[UncleOxidant]

That's debatable. Intel's design teams aren't as nimble or as lean as AMD's. That means it takes longer for Intel to create a new design to send to the fabs. Yes, Intel is a bit behind on process, but seems to be catching up. I think the bigger problem is on CPU design side because AMD seems to be much more productive by taking more advantage of design automation.

[AnthonyMouse]

Intel's designs are basically competitive on performance, even when they were stuck on 14nm against TSMC 7nm, at the cost of higher power consumption. Which is down to the better power efficiency of TSMC's process.

Their reputation has taken quite a hit because they're used to charging a premium, so they've been selling hardware with similar performance and worse power consumption for higher prices than AMD. Which isn't a good look. But it's not because they have a bad design, it's because AMD's design is just as good with a superior fab.

A lot of people credit AMD with chiplets, which really was a clever way to deal with fulfilling their contract with GF, and has a major advantage for server chips where they have a large number of compute dice. But the mobile chips and some of the desktop APUs are a single die and don't seem to be suffering for it. It's not the reason the Ryzen 7 5800X uses so much less power than the equivalent Core i7.