CPU architecture in consoles couldn't be more uninteresting, to a user it doesn't matter one bit what's "under the hood" in a console, as long as it's powerful enough, cool/silent enough, and helps making the system cheap enough. Games and services are what matters.
I disagree with your claim of uninteresting. While most console users do not feel the need to care what's inside their gizmos, we have reason to find it an interesting detail. Why? Well, some people say that PowerPC is not developed with desktop computing in mind, and therefore these network router chips are relatively poor as desktop processors compared to Intel and AMD things. As the old term "convergence" gradually comes true, these consoles are going to start doing more desktop like things, and they already have. They now surf the web, play movies, show pictures, do video conferencing.
So long as these console makers continue to choose PowerPC, for whatever reasons they have to do that, PowerPC processors will be pulled toward features and instructions beneficial to these and new tasks that historically may be considered desktop things rather than router or car engine things. As these desktop-alike things filter into PowerPC, our situation, so long as we are unwillingly chained to the PowerPC flagpole, can improve. Doesn't mean it will, as that depends on someone taking such a new PowerPC chip and makign a desktop with it, but at least it's possible.
An observation of this happening is the return of Altivec to Frescale's product line. They'd lost interest and dumped it. But enough customers had enough reason to want it back that Freescale had to give in. We potentially benefit from that, as a desktop AmigaOS machine with Altivec is better than one without. As long as consoles and other things want certain features they will much more likely remain core requirements of the PowerPC spec, rather than drift away to optional features or even removed in future spec releases.
