Why?
I've never understand this being a fan of a specific company. They're a company. They have no affinity towards you as a person, they are not family or friends. Choose the product that suits your need and costs the least (in terms of tco, not up-front price). Brand should be very low on the criteria list. In fact even for a company Intel has proven to have absolutely no interest in providing for you. For the past ten years they have done little to no innovation, while keeping prices as high as they can. They have engaged in anti-competetive bribing and strong-arming to force companies to use their chips exclusively. They flat-out said to Asus and the likes that they would either not sell them anything anymore or only at extremely elevated prices if they dared to bring out a laptop with an AMD processor. That's not only illegal, it's immoral to boot.
Intel does not care about you. They only care about money.
And no, AMD does not care about you either, but at least they give Intel some incentive to improve.
Personally I will choose a product of the underdog if it ticks all the requirements boxes and the price is equivalent. And no, Intel is not the underdog at the moment, even though they are underperforming.
As of now, I would go AMD for CPU because they offer better price / performance in the mid-range. I'd also consider a used 570. That being said, I am a bit heasitant of their graphics as I had to deal with Linux driver bugs for years. Nvidia's bugs was graphical distortion as opposed to AMD 's crashing the running userspace. For my 3500U, Linux kernels are still fussy with AMD and Windows was crashing with green screen when using an external monitor on the previous update.
There's no chance I would have chosen an AMD over Intel during the FX generation. At the time, Intel had the performance and graphics drivers (despite lacking on the graphics hardware).
Ryzen 1000 would not have been enough to convince me to buy AMD because how lacking it was in single thread. Intel still has better cache systems, which makes a difference when running unoptimised code as well as emulation.
A couple years ago, if you asked me if I was an Intel Fanboy, I probably would have said yes, because they really were that much better at the time. A few security performance drops later, combined with bad pricing schemes, I'd now say no.
I was cheering AMD on the APU aspect when they were still pared weak CPUs. I've since stopped caring as much about APUs as are only as powerful as old it/i7 with entry level graphics cards. The graphics need to improve and the price of the 2400G needs to drop before it starts to make sense. Before Ryzen APUs, it seemed like failure after failure because the CPUs were so weak, even if the integrated graphics were stronger than Intel.
I wouldn't mind seeing Intel pull ahead again. Part of it may be nostalgia from my first it build. Equally, I would love to see market disruption if either company could manage a 50% boost in single thread performance (and I'm not just talking FPU).