I disagree, I've code applications that could bring the fastest CPU to it knees and I was only warming up (just testing the waters so to speak)
I can write one right here:
[code:1:3a75de9d6b]for(int i = 0; i < 100000000; i++) {
x += 1;
}[/code:1:3a75de9d6b]
Now just cause I have, it doesn't mean that it does anything useful. The point being, unless you're in the prefessional or the enthusiast class, 90% of what you're doing doesn't press a CPU to it's limits. On top of that, for the tasks that do run CPUs to their limit, there is a consumer expected processing time. Processors that can encode a full length DVD in a couple minutes just aren't a realistic expectation. This is why multi-tasking performance is becoming more important to the consumer.
As for gloating rights, may not be applicable to professionals, but you obviously don't know the enthusiast market at all (Which is exactly what the high-end dual-cores are targetted at). That's all about the gloating. I love the expression that people give me when I tell them that I have a dual-core CPU and a 7800GTX.
Price drop: You obviously have no clue what you'r talking about here either.
Here are your prices, and if you expect a $300 drop from that you're crazy. A 3800+ for $22, or a 4200+ for $100? Why not just give them away? On top of that, compare your 4800+ price to Opterons running at
2.4GHz. Yes, you may be paying a little more, but you are recouping that cost on less expensive RAM and motherboards, for as you said <1% difference in speed.
As with any new technology, the introduction of it is always expensive to recoup costs. No-one needed a plasma TV 5 - 10 years ago, since there was nothing that could actually use that definition, but that didn't prevent people paying through the roof to get a hold of them and have their braggin rights. LCD screens, blue LEDs, whatever. It's always the same trend. So unless you expect to argue the entire costing structure of the world for the past 100 years, I'm going to have to say that you're full of crap in terms of the price.
Last but not least, the concept of going down other R&D roads. Have you even read the roadmaps for the next year, 2 years, 5 years, or 10? They aren't focussing purely on dual-core, quad-core, then eight & sixteen cores. Instead, they are using this as a supplement to their current plans or improving single core performance. On top of that, they still need to make money to have R&D funds to develope those faster cores. So if they can make some money by providing some functionality to a nice niche market, more power to them. They're doing proper business, and fufilling my needs in the process.