Eh, that's questionable really. And besides, what are we measuring on, stock coolers or LN2? The i7 920 already comes with a beastly cooler just to run 2.66Ghz at reasonable temps, and that's putting aside the fact that it carries a 130W TDP.
That is hardly questionable. I can run my CPU at 4Ghz on air, and just about anyone with a D0 stepping i7 920 can do the same, with decent temperatures, on a 37$ cooler (Scythe Mugen 2). How many Phenom IIs that hit 4Ghz on air are there (The average seems to sit around the 3.7-3.8Ghz mark, or so, and the 955BE isn't really clocking better than the 940BE, is it ? To me it looks like AMD is creating higher clocked SKUs which do not neccessarily attain better overclocks in order to look faster) ? This is not to say that there are none, but there are definitely less. If we also remember that the i7 (And the Core 2) is more effective than the Phenom IIs clock for clock, the advantage becomes more evident.
For my current 24/7 settings, my CPU, which is far from being the best 920 out there, needs 1.18v, and with the said 37$ cooler loads to the low 60 degrees C in very hot weather (Lowest ambient we see now is in the low 30 degrees C). I can also run 3.2Ghz at1.04v, which would be well attainable on the stock cooler - Since it is less volts than stock voltage on my chip (!) and sub 1.0v 3Ghz i7 920s aren't very rare.
Besides, aren't the higher end Phenom IIs, namely the 940 and 955, 125W TDP chips, and 5W aren't anything to get fussed over ?
Beyond that, Intel has already shown that they will milk every Mhz for twice what it's worth with the high-end i7 pricing. $1000? Really?? If you need that kind of power and you have that kind of money, you might as well just buy a damn server!
True, but the Extreme Edition CPUs are not meant to compete against AMD's Black Edition chips. The vanilla 920 does that just fine. I consider anyone buying the EEs as either nuts (not neccesarily in the bad way, actually), or simply rich enough to not care.
But I'll be real. The i7 is a great processor, the most powerful on the market, and certain very specific models are a good value, but on the whole Intel is losing to AMD's package approach. With better marketing (and smarter OEM's), the Dragon platform presents the absolute best solution for middle-class gamers around the world, who aren't afraid to get their hands dirty squeezing out power for pennies. And besides...
There is no argument there. The 710 and 720BE at their price points are very hard for Intel to beat (Currently, they aren't beat, at least not here). But the situation at the higher end of the spectrum is different. The i7 920 is priced well when compared to the higher end Phenom IIs, and the price of very, very good X58 motherboards is compared to the price of the higher end AM3 motherboards, at least here. Granted, you can build a Ph2 920 rig for cheaper by using a cheap motherboard, but if you're going that route, you might be better off with a 720BE altogether for a cheaper setup altogether.
And much good does it do them ?
Now, before I am being accused of fanboyism. I am a fanboy of nothing. I recommend AMD builds several times a week, and I do not remember when I last recommended an Intel build which wasn't an i7 for someone of sufficient budget, or wasn't E5200+G31 based for people with next to no budget. Additionally, I was choosing between my current i7 920 and the Ph2 940 less than two months ago. I chose to go the i7 route, since it got me a platform that will happily run both SLI and CF and perform better while doing either, for under 100$ of difference back then. The difference hasn't grown since.
In the bottom line, Intel has nothing to compete against AMD's excellently priced triple-cores, but with the prices of the i7 920 being what they are, AMD has a very tough fight on their hands. This is not to say that Intel isn't losing ground, it probably is (But not according to the Steam HW survey), but not due to AMD's high-end chips. I do think that Intel is somewhat neglecting the "mainstream" for the past few months, since they are focusing on their Lynnfields, and it might cost them more than they have planned for. On the other hand, Lynnfield based CPUs might give AMD a sound beating come September. Time will tell.