> How is Intel an underdog next to AMD? I don't know many business machines running AMD.

I don't know what a "business machine" is, but you probably aren't intimately familiar with organizations that have been directly purchasing large amounts of processors or processor containing devices over the last several years. For many such entities, AMD has made way more sense than Intel.

I meant workstations, laptops, servers, etc. My org has 1000s of endpoints and 10s of servers across multiple campuses. All of it running Intel.

Then your org is over paying for mediocre HW, at least for servers, arguably also for laptops (Dev machines for sure) At least for the last two years.

I can count on one hand the number of devs we have. We're not a software tech company. vPro is a standard for device management here.

Intel has been shitting the bed for a decade+ now

not quite, Haswell was only 9.5 years ago :) fma+avx2 is a pretty nice architecture boost.

Intel are screwed. Many of its biggest customers have started just making their own chips instead. The bleeding edge of compute appears to be falling to Nvidia (who now make both the chips and the network that connects them). Their latest GPU project is going the way of their other GPU projects. They don't even have the biggest/baddest fab capability thing going on any more. I have no idea what's going on in there, but I can imagine, and it's not pretty.

Other than Apple who else is making their own chips?

Amazon. And I was assuming Microsoft but it turns out they are using ampere. Heh, Google too. I guess it's starting to work out for ampere (but Google make their own tensor chips).