From what I read Intel and AMD have now same instructions set, and when it comes to benchmarking different software scenarios it's there is no significant difference. One major difference is that some software (some games mainly) treat all Ryzen's threads as physical cores, and makes no difference between logical and physical cores. This makes Ryzen lagging in performance, but is being addressed. And by Intel having more IPC, I meant benchmarks that put Ryzen's and i7's clocked similarly doing stuff on once core only. In that scenarios Intel's simply performs better. But I don't know many applications that really have only one thread, and even still most of them are not CPU, but rather I/O bound.
I know often AMD was sometimes better when it comes to performance per dollar. But I don't remember when was last time that AMD had both processors which were more performant in most scenarios, and had lower TDP, still costing more then a half less (i7-6900k vs Ryzen 7 1800X). That's why I wrote AMD is crushing Intel as of now And that's why I think Naples has a very big chance to bite a big chunk of server market.
As far as I remember I had AMD CPU's in my desktops because I don't need top shelf performance, when I can have good enough performance for reasonable money. But Intel in my laptops because of performance per watt ratio much better in intel's mobile CPU's. I'm really not trying to biased here.
And first time for the past 6 years, I think that performance gain over my old six core T1100 is worth the money when I read about Ryzen's 7 CPU's. I'm just waiting for UEFI/BIOS stabilization so I can put fast 3200 maybe even 3400 RAM sticks into motherboard and have it work without problems. Because sadly as of now Ryzen's platform is still a bit too young to be stable enough for me.