They have also made a lot of successful products and come backs. While the Pentium 4 lost out to the Athlon's and their marketshare dropped they then released the Core series of CPUs and the Core 2 Duo was a huge hit and marked the beginning of the dark ages for AMD until they released Ryzen.

As a company they have had long periods of dominance potted with big losses to AMD on the CPU front which they always claw back. They seem this time to be taken out by their inability to get their fabs online more than anything their competitor is doing.

I might be misremembering, but the initial core series (core 2 duo/quad) was still a bit behind AMD's Phenom line. Core was definitely better than the old netburst architecture, but I don't really remember Intel regaining dominance until the core i series/AMD FX.

This was also like high school/college for me, so I could be way off.

AMD was beating the on performance before Athlon and Athlon 64 made it simply clear to everybody.

Intel spent literally 8 years and many, many billions and billions of $ to do everything possible to prevent AMD from getting volume.

The had so much production capacity and AMD so little, that they basically had the ability to pay every single large OEM not to use AMD. If you as company used AMD, you would instantly lose billions of $, you would be the last Intel costumer served, you wouldn't get the new chips early on and potentially much more. OEM were terrified of Intel. Because Intel and Microsoft were so dominate OEMs made terrible margin, and Intel could basically crush them. Intel used to joke that OMEs were their distributes nothing more.

This was to the point where AMD offered free chips to people and they refused it.

AMD had a long period of time where they had better product, but the couldn't sustaining investing in better products and fighting so many legal battles. And the regulators around the world took to long and were to soft on Intel.

Intel in the 80s invested big in memory, and got crushed by Japan. They invested big into the iAPX 186 and got crushed, it was horrible product. Luckily they were saved by the PC and were then able to have exclusivity on the back of the i386.

By the late 90s AMD was better then them and that persisted for almost 10 years. And then they took the lead for for about 8 years and then lost it. And they didn't lose it because of the fabs I don't think. When they lost on the fabs they just fell further behind.

Its really the late 80s and 90s gigantic PC boom that gave them the crazy manufacturing and market lead that AMD was not able to overcome the 10 years after that.

Chiplets were a great move that kept yields up on aggressive process shrinks and prices low.