I was reading an article in a computer magazine. It was comparing the Dual 2Ghz G5 with the AMD Athlon 64 FX-51 (2.2Ghz) and the Intel Pentium 4 Extreme Edition (3.2 Ghz). What my hang up is about is whenever there is a comparison between the G5 and and other computers they always give fairytale prices for what it would cost to get one of the computer being compared. For example the price on the Dual 2 Ghz G5 is $2999.00, then the article gives the price for the AMD Athlon ($733.00) and the Pentium 4 Extreme ($925.00). Now we all know what you get for these prices isn't the same as what you get when you pay for a G5. The tests are always questionable because they never tell the reader under what conditions they tested the chips, we all know what you get in a Dual 2 Ghz G5 but what stop the magazine pumping up the computer for the games test and then using a different configuration for another test. What I was after was an article that tested everything on the computer, a complete test. Which compares a package that a consumer would buy of the shelf not a box that a technician throws together. I really want to rip it up the author of this article.