There are some benchmarks on Nehalem from reputable sources (like Anandtech). It's very likely to be a very quick CPU (significantly quicker than a Core 2 Duo, clock-for-clock, and therefore much quicker than anything AMD has released so far). AMD's big problem seems to be that their CPUs cost too much to make. They can't release a low-end dual-core because they'd be losing money - but that just means that they're putting single-cores up against Intel's dual-cores (Celeron E1200 and E1400). The 780G chipset would be a huge bonus for AMD in the low-end market, except that all the boards cost $80+ (while cheap Intel i945GC boards cost $45). You end up deciding between a 780G and a Sempron LE-1100 or an i945GC and a Pentium Dual Core E2180. Given the choice, I'd go for the Intel option. Even the X2 4600+ (which is one of the few AMD CPUs that can really compete well with Intel's offerings) isn't much faster than the Intel offerings (and cheap i945GC boards cost less than cheap AMD boards, reducing the price difference further). Intel's brand name is still powerful enough to persuade people to buy the slightly slower Intel systems. Hopefully Fusion will allow AMD to make a reasonably fast low-end CPU/GPU combination for a good price. Intel still doesn't have any decent IGPs (even with Nvidia's ones), and none of the current IGPs offer video decoding. If AMD can take advantage of that then they may well have a winner.