Well, it is certainly wrong to make a blanket statement that AMDs consume less power and produce less heat. Intel was greatly embarrassed when AMD caught them sitting on their laurels and leap-frogged them years ago. And they were embarrassed even more when it took over a decade to catch up. But as Highwayman correctly pointed out, that all changed with the Core 2 Duos when Intel not only leap frogged past AMD, but kept on increasing their lead with even better products. When looking at the entire line of CPUs from both makers, with very few exceptions, Intel excels handedly. Intel has vowed to never be spanked or embarrassed again and they have continued to demonstrate they mean it, and, unfortunately for AMD they have the deep pockets to make it happen. That said, AMD does, and always has made excellent CPUs and they continue to make a fine foundation for a solid computer at a competitive price. But price is really AMDs only serious selling point, and Intel continues to put pressure there too by dropping prices regularly. Yes, AMDs should be considered, especially if there is little wiggle room in the budget. But it is important to remember that saving $50 to $100 during the build dwindles in significance when stretched over the 4, 5, 6 or more years of the life of the computer. Since the release of the Core2s, I use Intels exclusively in my builds but make no mistake, I want AMD to survive and to keep nipping at the heels of Intel. That does nothing but to drive advances in the state-of-the-art and keep prices in check and that's a solid win for all consumers. I would say this to the diehards who have been AMD fans for the last 10 to 15 years, "consider Intels, they make good CPUs too."