Performance wise AMD has been outdoing Intel (when compared to systems with similar components/configurations and using processors with similar "performance ratings") for at least a solid 18 months now, if not longer.
Price/performance wise AMD has been the better value for literally years.
Heat? Yep well, its hard to say if AMD is still hotter, as even the higher speed Intel's run pretty darn hot now as well. On this one I'd say at the moment they are pretty close to each other -- perhaps AMD is a tiny bit hotter, but nowhere near the different it used to be. Intel chips used to be like air conditioners next to AMD.
Bottom line, in my experience is they both make good chips. Overall when I take all the benchmark data, through in a cheaper cost and stir...I come out with the opinion I've held for a few years now -- AMD is the best value. Still. And I actually do think, at least for a gaming PC, the FX series is the creame of the crop right now.
But, Intel has some impressive products as well -- even though you pay a bit more for them. When in comes to laptops the Centrino product is simply great for instance. I know very common sense idea, but hey Intel is the one who actually made that idea reality and it works great. Bench marks are still showing that Intel has an edge (although an edge that is getting thin) in number crunching apps. I see database performance and complex spreadsheets (key word is complex, not talking about your little personal expense spread sheet here but hardcore math used in THOUSANDS of cells)
better with the Intel line.
So I think this way..if you never game (or its only a "casual" thing for you) and you mostly do heavy crunching...Intel may be better, if you want to pay more. Of course to be hoenst how many of us, even executives among us, create spreadsheets so huge that you'll notice the difference with a Intel versus AMD solution?
Anyway...just sounding off my 2 1/2 cents.
later.