I don't think that THG is being "Intel Bias" at all - It may be an error, but I dont think so. Just because a processor has "x" million transistors does not mean that it thus has to be "y" mm^2. It all depends on how it is designed. And I don't know if the transistor count includes the L2 cache or not or if the die size is including the L2 cache or not.
Who's General Failure and why's he reading my disk?
Toms Hardware is getting more and more like fiction in ALL their reviews. The best example is when they reviewed the Barton they had a full page saying how it needed a 166Mhz FSB chipset (333DDR) and then on the next page they showed compatable chipsets and had the AMD 750 (100Mhz FSB NO DDR) and the AMD 760 (133Mhz 266DDR). I dont trust anything written on toms hardware now. And I recommend people stay away from it. They are just putting out too much FUD.
'It's only when you look at an ant through a magnifying glass on a sunny day that you realise how often they burst into flames'
I'm sorry to disapont you, but if you are using the same techonology in terms of gate lenght (that's what the 0.13um means and not the distance bweten components, as many people think), there's no way that two chips (be it processors, memory, etc..) with such a great diference in the mumber of transistors (the double in this case) can have the same die size!!! There could be some capacitors on the one with less transistorts, but it have to a very big capacitors and it's not usual to make large capacitors on chips!!
Be sure to engage your brain before open your mouth!