well first of all, you can't come outright and say oh AMD or INtel's gonna rule with such and such core..
it depends on many things..
the P4 with it's ability to have REALLY high clock speeds might overcome it's clock for clock performance by being capable of extremely high mhz. the P4 when it tops out, OBVIOUSLY will perform better then the P3, in old, AND new benchmarks. therefor, I feel that the FINAL chip performance justifies what they've done to that chip.
however, currently what they've done makes it look bad, because we have a fairly old CPU (the P3 and Athlon core which hasn't really been modified since it's birth) that is clock for clock faster (currently).
if Intel has designed the P4 correctly, when it DOES hit much higher clock speeds, it will continue to scale well whereas the gains of mhz on a P3, or Athlon might not gain the same returns (cache size etc contributes to this).
howver, because I've been proven wrong on this subject so many times before, you have to take what I say with a grain of salt, at least until PM comes in and proves/disproves me!
looking at the current situation, with the Palomino imminent, these scores are unimpressive, because much of that extra boost that Quake 3 recieves has to do with the FSB and RAM overall speed (however DRDRAM isn't a good answer for extremely high mhz CPU's, because the CPU shouldn't have to wait so long (an eternity for ghz CPU's) for data from the RAM, lower latency RAM would be better in this respect).
T-Bird not only is clock for clock faster with an untweaked core and Via chipset with SDRAM running at 133mhz, but Palomino with it's tweaked core and DDR SDRAM capabilities as well as the 133mhz FSB capability, will counteract most advantages of the P4's increased fsb etc.
for example, they test Quake 3 at 640X480 on normal quality, I'm sufficienltly sure that the Palomino can do reach those speeds as well.
finally, I don't trust these scores either.. I'll wait till Anand does a review..
Facebook
Twitter