Intel has pushed the Atom series through heavy marketing. It simply sucked, it sucked then, it sucks now. The $250 Chromebook is superior to the latest Atom chips.
The Core I series is a processing monster, but it does not deliver the type of performance graphics-wise that AMD can pull off. In the long run, AMD has the upper hand. I don't think Intel's graphics performance, especially on integrated solutions, will be superior to AMD's. And graphics performance is what the end-user will be looking for the most from now on, especially in small form factors (there are some Mini-ITX FM2 designs that will kick a**).
What really bothers me is that when Intel throws something out that clearly has sub-par performance (such as Atom or the integrated HD Graphics), the reviewers put up all sorts of caveats before showing the (horrible) numbers. When it's AMD, there's absolutely no excuse for low numbers.