Competitive Comparison
AMD vs. Intel vs. NVIDIA
Three different bets on the same AI-accelerator demand cycle, compared on real fundamentals — a leader I don't own, a challenger I do, and a turnaround story I also hold.
| Metric | NVIDIA (NVDA) | Advanced Micro Devices (AMD) | Intel (INTC) |
|---|---|---|---|
| Market cap | ~$4.8T (implied) | $882B | N/A (unprofitable trailing) |
| P/E ratio (TTM) | 29.95 | 182.11 | N/A |
| PEG ratio | 0.28 | 7.52 | N/A (negative EBITDA growth) |
| EV/EBITDA | 29.43x | n/a (quarterly EBITDA $2.23B) | 23.73x |
| Capex (TTM) | $6.57B | $282M (quarterly) | −$13.10B |
EV/EBITDA, compared
Why I own AMD and INTC, not NVIDIA
NVIDIA is the dominant AI-GPU supplier by a wide margin, and its PEG of 0.28 against 108.9% EPS growth is a genuinely cheap number for a market leader — I don't dispute that. I don't own it because the thesis is already fully priced by the entire market, not because I doubt the business. AMD is my bet that the accelerator market doesn't stay a single-vendor story forever, at a real cost: 182x trailing earnings versus NVIDIA's 30x is the market charging a steep premium for AMD merely becoming a credible second source, not for actually leading. Intel is a different bet entirely — a manufacturing turnaround, sized small on purpose, where the negative PEG and EV/EBITDA reflect a company that hasn't proven the thesis yet rather than one the market has already rewarded.