Yes, but the comparison is kind of moot here isnt it ?
Compare a cheap ("entry level") AMD with a expensive ("Extreme level") Intel with each other. And furtermore, the AMD has 2 cores, the intel 4 cores; So the coparison isnt even honest. And thirdly; Who cares about DivX ? When you want to back-up High definition, you better use x264. And that's a very big deal slower, and heavier for your PC. But there is a real technical reason for this test not beeing correct;
I think it is likely that the 77 fps menitioned for the Intel, the proces was bottlenecked by the source. Cause when re
encoding, your system has to decode the source and encode that "at the same time". So, when you use a decoder that's not really very fast, the encode wont be very fast either.
I say this, cause i can encode in SD quality on DivX or even X264 faster than that with a QX9650 (which, these days, can be had second hand for about 300 euro; So you can build a far-out system cheaper than you suggest, when you not olny look at new-prices).