AMD llano cpumark artificially inflated scores

[pman6]

http://img594.imageshack.us/img594/5145/passmarkcomp.png

I discovered something odd when I made a portable version of Passmark 7, and brought it to Best Buy electronics store to compare Sandy Bridge and Llano mobile cpu display models.

refer to picture link above.

the weird things-
1. at the top, it says version 7.66 for some reason. not 7.0
2. my Llano cpumark scores were vastly different than the average scores posted on cpubenchmark.net, but they were realistic and believable, and correspond to their actual performance compared to Intel.

Let me explain #2 further. All the laptops tested were configured exactly the same way, with exactly the same software on them. Control panel power setting set to High performance.

According to cpubenchmark.net, the cheap A4-3300m dual core gets 2412 average score.
My cpumark test, with 2 threads, shows only 1334 score.
A huge score difference.

I didn't do anything wrong either, because the dual core Intel B940 score is in line with the average score shown on cpubenchmark.net.

The dual core celeron p4600 scored 1336 in my test, similar to average score on cpubenchmark.net

The reality is that A4-3300m dual core is as slow as the P4600 in real world and dual-thread tests under 100% cpu load.
The A4 should score the same as the P4600, like my test showed.

If one were to look at the 2412 score of the A4, he would think it has similar performance to the Core i3-2310m, which scores 2500.
The fact is, the A4-3300m is much much much inferior to the Core i3.

Very misleading Llano scores posted on cpubenchmark.net

the A4-3300m vs p4600 vs B940 was an apples to apples comparison- All dual core, no hyperthreading.

[pman6]

Phenom II X6 1090T vs A6-3650

which do you think would be better, both having similar cpu architecture ?

The phenom x6 has 6 cores, 3.2ghz, turbo to 3.6ghz, and L3 cache.
the A6 has 4 cores, 2.6ghz, no turbo, no L3 cache.
(the A6 is priced at $115, and the X6 at $180)
The phenom is a performance cpu. The A6 is just a budget cpu.

Yet, at a glance, the similar cpumark scores would lead the unsuspecting buyer to think that cpu performance of the cheaper, weaker, clearly inferior A6-3650....... is on par with the hexacore 1090T. But it's not!

Something is wonky with the cpumark test, or AMD found a way to cheat it. ALL the AMD llano chips lately have had inflated cpumark scores that belie their actual performance.
AMD didn't just magically increase their IPC, especially using the same K10 architecture.

There needs to be a breakdown of the score. Not just simply a score.

Shoppers are getting misled into thinking that AMD cpu performance meets or exceeds intel's, when in reality, it is inferior in almost all tests, especially multithreaded ones like cinebench and x264 video encoding. amd's IPC per thread is way behind intel's.
Yet, a slower clocked llano gets roughly the same cpumark score as Intel's Core sandy bridge chip ?

A6-3650 cpumark score below
http://www.techwarelabs.com/amd-a6-3...u-processor/5/