Tradesman1 :
Intel has tru 6 and 8 core CPUs in the 2011 socket CPU line, though on the expensice side, the i7 quad cores utilize hyper threading, and as far as pure performance and power the i7 quads run away from AMDs best CPUs....the new 8 core 9590 from AMD (at $700) get beat at most everything by a stock (no OC) 4770K
I wasn't saying the AMD processors would out perform a Intel, cause they will not, i know this, however if you are utilizing heavy multi-core technology running applications, (5-8 cores) the AMD would be a better way to go, however, even for gaming most games (at most, and very rarely) will only utilize 4 cores, in which the hyper-treading technology would come into play from Intel, and smoke an AMD. Point is AMD processors are useless unless the following conditions are meant:
1. You are using programs that utilize 5-8 cores and can't run it without the extra cores (even then this reason is still pushing it, since the i7 will outperform the new AMD processor)
2. You are doing heavy video editing, streaming, or music editing. AMD will usually be faster on an encoding side of things vs. Intel.
3. You want to go the cheap way and get an AMD cause you can't afford an Intel (budget computer)
***Those are the only 3 basic conditions that you would want an AMD processor over an Intel. Otherwise Intel would waste the AMD processors since the Intel's utilize the hyper-threading technology.
Also you are comparing apples to oranges, since the i7 is a quad core with hyper-treading and the AMD 8350 or AMD 9xxx processors are 8 cores, of course the Intel will be faster it is pushing around half the cores at hyper-threading instead of actually pushing 8 full complete cores.