not quite as creative as ARM, but...
having collected a bunch of downvotes on the ARM presentation article by pointing out the "creative accounting" in the ARM guy's comparison, it's a good time to point out the notable non-comparison in the Intel presentation - they are just comparing translated vs. native on x86, and in particular do not compare x86 vs ARM performance at a given price or power-consumption level, or compare x86 vs ARM power consumption for a given application.
Vendor benchmarks are very much like used car ads, it's what they don't say that hints as the facts they'd rather not have known...