Have you got the NVIDIA numbers right? A NVIDIA DGX Station A100 (desktop/workstation sized computer with 4x A100 and draws 1.5 kW of power, is rated at 2.5 petaFLOPS, so a good 30+% more than the PS3 cluster.
Also the PS3 apparently drew up to 200w, so a cluster that size would have drawn 352 kW.
The units being used here are likely different. In most press releases Nvidia uses their "tensor core" performance, usually with either sparsity or 16 bit data. A single A100 is said to have 320 teraflops of "tensor float" performance but only 19 teraflops of "normal" full FP32 performance.
This is way out of my field so I don't know the whole implications, but my understanding is Nvidia cards cam only reach these speeds at the loss of precision or full functionality, so it's an apples to oranges comparison versus non-nvidia chips.
Also the PS3 apparently drew up to 200w, so a cluster that size would have drawn 352 kW.