i highly doubt that article (heavy bias favoring intel if you read the other articles on that site), i could give you some benchmarks from amd that would basically swap the 2. finding a neutral source is difficult.
The article is not biased, but according to you any review that shows the truth is biased.
I challenge you to show me
one review that shows E7200 having worse
average performance than 6400+ in real-world applications and gaming.
And xbitlabs is know to be one of the most reliable source on the internet. I'm pretty sure that many people agree with me on that
Anyway, here is another review for E7200 that shows similar results
http://www.anandtech.com/cpuchipsets/showdoc.aspx?i=3293&p=5
So, now it not just one review but it is two review from two difference sources. Both xbitlabs and anandtech are two popular sources.
not to mention it destroys any similarly priced intel in performance. and there is my biased opinion favoring amd
At newegg E7200 is cheaper than both 6000+ and 6400+. And it outperforms both even at stock speeds. Not to mention that E7200 consume less power and overclocks much better
it even scores better than phenom 9850 in some benchmarks.
E7200 does outperform Phenom 9850 in some benchmaks
So, what is your point?
.the 6400+ (not even including the BE which is even faster) is one of the fastest, and highest performing dual cores to date.
It the fastest AMD dual core, but it is not the fastest dual core, and it is not one of the highest performing dual cores to date because many Intel dual cores outperform it easily even at stock speeds
