This AMD gamble should be a quite safe one, luckily: even if 8th gen will sell the same as 7th, or even a little less, AMD share on it will be far bigger, and actually MS and Sony are giving it a huge help to launch what will be the top of AMD low power consumption APUs range.
In the worst possible scenario console market will give AMD little help, but it shouldn't damage it.
About leasing the offices they just sold... MEH, this shows AMD's worst problem, its management SUXXXXX!!! Hard. If they cannot afford them anymore, don't lease them, move to a cheaper area and instead of paying a rent, get a loan to buy cheaper offices and use that same money of the rent to at least end up owning what you're paying for.

I've been out of the loop for years now with my lack of money for upgrades but if I had to guess, I'd say a brand new PC that would keep up with the new consoles wouldn't be more than $800. Probably a lot less if you really know what you're looking for.

Fair enough. 

Stop twisting things. I admit that PC really is better than console in terms of performance no doubt. However the cost and effort to build one is greater than simply just getting out there and buying a console. Not to mention the gains you would get in the long run granted you stick with your initial set-up are not really that great. The so called "lesser" console counterpart would not really be a game breaking experience.

Then you could go on and say it's overclockable. Etc etc. Overclocking will scare the shit out of the general consumer. Overclocking is for the enthusiasts. If you go on and fiddle with it with your bad luck/inexperience and break it, you're screwed.

The point is. It's expensive and inconvenient(or less convenient) and the difference isn't really THAT mind blowing.

I could list many more things that are convenient with console if gaming is the only thing in mind.  I do a lot of travels and I love bringing my PS3/360 whenever it's possible. You can't simply do that with a decent mid tower rig which weighs a whole lot. Unless you're willing to dismantle every damn parts and leave the casing behind.

I really doubt 2005 PC that was not upgraded will play much of modern games (if at all) at nothing but low settings...maybe if, and that's a big if, you shelled out $600+ for 7800GTX. At $400 for 360 at a time, I don't see how PC was better deal, for most of people anyway.

Similarly, it will be really interesting to see what 7850-7870 based PC (which would cost you some $700-$750 now, and hopefully perform at PS4 level) will be able to play in 8 years, without upgrading anything.

I've always have, and most likely will, prefer computer gaming (having more genres being key factor there) - however I can understand why lot of people choose console only approach, exclusives not being only reason for that.

At bolded. I look forward to that too. Just out of curiousity, to see how they compare  to PS4 in the future without upgrading anything. Some believe it will keep up throughout nextgen and are quite happy that they won't have to upgrade.

Again, it's really only one or the other.  It's either more costly, more effort, or the graphical advantages are smaller... but still exist.

You can argue they aren't significant in the third case, but again the advantages still do exist.

In the end, Nivdia is right.

At the time they didn't have anything similar to  amd's apu / hsa design far enough developed to match amd's offering only  tegra , recently they said maxwell will be their  first gpu to use system ram , so yes they didn't have anything to match and are playing catch up it happens ,  both sides have been ahead in certain areas over the years ,also I agree  amd needed it more than Nvidia  ,still if Nvidia had something to compete they could have cut their rival off at the knees denying them  much neeeded income , about selling property and leasing it back it happens all the time .

The overhead isn't worth teraflops.

A PC with a similar GPU to the Xbox 360 and PS3 like the Radeon x1950 can play standard-no-effort-put-into-it console ports fine at 720P with 30fps, the same level as the current generation consoles.

Case in point Crysis, which will run fine on any Dual-Core with a Radeon x1950 better than the Xbox 360 or PS3, with better foliage, textures, lighting and more objects on screen.
But don't take my word for it:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jHWPGmf_A_0
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=s46UC_gVH_0

Call of Duty will even run on a similar system with 60fps:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SpWRJRCNO_A

However, if you take a badly ported game like GTA IV, then even the fastest of PC's will crumble, but that's not the fault of the PC, the PS3 suffered from some bad ports to, like Skyrim. (Again a PC with a Radeon x1950 can play.)
If you grab a game like Battlefield 3, you can't even compare them as even the minimum graphics on the PC is superior to that of the consoles, due to the fact it doesn't support the Direct X 9 feature set at all.

The "Optimisations" consoles get do help, however it's not going to translate into double, triple or quad-druple the performance of an equivalently specced PC though.

Overclocking these days is tame, long gone are the adjusting of the voltage, FSB etc' via Jumpers on the motherboard, these days it's all about just setting a multiplier and leaving it at that in the BIOS or even in Windows. (Unless it's AMD, they are more enjoyable CPU's to overclock!)
With that said, the risks of overclocking are blown out of proportion, you aren't going to accellerate the effects of electromigration with a mere increase of a Multiplier and it's gotten to the point where it's become more accessible to younger gamers with some Laptops even coming with an "Overclock" button set by the manufacturer. (Some Asus EeePC's had it too!)

However, you are right, the average person wouldn't care or be interested in such things, but the risks of "blowing" up a system these days via Overclocking are pretty much minimal these days.

Come on mod, fix your quote trees :P.

OT: Yeah to those people that said they conveniently left out Nintendo. I am sure Nintendo would have been a big piece of the pie, assuming the PS portion includes PSP as well. Then Nintendo's portion would possibly be bigger then Xbox as it would include DS, 3DS, Wii.