Let's take these one at a time.
1. First of all, it can be clearly seen that large supermarket chains can provide a large number of product options.
Really this sentence is grammatically fine. The only objection I have is with the use of the modal 'can'. 'Can' means 'able to', and to be more precise in meaning, don't use can here. Why? because the point is that 'chains do provide a lot of options' not simply that they are able to - they actually do this.
2. Nevertheless, some critics argue that there are too many products, which make customers feel confused and waste time making choices.
You need the comma after products to get a clear meaning. With out the comma it could be interpreted as saying that too many of the individual products in the store make customers feel confused, but I think your meaning is that it is the great number of products that people are confused by. The second correction is about using a gerund after the verb instead of a to-infinitive. '...make customers waste time to make a choice.' A verb like waste is usually followed by an object noun: waste money, waste energy, waste water etc - we often just want to say what gets wasted. But we also can add meaning to verbs like this with additional complements, often using a gerund.
"You waste money investing in these penny stocks." S+V+O + gerund + prep. phrase
3. Furthermore, it is apparent that most products in large supermarkets are cheap, which is beneficial to consumers.
You might want to say 'cheaper' rather than 'cheap'. Keep in mind that cheap doesn't always mean less expensive, it can mean poorly made and low quality too.
4. However, some people argue that low prices of products may “squeeze” the
interests of suppliers.
This one is also OK grammatically. 'interests' may be a little broad for your intended meaning. What is squeezed are profits and margins as big chains pressure their suppliers for better and better prices. Walmart is notorious for this kind of behavior.