And lo... it was given.
So after going to PAX East I received a survey which came from an anonymous source but was clearly sent by Intel (I feel for the poor person who had to type in all those email addresses.)
Anyway they wanted to know what I liked about PAX, why I went, am I a builder. Based on my responses the survey went on to ask what type of Intel CPUs I liked and what I might consider buying in the future. It also asked me if I would recommend Intel to others. When I answered "maybe" it asked what Intel would need to do to make me recommend them.
This was my answer...
Hard to say, people generally feel really strongly about AMD vs. Intel. People who buy Intel generally like that it's pretty plug and play and is supported by most major brands (Windows, NVidia, etc.). People who buy AMD generally feel like they're getting more for their money. Intel people (that I know) don't overclock. AMD people (that I know) overclock. It's like NVidia vs. ATi, just a difference. Most people aren't on the fence about these things UNLESS Tom's Hardware declares a clear price/performance winner.
I like Intel, don't get me wrong, and most of the time I go for them for the reasons stated above. But if AMD knocks one out of the park in terms of performance and price, I sure as shit ain't gonna turn that down.
So yeah, color me Intel, but not 100%. As for convincing others? I tell them to go to Tom's Hardware and do the research themselves. I don't want to be blamed if they aren't happy with their choice.