Yeah, grow a thicker skin. I've been through massive Usenet flamewars, I'm pretty fire-retardant now.
Anyways, AMD is OK, for someone on a budget, but I would hesitate to recommend them to anyone these days, mostly due to their lack of performance / watt, which has a lot to do with inferior process technology, due to being tied to GlobalFoundries.
My personal recent observations:
I bought several Lenovo laptops recently. One model is a Lenovo B50-45, with an AMD A6-6310 quad-core "small core" APU. 4GB of RAM, and I upgraded the 500GB HDD with a 240GB SSD. The other, was an IdeaPad 100s, with an Intel Atom Z3735F, 2GB of RAM and 32GB of eMMC storage. (Like an SSD, but both of those are fixed, and not upgradable.)
I find myself liking the Intel Atom setup better, quite frankly. It was only $120,and the AMD was $200. The AMD is more expandable, comes with more RAM and storage, and a user-removable battery. But the Intel is only 11.6", and has twice the battery life, and is more convenient. I've also had issues with the Wifi on the AMD for some reason, I don't understand why, unless that model is just flaky?
Either model is fine for forum-browsing, but I get double the battery life with Intel, and a more convenient size. I don't do Office though, which would probably be better with the AMD quad-core, as I believe it performs a bit better.
Oh, and the OS on the AMD rig is Win7 Pro 64-bit, which is loads better than the Win10 Home 32-bit on the Intel Atom laptop. Yet, I still prefer the Intel, for form-factor and battery life.