For the last few days I have been engaged in a debate over the relative merits of AMD vs Intel, with no clear winner. My position is that a CPU that has no overheat protection worth anything should not be a serious contender against a proven and well-known CPU that DOES have good overheat protection. The AMD will self-destruct if you remove the heat sink - it cannot deal with rapid temperature spikes. The Intel merely slows the clock down until the heat is manageable. Thus, even if the AMD is 30% cheaper, I would still go with the Intel. I'm paranoid that way.

Now the chances of a heat sink just falling off is not great, but not impossible nor unheard of.

I also admit to having some bias against AMD due to the compatability issues with games and apps in the older CPUs. Even though they may be completely perfect today, I still don't trust them. They screwed up. Perhaps I should forgive them, but why should I when Intel IS the standard that the AMD is measured against? I remain an Intel-only consumer.