Balanced PC
This concept is nothing new but there are a couple of reasons McNaughton is keen to emphasise it now. Firstly, with Intel extending its CPU technology lead AMD, like NVIDIA, is keen to point out that the overall performance is determined by a lot more than just the CPU.
Secondly, AMD thinks this logic will ring particularly true at this time of global financial peril, when everyone's feeling skint.
The balanced PC argument is quite simple. The cheapest Core i7 is around $100 more than a 9950 BE (or indeed a Q6600), what else could you do with that $100? AMD is arguing that buying a 9950 BE and spending the $100 you've saved on, say, an ATI Radeon HD 4670, will offer a superior all round system to one based on Core i7 but with just integrated graphics.
Not that AMD wants to rubbish integrated graphics - far from it. One distinct advantage AMD has over Intel is its integrated graphics offering in the form of the 780G and 790GX chipsets.
So another option for a less gamer-oriented balanced PC might be to go for a 780G motherboard, which necessitates an AMD processor, and spend the difference on a bigger display, or better optical drive, or more memory, or whatever.
Ultimately, a win for AMD right now would be if end-users concluded that while Core i7 looks great and everything, they don't feel the need to pay for that kind of CPU horse-power right now and want to spend that $100 or so on other stuff.
Of course that doesn't mean they'll spend their money on AMD kit. As we've already concluded, you can get similar bang4buck from Intel CPUs if you want, but the main reason not to, according to McNaughton, is upgradability.