I've not flown the SR22 but I have flown the SR20. I've flown the TB and the Rockwell.
I'd be surprised if you could find a SR22 for the same money as a TB20 or 114B.
As with marioair, I'd separate out the SR22 from the other 2.
Both the TB20 and the 114B are metal aircraft with retracting gear and manually adjusted propellers.
The SR22 is plastic with an automatic prop.
I would imagine the fuel burn to be about the same for all 3, with the Cirrus coming out a bit more fuel-efficient due to higher speed.
I found all 3 to be more comfortable to sit in and operate over a 2-hour sector than a 'cooking' PA28 or C172.
The Cirrus has fixed gear, whereas the other 2 have the possibility of landing wheel-up.
The Cirrus needs a new parachute and rocket every 10 years at £10k. The other 2 need extra maintenance (cost) to keep the wheels coming down.
Both the TB and the 114 I have flown have 'legacy' instrumentation with add-on GPS and autopilots. The Cirrus I've flown have Garmin Perspective.
With the 'legacy' stuff, the initial transition from a typical training aircraft isn't too hard as you can fly basic VFR to get used to the aircraft before getting more adventurous with IFR flight. With the Cirrus, you need to do a comprehensive ground school course in a dedicated simulator, then a bit of flying with a type-current instructor. Flying with an instructor familiar with the particular kit in all 3 aircraft is essential before going touring. Beware legacy autopilots.
The Cirrus takes up more room in a hangar, due to its wingspan. It is also really awkward to move about in the hangar due to its castoring nosewheel. This might take some getting used to when taxi-ing. Get some time in an AA5 to learn how. It's great when you get it.
No noseleg will take a lot of abuse, but the Cirrus seems more fragile. The mains seem very sturdy, designed to take the impact of a parachute let-down. I wouldn't operate a Cirrus from grass. The spats are really tight on the wheels.
The Cirrus has a reputation for being more difficult to land. In my experience, it's all about being ahead of the aircraft and getting the speed on final absolutely nailed. I've witnessed a horrendous landing accident with a Cirrus (too fast, enormous bounce, failure to go around, prop shattered and noseleg collapse on 3rd bounce). This rather put me off, but lately I've had an opportunity to do some flying in one and with proper training and discipline, the Cirrus is no more difficult than the other 2.
The biggest difference for me was the instrumentation. For the Cirrus, it's essential to get proper training and to use the autopilot in the cruise. I wouldn't want to hand-fly a Cirrus for a protracted period in IMC, whereas I've done 2 hours in IMC hand-flying the 114B. Very stable in pitch.
Hope this helps
TOO