What i've seen is:
Pro-AMD sites give either Barton as a winner, or as a close call to the p4
Neutral & pro-intel show p4 way ahead.
3D software and FPU intensive apps are killing the AMD proc.
On other tests they're more or less on equal grounds, but that's nothing new since the 2700+....
Tests at Anandtech are seaking for themselves. The conclusion at anand is laughable, as most of their benchs show a neat lead from the p4.
airspirit: how can they do the same, the 2100+ is in 0.18µ (palomino) whereas the 2400+ is in 0.13µ (tbred) ?? And i doubt a core clocked @1716 can overclock as well as a core clocked @2000... am i wrong here ? Did i miss something ?
(edit) bb2k: my TBird (1st gen) has "built-in" 200FSB
(=400MHz DDR). Works like a charm. I still don't see the need of a "stock" 333FSB, apart from artificially raising prices...
(edit2) i AM pro-AMD, but i admit that the Barton priced like a p4 is a mistake. At $350 it would have been a killer, and more in the line of AMD pricing habits.