Any bias would is your own perception, believe me
Not that I have anything against Intel. I just don't have anything FOR them either. I look at the results after testing.
If I was to stick to the standard benchmarks - 3dmark, some games, sciencemark, and sisoft sandra, my reviews would look like most of the others, showing the A64 winning in every category. However once you look at real world apps, thanks to Worldbench and SYSmark, you get a better picture of actual system performance. And as anyone who has actually used a Hyperthreading or Dual CPU config can attest, it REALLY improves overall smoothness to basically every computing experience.
So the facts are as I stated in the review, technological progress notwithstanding (the 600's are JUST catching up to what AMD brought out 2 years ago). The fact is, P4's do very well in office apps, where multiple threads are used, and mutliple windows are open. They also excel in video encoding with various codecs (DivX, Xvid, WMA), and in audio encoding in MP3, WMA, OGG. However for gaming, there really is no contest. And heat levels, the P4's are smoking, although that has gotten better with the 600's. A64 is also the best choice for 'pure number crunching' like many of the distributed computing programs out there. And don't even get me started on price!
My site might come off as being too upfront for a lot of people, but that's how it's always been. The facts are there, and you need to take it for what you can use it for. After reading my review (and maybe extra explanation in this forum thread), you will know where the P4 does well, and not so well. And where the A64 does well, and not so well. No bias, no "bragging", nothing.