Actually the results in the slides are not bad at all. Take a look at this one:
http://img.donanimhaber.com/images/h...2a_dh_fx57.jpg

You can see that SMT in case of 2600K vs 2500K brings a lot (8 threads vs 4) in terms of performance and not many of those listed applications scale perfectly with more cores/threads. So SMT kind of already extracted a lot of parallelism from the code and I doubt that bringing more cores in the case of intel (say SB-E) would increase the results by 50% . Well maybe in few cases it would,like wprime and Pov ray.In the rest I really doubt it would.

If you look at the 8150 vs 2500K numbers,the average is around 23.5% in favor of FX,give or take a few. That's pretty good advantage on desktop and it's more than what SMT (2600K) gets over non-SMT (2500K). We do need more applications that scale well with many cores to see this more clearly, but the point is that AMD's "cores" will scale better and will also use SMT in SIMD workloads to extract the ILP from applications that are not coded so well for many threads (just like i7 does).

I have a question though. Why is there no model number for FX listed in the slide above?? All other slides have 8150 listed but they are not compute intensive test but gaming ones. In this case FX6xxx and even 4xxx is just as good as FX8xxx. Anyone seen the "back up" slides that have system info listed?