I'll be running Intel based 1U servers soon. AMD processors are very hard to cool, if the fan fails the whole CPU and possibly the motherboard dies with it. With the P4 it would just clock down until a safe tempature is reached so a slow CPU vs. a dead CPU is a bigger deal to me than saving $50 and going with AMD. The owner of Sprynex, who I'll be colocating my equipment with, puts extra fans in his cabnits pointed at AMD servers just to keep them from overheating. Intel also makes consistantly better chipsets than anything on the AMD side but that's just my opinion.
Better performance... come on, no one I've met that's into computers will seriously stand by the 5% performance increase in favor of either actually making a difference in the applications you'll run on the machine. Think real world performance -- no real difference between to two. Both processors aren't very exciting, I still think the G4 is on the top of my list in "cool factor" for how it gets things done. Fast enough for me, am I all alone?
I beg to differ on the better bang for the buck on the AMD side but it really doesn't matter, PC's suck
Things couldn't be better for Apple. With a glitch in intel's newest processor Apple may be able to take the cake with the 970. Assuming it's above the hype.
Cheapest Power Mac 970: $1,600
Cheapest P4 System: under $1,000?
Not with Apple's pricing, I learned how to use Photoshop on Pentium III machines with 512Mb RAM and it worked just fine. Most people don't need an 970 powered computer. At least not enough to take the cake.