Based on the benchmarks that they used, the A10-4600m does seem to do almost as well a the Core i3-2310m.
Sadly, the one benchmark that I place heavy reliance on (Video Encoding) does not have the Core i3-2310m as part of the benchmarks. Since I am not really impressed with the video encoding programs that can take advantage of Quick Sync or AVC, I prefer looking at benchmarks that relies solely on CPU performance. The A10-4600m is not that much faster than the Core i7-2637m used in the benchmark test, but it does show that it can at least beat a lower clocked dual core Intel Sandy Bridge CPU in video encoding. So assuming a laptop with the A10-4600m is equal to or less than the cost of a laptop with an i7-2637m, then that's a win for AMD.
However, for people looking for an inexpensive laptop with integrated graphics that is capable of playing games moderately well on a low resolution screen, then AMD is definitely a winner since Trinity's fastest IGP is more powerful than Intel's fastest IGP. Adding on a modest AMD discrete graphic card will boost performance a bit more due to Hybrid Crossfire / Dual Graphics Crossfire, or whatever they call it nowadays.
It will be interesting to see what happens next year when Haswell is released. Speculations are that the new Intel IGP will be 3x more powerful than Intel's HD 4000 graphic core. If true, then that will be impressive, but I think AMD's next APU generation, Kaveri, will still beat out whatever is in Haswell. The loser will be nVidia since their weakest graphic card will have to be faster than Haswell's IGP.
Based on some benchmarks comparing Intel's HD 4000 vs nVidia's GT 610m, the HD 4000 seems equal to nVidia's weakest mobile graphic card. Or at least so close in performance that spending money on a GT 610m would be a waste.
the 797-0m is the most powerful gaming gpu avaliable to notebooks. the trinity may not perform as well as a core i5, but if this laptop allows overclocking, that would be awsome, and still probably get better battery life than ivy bridge.