Remember that the best current AMD quad-core (X4 9950) barely matches the worst Intel quad-core CPU (Q6600). The Q6600 was released in 2006. AMD plans to use the same core as the X4 9950 as their high-end through late 2010. Intel will have released two brand new architectures in that time, and in 2010 they will have a process advantage too. Do you see a problem?
AMD is losing now; their 45nm Phenoms show little better scores; they don't plan to replace Phenom until 2011. Sure, they can promise 32nm "Bulldozer" cores in 2011, but the current delay rate has been two years per year (i.e. Bulldozer has slipped from "2009" to "2011" in one year.) If they deliver late (highly probable, since they are introducing an entirely new chip and process at the same time) that will leave Phenom standing up against yet another new architecture, Intel's Sandy Bridge.
AMD promised Fusion (CPU+GPU on one chip), but even though they already have the raw materials (they will use Phenom cores and HD4xxx GPUs) they will wait until 2011. Intel, on the other hand, will have their new high-performance graphics chip Larrabee and Nehalem cores, both expected to be better than AMD's offerings, in 2009.
I am an AMD fanboy*, but AMD is doomed. The Intel monopoly is coming...
*not really. I'm still rational. I just want AMD to be competitive for a change.
