Can you compare Intel and AMD processors- apples to apples?

I know and thoroughly understand Intel processors, but I want to get more comfortable with AMD processors. Can you give me the "AMD equivalent" to the following intel processors? It's okay if they aren't 100% equal, just as close as you can get. If one is a little more than the other, please specify.AtomCeleronPentiumCore SoloCore 2 DuoCore i3, i5, and i7Thanks!

Well I don't know the equivalence but I have been an intel fan for a while and finally decided to get an amd since I was looking for a computer I could afford.So far I'm extremely impressed with my processor. I have an amd anthon 64 2.8ghz processor and am able to watch videos with speed, and play fast paced mmorpgs without the computer slowing down. Multi-tasking is great too.

uuhhh...fail!

You can find out yourself by going to the AMD site and studying these cpu's, but I will give you my general experience and feedbackAtom = substandard silicon, although new, good enough for junk netbooks but nothing else, equivalent to a Sempron or Turion processorCeleron = OLD, outdated technology, crippled cpu in the wafer fab plant, good for cheap notebooks or really crude, low priced business computers. Equivalent to a Sempron.Pentium(4) = OLD, outdated and I would say, equivalent to an Athlon XP + since it is not a true 64 bit processor, but a 32 bit processor...this is the one where AMD kicked Intel's butt by introducing the AMD 64 monocoreCore Solo = AMD 64 monocoreCore 2 Duo AND Quad = This is where AMD tops out, The Phenom II 965 Black edition is probably up there along with the Q9650 processor. The lower variations of Phenom and Phenom II are probably more in the area of the E9XXX or E8XXXX Intel processorsCore i3 is garbage - crippled, left over i7 silicon and I throw it in with Celerons and Atom silicon in my opinionCore i5 - ok, but still crippled - Why is Intel marketing junk silicon? ...That is my question.For Core i3 and Core i5 I automatically DEFAULT to AMD as superior, especially the i3...maybe less so for i5Core i7 - Superior to any AMD processor bar none.Now, this is just based on my own personal prejudices, plus personal experience with most of that silicon plus what I can study on cpu stress tests on sites like Tom's Hardware, Anandtech and magazines like Maximum PC Magazine (San Francisco).I am not for either Intel or AMD, I am for what is BEST for the consumer. TO me, the cpu's are transparent in most app's, where the REAL change is that needs to be made is in the software so that software multithreads and can use the extra cores. Intel is going to release the i9 core with 6 cores, but what good does that do people when they cannot take advantage of any more than two cores?AMD already has commercial class 6 core processors available.I consider the i3 and the Atom silicon to be JUNK silicon, fit for buzzards that peck off of dead bodies...that is where junk silicon belongs when it comes to true GAMERS!

Atom is roughly equivalent to AMD Athlon Neo series. Celeron = AMD Sempron http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sempron and Mobile SempronPentium (Dual Core) = AMD Athlon 64 X2 http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Athlon_64_X2Core Solo = No real equivalent. It's really a Core 2 Duo with one disabled core. Core 2 Duo = Phenom 2 X2 series, Athlon 2 X2 series (Phenom 2 features larger on die cache compared to the Athlon 2 series. All of the Phenom series are actually Quad cores, with only 2 cores that actually work. It is a popular practice for people to buy Phenom 2 X2's and unlock the remaining 2 disabled cores, turning it into a quad core CPU) http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Phenom_IIhttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Athlon_IICore 2 Quad = Phenom 2 X4, Athlon 2 X4, http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Phenom_(processor)#Phenom_X4Core i3, i5, i7 = Phenom 2 X4 (Black Editions) clocked above 3ghz are the only real contenders against the Core i5 and i7 series. The Core i3's don't hold a candle to any of the Phenom 2 X4 series.Xeon (Nehalem based server processor) = Opteron (6 core Istanbul, high end AMD server workhorse)