Interesting, but by only using one core it doesn't give a decent real world test
I'd have like to have seen a real 'upgrade' comparison, eg divx encoding on an x2 vs phenom to give me some idea if it's worth the money

not realy the Point of this test was to show how real world apps perform in Single threded apps

was hopeing anandtech did this but thay used Faster X2 amd chips so there was No point at all included them results unless thay had the same clocked chips as well

and thay have all ready done (or other sites have any way) done divx tests but like i sad before thay needed to inclued same clocked X2 chips as well

untill X4 3ghz cpus are out or can run at it 2.6ghz X4 performs like an 2.7-2.9ghz X2 cpu (apart from when more then 2 cores are used then it smoke all X2 chips no mater what clock speed thay run at, Divix for e.g.)

DAAMIT I'm now in limbo, wanting to upgrade, but not really sure if i should..... (actually i'm pretty sure that I shouldn't)

I still maintain these are better products than Intel's C2Q. A real-world testing using heavy multi-tasking would show the benefits of a monolithic design and in a cluster environment this would simply win hands down, since inter-core bandwidth is essential. Intel's offerings concentrate on nstructions per clock - not bandwidth.

8 of these cores when used in a server would blow away Intel; the memory latency and HTT 2.0/3.0 interconnect would be leaps ahead. Intel cannot fit monolithic cores onto a single die as the design is flawed.

When are we gonna see 128-bit SIMD instructions to really show off what this can do?

I urge you all to check out this review http://www.lostcircuits.com/cpu/amd_phenom/ on lost circuits and direct you to the multithreading benchmarks F.E.A.R and especially UT3.

All isn't lost for AMD