I love seeing fanboys go OMG U NOOB. From both sides.
I consider myself an AMD man, not a fanboy either, but an AMD man.
I don't buy AMD processors because I believe they're faster than Intel's right now, but because I believe that if they sell many processors, more money will be invested in I+D, and in the end that means faster processors.
History tells that Intel has done way too much dark tricks in order to gain market (Threatening Dell, trying to publicly bash AMD, making dark trades with Microsoft concerning uber-weak IGPs, amongst others), and AMD has... well, tried to survive.
When A64's were faster, people still bought the butt-inefficient P4s because of marketing. Because retailers made their way into bashing AMD (I remember lots of retailers didn't even know what an A64 was, back when they launched the San Diego cores aka P4 bashers and denigraters).
So far my reasons for having AMD over Intel are well... I own a 9650 (I paid $120 for it) because it was the first affordable true-quadcore ever made. I own an Opteron 1214 because when I got it it was 90€, and almost matched the existant Intels at a WAAAY lower price. I own an X6 because I do hardcore compiling/rendering/encoding (as well as multigaming) and for $200 CPU+$120 mobo there was no Intel system coming nowhere close to the AMD.. And because having 6 cores automatically lenghtens your e-peen
So, for me, I expect this:
In terms of price/performance/power consumption, not just raw performance.Edited by Artikbot - 2/16/11 at 2:18pm