Intel Kentsfield trounces AMD Quad FX
 

Test scores reveal that Quad FX manages to achieve equal performance to Core 2 Extreme QX6700 in SiSoft Sandra 2007 and PCMark05 and narrowly edged it in memory tests: both L1, L2 and system memory latency are better on QuadFX than on Kentsfield, but that's nothing new.

However, taking a look into media encoding shows that QuadFather just gets crushed by Kentsfield, especially in MPEG-2 8Mbit reproduction. But the worst result for AMD is a look into power consumption and performance per watt. AMD system consumes far more power than Intel, sometimes even double that Kentsfield setup.

http://www.theinquirer.net/default.aspx?article=36050

AMD had to go very agressive on the pricing, I doubt it's that easy to get 4 90nm cores with 1 MB running 3 GHz and sell it for 1000$.

I still don't want one, overclocking a dual cpu system will prove harder than single CPU systems; and without any useful apps needed more than 1 core to work fluently... there's no point in spending $$$

me neither but there are plenty of people with too much money