Motorola did not have Intel beat. Motorola had nothing.
Moto did the 88K as its replacement for the 68K. While some architects like the 88K, it was a market failure.
IBM derived the PowerPC from its workstation line, developed three initial processor families, the 601, 603/604, and 620, and the gifted this work to Motorola so that PowerPC could claim to be a consortium with multiple potential processor design houses. The PowerPC NEVER had "Intel beat", it was explicitly designed to provide performance parity at lower cost than Intel. That's why no one adopted it other than Apple. Apple wanted cheap and didn't need binary compatibility. No one else wanted UNIX workstations that performed worse than everyone else and that's what PowerPC delivered.
Motorola, after being revived from the dead with the gift of the new architecture, proceeded to squander it by failing to advance the platform in any meaningful way. There was essentially no adoption outside embedded so Moto focused its energies where its sales were. Late in the game, IBM reentered to game with the 970/G5 but it was too late and x86 was no longer a target that would be defeated so easily.
Motorola never had Intel beat, they were merely a proxy for IBM who might have but failed to. PowerPC is now dead, a result of IBM's short-sightedness, Motorola's incompetence, and ARM's dominance at the lower end.