The short version: the test is not indicative of how good the i7 is, whatsoever. What you get with the i7 is a hyperthreaded (8 virtual cores) quad core with extremely low stock temps and great overclocking potential. That's why everyone loves them.
the long version: the 920 is probably low on that when you are talking about stock speeds. if they instead did a chart comparing the performance when paired with like, an ocz vendetta 2 since thats a good heatsink that has an attachment for every socket ever made (or similar aftermarket cooler), and overclocked each cpu to the point that they maxed out at, say, 60c temp under a prime95 torture test with no errors, and then finally...
...instead of simply using some arbitrary game that could favor one cpu or another based on its code and would likely never show you the proper difference between a quad and dual core, if instead they ran a proper cpu benchmark that can multithread perfectly and either show an improvement or the lack of improvement when using hyperthreading or not,.....Then you'd most likely see all the i7's at the top, the phenom II x4's and quad cores below that, the phenom II x3's with fourth core unlocked below that, the phenom II x3's with three cores enabled below that, then the phenom x4's, then the phenom II x2's, the phenom x3's, then core 2 duo, athlon x2, core duo and so on and so forth...
... BUT MOST IMPORTANTLY, since it would take so long to run all those tests and properly attach the heatsinks and tweak the motherboards, and buy all the replacements after burning through the motherboards, this would be done a year into the future and you'd notice way above all the others sits the larrabee at the top with an x86 cell right below that.
