Somehow I feel that in our world the majority of corporations don't make direct comparisons to their competitors that often, preferring to use "competing brands" or something of that variety instead.
Avoiding a lawsuit is easy in that case: The Intel lawyer would have to make the argument that Pentium PCs are, in fact, harmful. Which would have opened a whole new can of worms.
Hard to see how Intel could sue over a statement like that.
The reason many companies say "competing brands" is because they don't want to mention an alternative, because it increases the mindshare of the other brand.