As to where the money goes afterwards…EU budget of course. Intel has harmed the market and the market gets even (also, EU is relativelly good in sensibly using its money). And before somebody suggests that's a way for EU to get out of recession – this amount is pocket change for EU budget (and most of its countries); besides, EU usually fines…european companies (surprise!) – you just don't hear about it.

Somebody else might ask “so how does that help AMD?!”. Well, the role of govs isn't to favour one company over the other, it is to maintain even playing field (plus – don't forget about Via, ARM, Transmeta, and so on…should they get the cut too?). And Intel now will be under watchfull eye of the commision for several years. If they don't behave….BAM! Another fine. If that doesn't help…another one! This means that such practices ceased to be sustainable for Intel, and it needs to play fair.

So it also needs to maintain healthy, sustainable prices; unable to wage price war to the bottom using such dirty tricks and its vast reserves. Which means AMD benefits (and yes, somewhat higher, healthy prices are better than too low ones – what do you think Intel would do if AMD became irrelevant? What would stop them from going back to pricing practices from the 90's?)

http://blogs.zdnet.com/BTL/?p=17884&tag=nl.e589

“The previous record fine for similar abuses in the EU was €497 million, or about $677 million, levied at — you guessed it — Microsoft in March 2004 for blocking competition in markets for server computers and media software.”

What does EU do with this money if they're able to collect?

That's one more competitor Intel has to care about in the Netbook market. As if the ARM based processors were not enough of a worry…