuon in the same game, this makes a big difference in needed power and is easy to get the information. If you actually see the difference without side-by-side comparisons though ....

EDIT:

Oh, found a nice picture.

Obviously Lara does look better in each iteration, but the first steps are much more noticable.

Why are people comparing very unalike games on the Switch to PS3 games that are designed around a limited play scope. Compare GoW3 to Bayonetta 3 when it comes out.

I will say this: I have Resident Evil Revelations 2 on Switch and that game looks fantastic on my 4K set (I know it's only 1080p). But, again it's a game that runs just fine on last gen hardware.

It runs fine on the 3DS.

The first one may have but I can assure you RER2 didn't!

Oh, salt on a wound.

Thats cause the full pontential of the switch is yet to be extracted. 

In other words: look at the difference between uncharted: drakes fortune and the last of us.  

Or, playing COD 2 (or any game of 2005-2006 on Xbox 360/ps3), was GTA 5 thought to be possible on that same hardware?

Give it an year or two. I guarantee many games will look better GOW 3 ever did (and in my opinion, super mario odyssey already does that).

I feel your pain. After playing the first one on 3DS, it broke my heart when the second one only came to home consoles with a shitty version on the PSV. I tried to find that version for months before giving up. Now I have it for the Switch so the story did have a happy ending, at least.

At times, I looks kinda rough but sometimes it's a sight to behold. I've taken so many screenshots!

Switch lacks content that looks like GoW3. But PS3 doesn't have games as polished as Mario Kart 8 (1080p/60 fps!), Mario Odyssey (60 fps), Splatoon (60 fps), etc.

In pure capabilities the Switch can do anything a PS3 can with more polish.

It's not really something that can be compared with screenshots. A lot more goes into it than that. In fact, for a real comparison, you have to look at development elements and technical limitations. Do shadows and lighting need to be scaled back? How many different AI can be running onscreen at once? How much environmental interaction can you have under stress?

So, yeah, who knows.