I agree with the comment above. The Pentium 4 getting a 9 and the Athlon getting an 8.5 is outrageous.

This goes to show sharky's continued favorism of Intel ... no matter what AMD does, they always seem to have done something wrong -- according to this website.

The XP2000+ which, by the name, is meant to be compared to a P4-2Ghz, beat the 2 Ghz hands down in just about every test. Not only that, but its much cheaper. How does it get a lower rating? Well, that reasoning is relating to issues like heat and overclocking potential?!? ***.

Sounds fairly biased to me.
a) Set up a suite of comprehensive benchmarks.
b) Your "favorite" doesn't win.
c) Invent creative reasons why your "favorite" is better that are not covered by these benchmarks. This way, you don't have to prove it.

If you are going to knock the Athlon for reasons like heat and overclocking potential, then they better be important issues. If they are important issues, why are they not benchmarked here?

-Brian