But it's going that way now.
AMD's CPU's are seriously lacking and they need to compete.
99% of home buyers WANT performance but don't NEED it. In most situations most people who buy home computers simply don't use the power they have at their disposal, so what good does more do.
Anyway, I've said in several threads recently, benchmarking for marketing reasons even from Intel are pushing the main reasons for most people to upgrade, better web experience, better high def experience, better gaming experience(while I barely class it as gaming things like facebook games and minecraft are HUGE and just as people think they need the best CPU, people will think that minecraft and future cack on facebook will run better with a better gpu).
THing is, these are all area's APU's from AMD will excel, and look truly excellent.
Acceleration in various adobe products, flash acceleration which means acceleration for youtube and other poo on the internet, AMD's Ontario/Zacate in a laptop (admittedly in AMD controlled circumstances) looks awesome. The thing is, thats the kind of "test" that marketing will work well with, it will appeal to the common user, little gaming, some high def content, lower power usage, AMD becoming a really top choice in laptops which sell more than desktops these days.
The biggest thing is Intel is pushing their own marketing the way of "apu marketing" rather than just, "look how uber my CPU is", because they also want average John Doe to upgrade their laptop and the average guy wants to upgrade to get better web performance. Intel has to focus marketing in that direction and AMD wants to focus it on "combined APU" performance rather than CPU only performance.
AMD/Intel have pretty much no chance of going bust or becoming unimportant unless current silicon based chips become a thing of the past and someone creates something like nanotube chips or quantum chips or biochips, patents it, cuts them out and moves forward on their own.
.
erformance ratio I believe the top 20 are all AMD processors.