Not really, because the AMD 8 physical core layout is still 4 packages of 2 register sets sharing ALU and FPU. It is exactly like a hyperthreaded Intel part, but Intel has much better per clock performance.

That, and I see next gen games more favoring openCL / GL 4.3 compute shaders to offload all their parallel workloads than to aggressively optimize for greater than 4 core processors. Your returns on moving traditionally CPU bound workloads (per agent logic, path finding, collision detection) to compute class GPUs (when available, with the cpu fallback for now) gives you significantly more returns than optimizing for the CPU.

Also, you can take a 4770k to near 5ghz on air. This part is already pushing the thermal limits of the Bulldozer architecture, AMD is just fabbing them out this high speed because they are floundering in this low-per clock performance rut the entire architecture put them in.

Now, I would point any budget oriented gamer to the 4 or 6 core AMD models around $120 - 130, because since they are all unlocked, you can get real performance gains (but terrible power efficiency) over Intel parts below the 4 core unlocked part they put out each generation. Since they are effectively 2 / 3 module parts, they are well suited for the next gen of GPGPU everything in the engine and let the CPU do control flow.

If you even approach $200, the performance gains from jumping from any non-K part to a 4.8ghz 4570k are huge, and that alone outclasses every AMD cpu for gaming, but does trade blows on some titles with the 8 core parts.

It'll be interesting to see if AMD cornering both the new xbox and ps4 has an effect on game engines for the pc as well -- specifically if the tuning that probably will go into console versions will translate to pc -- and whether or not Intel (and nvidia) will end up being penalized as a result.