I must laugh when I see some of the tripe that is allowed in the AMD forum.

In the Intel section many of the people that have posted their garbage in this forum would have been warned within minutes of posting. Actually they probably would just got the banhammer.

But seriously. Awhile ago we had a lot of people that would post that the Phenom couldn't match the Q6600 using wording like: "The best AMD has can't compete with the cheapest Intel has". That was a very popular Intel fanboy tactic. Sadly many accepted it without question.

Now only an idiot would actually claim that. But now I see: "The PHII 940 can't compete with the Q9400" posts on various forums. So now the base argument has appeared to have changed. But the Q9400 is not enough... the Q9550 is much closer to the PHII 940.

Luckily the PHII has no problem with beating the Q9400. Now it is actually pushing the Q9550 around in performance. But the PHII has a better architecture. Go figure. But the Q series chips use an older obsolete design.

Of course then you'll still see the "clock per clock" argument. But that was not valid even when it was first brought up.

You must compare chips that COST about the same. Period. If one is clocked slower... WHO CARES. Does one chip beat the other. Answer yes or no now. DON'T WAIT FOR THE TRANSLATION.

Especially when one overclocks more than the other; to the point that any "clock per clock" argument means absolutely nothing. What can the PHII do versus the Q9550 on good cooling.

Sorry I am into my cups tonight. But I still can't swallow the tripe we are fed by some of these people.