Isn't BapCo (SysMark) still located in Intel's building? ;-)
These tests show the E6600 to be a reasonable match to the X2 5000+, where you only mentioned the FX-62, and they're both about $320. At the high end, the E6700 goes for about $530, and the FX-62 for about $675. So the price disparity is mostly at the highest end.
So, yes, the FX line appears to be overpriced for what you get. But that's just the very top. When you get into the regular X2 line and below, the price/performance ratio matches up much better. And single-threaded performance of the Athlons is stomping the Pentiums, while showing quite respectably against the pricier Core2's.
For the price of the cheapest Core2 (E6300) at about $185, you can get an X2 4200+. It isn't embarrassed by the Core2 in home-user applications. And everything below the E6300's price is still owned by AMD.
I stand by my original claim, that for all but the high end, AMD is still the best bang-for-the-buck.