Why Intel is really dead this time around

AMD Fusion is the killer. Intel's Sandy Bridge, even when it resumes shipping in April, will not be enough to extract Intel from the inevitable decline and fall.

The problem with SB is that its graphics is low end, which makes the whole chip low end. If one wants a high end Intel based PC, he or she will still need to buy a separate discrete AMD GPU (or Nvidia). That's what I observed in the stores. The Core i5 PCes are all low end. The medium and up PCes are either 100% AMD or equipped with ATI graphics.

Fusion totally changes the landscape. With a single APU, you get equally matched compute and visual power. Intel's SB solution is like a big dog with short legs, or a Mercedes with a Volkswagen engine -- the GPU portion is the weakest link that breaks the whole value proposition. AMD has a balanced design, you simply won't regret the purchase. At the very high end, you get Bulldozer+Massive discrete GPU requiring 300 watts. At the medium level, you get Llano with 400+ SP units sufficient for any DX11 game, and 4 Stars cores enough for all common tasks at a small power budget, money well spent. At the portable side, a Fusion netbook allows you to have first-person-shooter fun on a flight from San Francisco to Beijing on a single battery charge.

Intel is so yesterday.

Toshiba AMD Fusion Netbook Playing Crysis

Live for Speed, Crysis, 1080p video using VLC...
The AMD C50 APU is cool. Moreover, it's a true 64 bit chip that can use 4GB of memory (Atom N550 is limited to 2GB).