mtcn77 AMD is winning on density. They have features unsupported by Directx, still, which could turn the tables.

You are free to doubt that balance however the case on gpu-mining should provide pointers on how they really stack up against one another.

Yes, all those special features, that AMD fans were screaming would save AMD. DX12, async, Mantle, vulkan, tressFX, the list goes on.Special features dont matter unless you can get most developers to use it, and only nvidia's gameworks has seen such success. For 5 years "special features" were going to be AMD's ace up their sleeve, and for 5 years Nvidia has dominated them on sales. AMD needs to focus less on special features they cant support and more on producing fast GPUs.Performance in one application =? performance overall. You could just as easily point to nvidia's gaming performance and CUDA performance in pro applications and say "You can doubt it, but that shows how they really stack up".Regardless of how good VEGA is (which is highly subjective based on application), VEGA was over a year late to market, power hungry, with very little OC capability, was hampered by minuscule availability and HBM production. The result was Nvidia capturing a huge portion of the market using now 2 year old GPUs because AMD never bothered to show up. You cant just leave an entire generation behind and expect people to continue supporting your brand.AMD now considering leaving a second generation to nvidia does two things. First, it creates an even stronger idea that AMD simply cant compete on the high end, reinforcing the "mindshare" that many AMD fans are convinced exists. in reality, it is people being uncertain about investing in a brand when said brand cannot consistently show UP to compete. The second is that it gives nvidia a captive market to milk for $$$, which helps keep them economically ahead of AMD, able to make bigger investments in development of new tech, and perpetually keeping AMD in a position of catching up.