The PS3 has a single CPU, not counting the EmotionEngine chip from the PS2 that some models have. It has a single Cell processor, that has about 8 cores, only 6-7 of which are actually used by the PS3.
Personally, I hope the future of video games is that this obsession with graphics subsides enough to let some real gameplay innovation happen. I don't know how much longer I can deal with the same basic formula being recycled for countless games. Graphics aside, how much real change has there been in first person shooter titles since Wolfeinstein 3D back in the early 90s? You still mostly run around cramped corridors, shooting pretty much anything that moves. The Thief series was a refreshing take on the first person shooter... Not only do you play an anti-hero, but stealth and cunning are the objective, not just charging in guns blazing.
Even my favorite genre of role playing games has been pretty stagnant for quite some time. The sphere grid in FFX was interesting, as was the no random encounters aspect of FFXII, but most RPGs follow a pretty set pattern. Some great evil appears, and a motley band of heroes sets off to dispatch it. You usually have your guys on one side, enemy units on the other, and you take turns slugging it out. It's been like that since the NES days in the 80s. Games like Grandia came up with an interesting twist, but it was more of an evolution than a revolution.
I wish more people would stand up and say that they would prefer gameplay to take precedence over graphics. Once you've got the controls down and all the other game mechanics are finely tuned and running smoothly, you can spend the remaining time and budget on making the game look pretty. As opposed to making the game look pretty, and then spending very little time on controls and other game mechanics. The world is littered with games that could have been truly excellent if more time had been spent on the fundamental mechanics.

Chowhound
Comic Vine
GameFAQs
GameSpot
Giant Bomb
TechRepublic