Actually, they did. AMD's Magny Cours Opterons were overall better than their intel counterparts in nearly every way except single-threaded tasks. They were cheaper, faster clock-per-clock, more power efficient, and had QUAD CHANNEL memory. The current Bulldozer/Piledriver architecture was also revolved around AMD server chips. They're decent performers in servers, but for whatever reason, companies would rather go for intel - I guess because Intel is the easiest way out. Intel has proven multiple times that throughout most of their history, they are not a cost-effective option in servers(when you include all CPU architectures). I feel x86 overall doesn't belong in most servers. Agreed, but with their current architecture, that isn't going to be a reality. This is probably why they're investing in ARM. I just hope they do the same thing with ARM as they did with x86-64. Better doesn't mean necessary, or cost effective. Intel's i3 and i5 series are pretty overpriced (except in laptops), and the average user hardly has a need for something much better than the best i3. The thing to consider too is most enthusiasts hardly *need* an i7. While there are undoubtedly good reasons to own one, I'm sure the majority of i7 users are just bad at managing their tasks, care about bragging rights, and don't have the patience to wait an extra few minutes to render or encode something.