LIKMARK's intent was to compare how efficent is SMT on Nehalem,that's the way i look at it.So he wanted to know how 8 threads in Bloomfield system compare with his 8 thread(2x RevBA).
I already showed you in my previous posts that LIKMARK's Barcelona system is around 25% per clock slower than jan's RevB3 system in Ceinebench10.
So if anything ,LIKMARK's system is actually holding its own against the new Nehalem system.The fact that it's 2xQC vs 1 QC(8 thread) chip doesn't make it apples to apples comparison,but it's valid as any other similar comparison when it comes to comparing previous gen. vs next generation chips.Remember ,while AMD is at its first attempt with Quad Cores and still on DDR2,intel is on it's third generation(65nm C2Q,45nm C2Q,45nm Nehalem).So basically you compare first TLB patch plagued RevBA system with yet unreleased 3rd generation intel quad core system.
The more valid comparison would be single Deneb versus single Bloomfield ,all at the same frequency.That's what we will have in Q4.Even better,a Deneb running a same DDR3 memory(AM3) as Bloomfield so we can have as close as possible memory subsystems,even tho Nehalem is better in that respect thanks to 3 channel IMC.