Well, it's easy enough to tell the difference between a failure and a success:

is it priced accordingly per core?

If no, and they expect you to pay the same amount for a 3 core as you'd pay for a 4 core, only then could you sanely throw in a comment like 'three legged dog'.

Maybe the wording of the manufacturing process involving disabling a core is confusing for some people? It's not the same as putting three wheels on a car that has a chassis made for four wheels.

The xbit labs article says they managed to overclock the x3 to a 3.1ghz, which ran stable. However they never benched the 3.1ghz against the rest of the cpus in the tests. Why not? I sure as hell would love to see the overclocked phenom against the core duos.