That said, this really does look like a pretty awesome chip for data centers. I would love a dual socket mother board that had 512G of RAM 1TB of Optane memory as additional "RAM", then 16TB of NVME SSD storage, and 32 SAS/SATA channels for an effective 360TB of rotating disk (dual parity RAID 6, 30 active drives, 2 parity drives). And then make a cluster of 48 of those monsters.
Ah the places we would go and the things we would do with such a system.
AMD didn't squirrel away the advantage. Intel abused their monopoly to starve out AMD by giving OEMs discounts if they agreed not to carry AMD chips. They paid a paltry 1.5B in fines for abusing their market dominance.
they didnt https://www.lexology.com/library/detail.aspx?g=8965e7a2-ac87...
That isn't really what happened though. It was a combination of two things. One was this:
The other was that it happened around the time when CPU frequencies hit the power wall. That hit the Pentium 4 especially hard, which gave AMD the advantage, but Intel's anti-competitive behavior prevented AMD from capitalizing on it. Meanwhile Intel knew the Pentium 4 was too power hungry for laptops, so they kept iterating on the Pentium M, which is what became Core. It was designed for power efficiency rather than clock speed right when clock speeds unexpectedly started getting limited by power. It wasn't expected to be faster than the Pentium 4 (at half the power), but it was, so Netburst got canceled and suddenly Intel had the advantage.
The combination of the two things meant that AMD never had a chance to really profit from its investment in Sledgehammer, which meant they didn't have the money to put into R&D and fell behind for a decade.
There is no guarantee something else won't go wrong, but the chance of that same confluence of factors happening again seems pretty unlikely.
I've used dual parity RAID systems for over a decade now and they work superbly when rebuilding even during a drive failure. (aka in 'degraded' mode). I typically run them in 22 drive sets because that is how many drives fit on a single NetApp drive shelf.
For a large write-heavy setup + "we will restore from yesterday's backup" mode of operation, you may likely be better off with a RAID10 which is faster. (Though RAID50 and even RAID60 are a thing.)
The age of the company in a case like this is irrelevant. What matters is current management and staff and market context.
With less success then