Yes they are truly great but point to consider is they are just competing against Intel. Don't get wrong I love what AMD has done recently with Ryzen but we need ARM based servers which has perf per watt competing with M1/M2
We have them? Graviton instances are priced pretty competitively compared to similar x86 EC2 instances. A lot of people don't use Graviton though (myself included) for a number of reasons. A lot of software hasn't been ported over to aarch64 yet, and even when it is it can lack the optimization that x86 enjoys (especially with programs leveraging AVX et. al). Furthermore, the CPUs that Amazon use seem to be bottlenecked by low IO bandwidth, which makes for some janky benchmarks when comparing simple database operations.
I think we'll eventually see a return to RISC architectures, but ARM's value proposition hasn't made a lot of sense on the server. It's still encumbered with proprietary licenses that make it extremely hard for CPU manufacturers to compete in the server market. It still hasn't figured out all of it's hardware-acceleration quirks, and you don't get any Rosetta 2 fairy dust on Linux (not that you'd want to use it in prod anyways). All in all, x86 is still the set-and-forget king, and probably more stable than ARM alternatives. I'm hopeful that RISC-V will finally put x86 in it's grave, but that's going to be a couple years out...
In my own workloads. Which are not burst, but first sustained CPU, and then sustained I/O, at about 5MB/s.
So, it is cheaper for Amazon, as they use half the power, but not cheaper for end users.
Intel has no real excuse since they use their own fabs and spun their wheels on 14nm for half a decade.
If the article is true (and that's a big if, given Max Tech's history of tech reporting), instead of blaming the above companies I'd just congratulate Apple and thank them for putting the bar higher. AMD recent processors are still great on the desktop, and an absolute blast on the server, with extremely attractive value for money ratio.