Perhaps you should read the rest and see why it sux when it is made by intel.
Most of the reasons why you think Intel sucks is due to things they did when computers weren't that big of a thing (when people wouldn't really notice the cache missing, and so on). Nowadays, Intel, AMD, Via, ARM, all these companies have to make sure that the products made are what they say they are (ARM just makes architecture, so if there's hardware faults, it's the company making the hardware)
Just think about it. If intel release a celeron with no cache, or an i7 with a piece missing, then people would be screaming up and down hallways waving their arms in the air, demanding a new pc, house and cat.
I agree that AMD's marketing and legal teams consist of a monkey and his shoe, and Intel has make it their business to out smart the general public and shake their booty, which actually costs less then spending copious (yes, I too can throw in big words) amounts of money on engineers exorbitant salaries, and making new architectures (eg, AMD).
Look at the Pentium 4 range, Intel made god damn sure every man, women, child and their dog knew Pentium 4's were the shizz, even though it wasn't.
AMD has however decided to follow suit and start a little marketing, eg: The Future is Fusion, however, AMD now has it's balls in a vice because, well they don't have the money to spend like Intel.
You can't argue, the Core2duo was amazing. AMD did see a niche, and figured 'Hmmm, I like one core, but lets put two cores together'. This was clever and all, but basically it was two Athlons on the same die, no real changes in architecture. Mean while Intel handed the contract for the now Core2 ... to the team in Israel (iirc, wikipedia, you gotta love it
). This team designed the Pentium M, and after handed this massive contract for all cpu's (laptop, desktop, server), they needed to use an existing Intel (to avoid law suits) architecture, they chose the P6 because they can modify it a lot with current tech (clever Jews
).
The Intel core 2 duo really did wipe the floor from AMD. This wasn't because of just marketing, the Core 2 Duo range was a seriously powerful architecture. What did win the hearts of the educated few (who used to buy AMD) was the very liberal overclocking potential and the higher performance that has put AMD into a speed wobble so bad that they are still suffering.
AMD is very good at what they do, and Intel is very good at what they do. However, when it comes to performance and market share, Intel has the medal this time round. However, being such a competitive market, AMD might pull a fast one on Intel next year and take the performance crown. The same discussion had be had between Nvidia and ATI/AMD.
You are making irrational ideas base who you support. Dude, this isn't football. I won't insult you (I trust I haven't,yet), but common. This is sorta like when you looking for a car, even die hard Alfa fans will concede that the BMW engineers have done a good job with the 3 litre engine in the 330i (200kw from a 3 litre, that is impressive). You basically reject everything intel does and then treat what AMD does as if it god's gift to the world. That's stupid, the i7 is a monster, faster then what AMD can dish out (at this point in time), and the Core 2 architecture was a truly awe striking architecture, Intel got it right so far. What does this all mean? Well your irrational patriotism towards one company, and against the other company makes you a FanBoy (wikipedia this one, and remember I said I haven't insulted you yet, this is that yet
)
Sign up with Google
