I'm no expert in this arena, just trying to build a mid-priced mid-range machine and get the best bang for my buck.

But I have serious doubts about the validity of this entire review when you have sooo blatently skewed the supposed prices in your price/performance comparison. Every single AMD price is over by $5-10, and every Intel price is under by $5-10. That's a $10-20 skewing of your results, which could throw the results off by as much as 15-20%! That's just ridiculous.

This obvious bias makes me question all your results, especially when they are way out of whack with other comparisons I've seen.

This article wasn't plagiarise worthy.

You guys have got sucked in money from Intel corp and wrote in their favour.
AMD is topping the charts in evry lab EXCEPT yours ?????????
you are wrong!!!!!!!

About Atlhon 64 X2 AMD processors, you`d must be use O.S. x86_64bits and 64Bits aplications to test.

Exemplo:

Windows Vista 64Bits + PhotoShop CS2 64Bits for Athon 64 X2.

This wuz a wicked Review... i have the Core 2 Duo E4500 ... and for the most part.. this processor wuz intermediate in every Event! it wuz neither bad nor great... soo i'm pleased with that .. thankz alot for the great report!

Why is there not a comparison of CPU's based on AutoCAD 2007 or 2008? Comparisons are made with Photoshop CS3 and other intense applications, I think that using AutoCAD as a software reference would help a lot of upgraders, and builders.

Is it fully updated? It would be fine if the price/performance will be updated now when AMD has made some price drops.

This is my first time using Xbitlabs, and I must say I'm impressed. Very impressed. Ilya Gavrichenkov, thank you very much for your extremely informative article.

I'd just like to say, this article is the most aweswome article on contemporary CPus I've seen. The comprehensive details about price to performance in general, and in different application tasks is brilliant. As well as the break down of application specific ratings, allows me to see how I can expect my new platform to perform.

I'd have to say that this has been the single most important document in helping me to decide on a CPU.

The ony thing that could be improved is allowing users to generate their own graphs by putting in their own prices, so as to allow this information to be more timely for users. :)

flkyul

M that is totally wrong as was posted by me a week after the first q6600 was in my had. check the post below it is from August 07

http://www.tomshardware.com/forum/244351-28-61ghz-1ghz

what have we found out 8 months later? that yes indeed each and every q6600 clocks to 3.6ghz with in a small voltage range.

cpu overclocking is like predicting the sun cycles - they are very consistent and every easy to project

just as the P4 ran 4.1ghz
remember most cpus are the same each chip with different multipliers or a few things turned on or off.

this article made me change my mind and go for an intel, I was almost decided to buy a amd 4400 but i think i will get the intel E2180

that stupid, ist false