Computerbase is also quite positive about the Phenom:

http://www.computerbase.de/artikel/hardware/prozessoren/2009/test_amd_phenom_ii_x4_920_940_black_edition/

Totally agree. The platform cost is cheaper (motherboard, memory and processor) and you get Q9550 equivalent performance.

What most reviewers neglected to mention is that DDR2 is a limiting factor in PCMark and overal system benchmarks - which ends up benefitting anything on a DDR3-enabled system (ie: Intel).

The power consumption story needs to be sorted out. Half the reviewers say it's good, the other half say it's bad.

If AMD knows it's good, they should push this with Phenom II X4 B-class processors, as businesses will surely appreciate the lower cost of ownership and operations.

Pity AMD doesn't own the channel like Intel does...

Despite the attempts to discredit the Phenom II by some, the chip performs quite well and is competitive with Intel's offerings at a much lower cost to implement. I don't think AMD will have any problem moving these chips.

What really made me laugh is the way a lot of reviewers were inventing multidimensional performance metrics that let them say the P2 is a winner. Lots of picking the Intel chip going on. Also lots of price normalization going on.

It looks like a decent chip and seems like it should do well in the middle of the market. It's not a winner compared to Intel's line up, but it does put AMD back in the game.

From the reviews of AMDs Phenom II it looks like a winner to me in both performance and value. Hopefully consumers will support AMD and purchase these products. Consumers always suffer when there is an industry monopoly. See the OPEC ore WinTel Cabals for proof.