is single core 3800+ processor better than a 3.2 ghz intel pro???

Yes it is.....infact the 3000+ comes in competition with the 3GHz procey...So u very well know where the best Athlon64 would stand!!

Without a doubt the 3800+ is better than Intel 3.2 GHz.
But if you're considering a 3800+ single core, I'd advise you to spend a little more and get the X2 3800+. Cost difference is negligible.

Rather AMD 64 3000 an oc it u[wards of 2.4GHz from 1.8GHz. or get X2 3800

What is your usage and which Intel CPU are you talking about.

eg: Soem Intel CPUs @ 3.0GHz may be better than AMD 64 3500 for Photoshop. some AMD 64 3200 may be better than some Intel 3.6/3.8GHz for some games. Which Intel CPU are you talking about, there are many 3.2. What usage are you talking of?

Well AMD's processors lack in rw number crunching but they sure come out in other(read most) arenas. Ma Athlon 64 3500+ is actually 2.21 Ghz but its nowhere below Intel's 3.8Ghz. Don't go with the no.s baby.

for most purposes intel 3.8 should be better in terms of raw power.

Depends on ur usage ... in gaming a 3200+ would compete with a 3.4 GHz Intel ... but if ur more concerned with encoding , decoding etc. etc. then the 3.4GHz one will have a slight edge .. but considering the price , if u do intend to get a single core , then a 3500+ (keep aside the 3800+) will beat the 3.2 GHz easily ... 3500+ at stock competes with a 3.6 GHz easily ...

For most purposes, I said. Other than gaming in most things like encoding, decoding, graphics, multitasking etc, won't Intel have a clear lead.