Why are Intel CPUs less common nowadays?

Basically, AMD have been making better chips that are clocking comparably with Intel, and have been doing so for less money. As for why... Basically everything went wrong in the early 2010s and Intel have yet to successfully unfuck themselves. First of all, that early-mid 2010s dominance of the market and performance tests that Intel was delivering, was the product of two choices: 1) the tick-tock generational model, where on the tick they would deliver a better core design (optimising and filling in space on the die mostly, having built the Core stuff kinda from the ground up (or as close to it as anyone gets), they weren't going to be doing a total rebuild *any* time soon)), and the tock would take that die and shrink it to the next process node. 2)They went all-in on speculative execution as best I can figure out - this delivered incredible performance gains by using unused capacity to execute code before the program called for it on a basis of "this typically comes next" - as a result, when the code did call for it, it already had the result waiting and didn't have to go execute that code. These two bit them on the arse, and did so *hard* - by the late 2010s, the foundry side of the business was running into severe problems with achieving the next process node (and in the end, in 2022 iirc, gave up trying to do it their way entirely and switched to TSMC's model of shrinking the transistors and not trying to increase transistor density too much), and so multiple generations were stuck on the tick - trying to squeeze ever more grunt out of the same space and transistor densities. And so they leant ever harder on speculative execution models. And then Spectre and Meltdown hit. Meltdown hit all three CPU makers, but while AMD and ARM were able to get mitigations into silicon relatively quickly, Intel really struggled - largely because Spectre (which was mostly a them problem), specifically harnessed speculative execution to hide from security software. First, there came the software fixes - microcode updates that were resulting in performance drops on the order of 40-60% performance decreases. Then there came the problem of addressing both security vulnerabilities in actual silicon, which was a mountain of a challenge - they did eventually get full mitigations into silicon... About five years or so later. As a result, especially given the foundry problems, Intel spent the late 2010s and early 2020s spinning their wheels, rebuilding their cores from the ground up pretty much, and still trying to have consistent releases of new chips to keep the shareholders happy. Meanwhile, between TSMC pushing the foundry side things faster and further than Intel (especially with the development of the chiplet model which made production of multi-core chips much, much cheaper), and AMD only having to really worry about mitigating Meltdown, AMD took a clear lead on the technical side, certainly in bang for buck, and started being able to deliver superior performance to Intel. Now, Intel still had it's reputation as the better bet for gamers and power users, and so it took a while of AMD being the better chips for gamers and PC builders to really make the move.