I read articles like this all the time for multiple websites. I am a professional application performance tester and I can tell you that most of these articles are junk just to stir up the masses. Most of their statistics are based on averages. This means that 51% of the time they are wrong. Have you noticed that none of them show confidence tests to prove that their data is accurate? Also they don't use 90th percentiles. I think this is due to the lack of the tools that they are using to generate these sub-standard statistics. Until the software they are using is more precise I would consider these tests to be junk science.

Thanks for all the information. I used this model to build my first computer, although no matter what I try to do, my CPU-Z never shows me the multiplier being anything but 4.0 and I can't get my core speed above 800 even w/ CnQ disabled.

Geez, some of you people make it sound like AMD has to have the fastest CPU in the market or they just aren't any good or something!

AMD knows what their chip/PC parts are worth in the market place and their price/performance fits in very nicely. I applaud AMD, without them you'd be reading about the new $900 2GHz P4s right about now LOL!

Either AnandTech is Intel fan or Intel pays them hefty Loyalty.

If not, then why every other reviewieng site shows AMD PHENOM 2 X4 955 BE defeating Core i7 940 on evey computing prospects.

On some instances it has bashed on Core i7 965 extreme.

This is pretty much biased and helping INTEL play their MONOPOLOY in this sector. In today's market, no two rivals can have their top of line product bearing differences of Day and Night like shown in this review.

Thanks

Either AnandTech is Intel fan or Intel pays them hefty Loyalty.

If not, then why every other reviewieng site shows AMD PHENOM 2 X4 955 BE defeating Core i7 940 on evey computing prospects.

On some instances it has bashed on Core i7 965 extreme.

This is pretty much biased and helping INTEL play their MONOPOLOY in this sector. In today's market, no two rivals can have their top of line product bearing differences of Day and Night like shown in this review.

Thanks

Either AnandTech is Intel fan or Intel pays them hefty Loyalty.

If not, then why every other reviewieng site shows AMD PHENOM 2 X4 955 BE defeating Core i7 940 on evey computing prospects.

On some instances it has bashed on Core i7 965 extreme.

This is pretty much biased and helping INTEL play their MONOPOLOY in this sector. In today's market, no two rivals can have their top of line product bearing differences of Day and Night like shown in this review.

Thanks

PII 940 BE = $189.99 on Newegg right now and for the last week+
PII 940 BE = $189.99 on Newegg right now and for the last week+
PII 940 BE = $189.99 on Newegg right now and for the last week+
PII 940 BE = $189.99 on Newegg right now and for the last week+
PII 940 BE = $189.99 on Newegg right now and for the last week+
PII 940 BE = $189.99 on Newegg right now and for the last week+
PII 940 BE = $189.99 on Newegg right now and for the last week+

----

Why is it every AMD article on this site has errors?

how x264?x264 benchmark 2.0 is very old .

it is 819,but new x264 is 1139.intel is better for 1139 a lot.

please test wirh new x264.

you know what they say about black processors...