The first time that you open the cpu charts ,it shows you how amazing Athlon 64 FX -74 is beating all intel CPUs, including quads, in the itunes wav to acc chart. Obviously this chart is not the best way of measure the overall performance of a CPU, but someone new to the page and to all this CPUs stuff may think that Athlon 64 FX 74 is better than anything else using only the info from that chart ( like I did sometime ago when I just started my research for my new system). I wonder why THG did it that way, they want to favour in some way AMD or they're just showing what the average computer user uses the most?
After you learn that the Itunes Chart is not very useful for the overall performance of the processor you need to know which one is really useful. I would like to know what are the charts that you should read when comparing the overall performance of two processors?
The iTunes benchmark looks very dependant on raw frequency but it's not annoying at all if the FX-74 wins that one, because a person that takes a minimal care of his next system, will go carefully through the benchmarks he is interested in; if one is so distracted as to look at the first benchmarks that happens to show up and then run directly to newegg.com, ...well, good for him.
The charts have helped me a lot the first time I used them. I took 2 or 3 ~$100 CPUs (the price I was interested in) and compared them in what I wanted; The A64 3000+ came up first and it didn't disappoint me.