I was browsing on Tomshardware and I came across the price per performace graph for the new Conroe processors vs. the AMD based FX and X2 series processors. It really seems to me that the E6600 Conroe is either faster or about the same performance as the FX-62 but when I checked pricewatch.com the FX-62 is priced significantly higher than the Conroe E6600. In fact it is priced almost twice as much as the E6600 Conroe. I'm not a brain surgeon or anything but why would any intelligent person buy the FX-62 processor when it gets blown out of the water by a lower priced processor? The answer to this is "I am not able to read the price per performance graph at Tomshardware, it's too complicated." Let me sum it up for you, the E6600 processor and above are far superior to AMD based processors. This means that since the FX-60 and FX-62 show weaker performace when compared to the E6600 it should be priced less. Let me give you a figure, the FX-60 should be priced at $270 and the FX-62 at $315. Please take notice of this, these prices from AMD don't seem to reflect the new architechture from Intel. If you have a hard time reading the graph try reading the benchmarks, numbers don't lie.