486-66 for life, yo!

If you have a 1st gen i7 its a marginal upgrade.

I have a i7 920 @ 4GHz, I might be upgrading to a IB-E+x79 when they come out in September.  Not for a super increase in performance, it seems like the last platform before things start getting restrictive in terms of built in DRM and my s**ts gettin' old.

There are rumors of AMD coming out with something competitive, but that could be just more fanboy FUD.  IMHO AMD provides a solid product and is great for people who see PC's as Facebook machines (Web with the occasional word processing task).  For gamers and people who need speed Intel+Graphics Card offers superior performance now.

So is there literally a wall that is being hit by both AMD and Intel with the x86 design, or is Intel's gracious 5-10% increase in performance every 2 years or so simply because they have no competition?

HOGWASH I SAY! AMD is rocking in my rig, and although not the greatest for gaming it's pretty damn awesome at my video renders.

You flippin nerds....

The AMD chips do a damn fine jerb when it comes to gaming. I had a 965 BE until recently and it had no problem cranking out any of the games I play. No one can argue that they hang with Intel though. The Intel chips are  Daft Punk - Harder Better Faster. Whether that power is needed is up to you but I would imagine that most people don't actually need it. Its just nice to have for e-peen. I thought I remember a few benches that showed that the Dozers were better at rendering but I could be wrong. I just remember the Dozers beating the i7s at something. I will stick with my i7 because I, like many others, like to flex nuts; however, AMDs do a great job at just about everything (including gaming) for anyone on a budget or those who want to hold out for the next major thing like Skylake.

Interested to see the comparison with them running Nvidia graphics instead of the AMD graphics.