for those that don't grasp the concept of "stretching the numbers", imagine if a car manufacturer had a different set guidelines that it based gas mileage on... (yes they don't get the milage posted as is already) but image if you a manufacturer took about all the interior and spare tire and all the weight it could, say lessened the car 700 lbs... then published those numbers for MPG as the their benchmark number. Did it actually get the posted "MPG"? yes. Can it be done under any other circumstance? No.
Why I think this is skummy is because it will force all other handset makers to start doing the same thing and then this may lead CPU number game that means almost nothing, misleading and wrong.
The flaw with that analogy is that there's no such thing as "unnecessary fuel economy". The higher, the better. And the results are reviewed by the government so it's not like manufacturers can fake them and hope that customers get fooled into buying their cars.
As for smartphones, it's entirely possible for manufacturers to run their CPUs and GPUs at full power. Of course, that would result in really poor battery life. The fact that Samsung's hardware ran at the speeds mentioned in the article is proof that it's capable of running at that speed. However, Samsung chose to clock things down in the interest of saving battery life. Also, there's a certain range (as well as a maximum speed) that the CPU/GPU operates at. Obviously, most apps don't need such high performance. They run well at lower clocks. It's only when games are introduced that things kick into high gear. Even then, battery life is still a priority. It isn't a priority when the hardware is being benchmarked though.
I fail to see how that's "scummy". Would you prefer it if Samsung allowed their CPUs and GPUs to run at full power all the time, regardless of the app? I'm sure a lot of customers would complain about poor battery life.