Read that section again, 10.6 beat 9.10 on the Apache compile, but lost by as much as it had won on the PHP compile. As with most of the tests they used, its a toss up between OS's.
In reality, both of these "benchmark" articles blow goats. The Computerworld one is extremely subjective and takes a whole lot of artistic license in determining the winners in a few categories. The Phoronix one gets points for being more objective, but in reality it really doesn't tell you anything. Unless you use your computer only for something extremely specific like doing long scientific calculations and simulations or intense movie rendering etc., the performance difference between OS's could be as much as 15-25% and still not matter. The difference between me saving a document and it taking a quarter second or it taking a half second is negligible, as is loading a webpage in a half second compared to a whole second. That's not to say more performance and better tuning isn't nice, it's actually a great thing. It's why I prefer Chrome to Firefox. The miniscule differences in page loading, startup times, and url searches all add up to a more positive experience that I prefer. BUT (and thats a big but, like something sir mix a lot would enjoy), when it comes to a choice such as what operating system you should use, there are so much more important reasons than how quickly your system compiles apache to base your pick on. Application capability is a big one. Like to game? Windows it is. Are you a big traveler? Then the 8 hour battery life of the new Macbook Pro's + OS X might be just what you need. Working in academia? Depending on where and what you are involved in, Linux could be the dominant OS of choice.
Each system has it's own advantages and disadvantages. Comparing things like installation experiences (something your users should only have to go through once) or benchmarking their performance in a multi-threaded ray tracing is journalistic wankery and serves no real purpose but to inflate page clicks and rouse up the fanboys. If you want to really figure out what OS is best for you, then look first to yourself and what your computer needs are, then find the one that meets those needs through its available applications and support. If all of them meet your needs, then look at the price of each and what sort of hardware needs you have, and if the OS can meet those. Still stumped? Pick which OS you're most familiar with. Point is, random performance metrics and criticisms of taskbar vs. dock or expose/spaces vs. compiz is the grime at bottom of the barrel in terms of reasons to pick an OS.