Well here's some thoughts I posted on the manufacturing of AMD processors in another thread, it's relevant here too though.Performance and quality wise, the two brands are really about the same.
Arstechnica had a great article that went over basically why comparisons of two different processor clockspeeds in different families or brands doesn't really make any sense. For example, you might have an Intel processor that does fantastic floating point calculations clocked at 2.6ghz and an AMD processor that does good interger calculations at 2.8ghz. Which is better? AMD processors tend to clock higher than Intel processors but this doesn't make them better. There is no good answer when you're building a computer to play games on. If you're building a computer that does mathematical calculations or runs simulations all day, and you wrote them all in assembly, there is a more clear answer.
When you're shopping for a home PC the best thing you can do is read lots reviews and don't buy a super brand new processor that was just released. That might sound odd, but you need to realize that new products tend to have defects and processor recalls are not uncommon.
If you look around enough you might be able to find an article on Tom's Hardware or something that demonstrates that on average it's 10 cents cheaper to run an Intel processor a year based on power consumption or something, or that over 6 years the Intel processor has a lower cost of ownership that probably still won't make up for the premium on it's initial price. But it's really down to what your favorite brand is here. My family in general has probably gone through 10-12 computers since 1995, with a mix of both AMD and Intel processors, and while we've had plenty of problems with computers, not once have we had a processor failure.
For the record, every PC I've built I've just shoved AMD processors in because they're cheaper. AMD motherboards also tend to be anywhere from 10-20 USD cheaper, which is also something I consider when I'm buying parts.
Poll