I'v used a lot of AMD production servers over the years, and from a relative standpoint I've found benchmark sites like CPUbenchmark to pretty darn close when it comes to determining relative value between the chips. Some specific tasks like H264 and SQL or gaming might lean more towards one vs the other, but when all things are added up they are pretty close.
I don't see anywhere on their chart where AMD leads with anything, and all the high profile Ryzen benchmarks I've seen pretty much correlate to CPUBenchmark. An i7 7820 pretty much 'thumps' anything in it's price category. If you step below that you see some Ryzen's that are about $100 cheaper than their nearest Intel neighbor, but it's obvious AMD does this from a marketing standpoint given the tight profit structure of OEM PC makers. It's obvious some of their chips are being put on the market at far lower profit margins to generate interest. Fine with me - keeps Intel honest.
H264 handling clearly benefits Intel, and it's a big deal with BI. However, the elephant in the room nobody is talking about is Meltdown, and that'e one issue AMD doesn't have to contend with. Problem is the benchmarks for Meltdown patching are all over the place, but they do impact storage.
IMO, unless you are doing a lot of MP4 conversion on a BI server for some strange reason all these higher end processors are overkill and the benchmarks debates are more fun than substance. I'd rather put my money in better storage.
