rawsteel :
P35-DS3L + 3GHz E2160 = $170
MSI K9A2 CF-F 790X + 3.2GHz 4800X2 = $160
AMD system will be at least 10-20% faster (clock per clock AMD is faster than Aliendales)
Here AMD wins
I'm not sure where you got your numbers, but newegg has that DS3L for ~$98. Add The $56 for the Pentium e2160 from Microcenter.com, and I get $154. I'd say that's close enough to the X2 4800 to not matter at all really. Plus, for me, I'd be using that e1260 on a $30 open-box Biostar nvidia 7050 board I previously purchased, with a simple pin mod to 333fsb for a nice 3.0GHz. That would be just $86 total, although the single channel nvidia chipset probably takes at least a 10% performance hit compared to that DS3L board, it's just an example for how far you can overclock a low FSB Intel, even on a very cheap board. The Gigabyte P31 board would be a decent alternative to the DS3L, and it only costs ~$75. What I'm saying is, the "AMD boards are cheaper than Intel boards" mantra is not exactly true. The only great thing about an AMD board right now is the superb integrated graphics, which admittedly is important to some people.
Also, clock for clock, I think the Pentium e series is a bit faster. Usually, the 1.6 GHz e2140 matches up well with the X2 3600, with the 1.8 GHz e2160 competing with the X2 4000. At least that's what X-bit labs showed in their review. I also find the following review by Chinese website PCOnline to be a good review. As it shows the effect of L2 cache on CPU performance with clock scaling, using the e2160, e4300, and e6850, all running at 3.0 GHz, 333 fsb, and being compared to the AMD X2 3600, running at stock and at 3.0 GHz, 333 fsb (9x multiplier).
article:
http://translate.google.com/translate?hl=en&sl=zh-CN&u=http://www.pconline.com.cn/diy/cpu/reviews/0704/993288.html&sa=X&oi=translate&resnum=1&ct=result&prev=/search%3Fq%3Dhttp://www.pconline.com.cn/diy/cpu/reviews/0704/993288.html%26hl%3Den%26client%3Dfirefox-a%26rls%3Dorg.mozilla:en-USfficial%26hs%3Djee
sample bench from said article: