I dont see their lineup changing any market share. If anything, they may lose some.
AMDs lineup for the rest of 2016 and part into 2017 essentially evolves around selling mainstream/low end parts that they have to compete with Nvidia about, and doing so at worse perf/watt it seems. While Nvidia gets the higher segments for themselves.
Something went wrong from AMD in terms of the lineup. Either they didn't expect Nvidia to do what they did (Unlikely). Or they simply didn't have the R&D to do better. It was clear that the "Chili event" was a desperate attempt to keep hype and focus, while they would lose the battle later. It made some people believe AMD was 6-9 months ahead.
Again, the products are priced because they perform as such in the metrics. Not due to any other factor.
It is amazing that you can state all of that garbage as facts when you are completely wrong.
AMD has planned to release 390/970 level of performance for cheap since they announced Polaris back in January.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=p010lp5uLQA?t=955
We have no idea how much power it takes, only that it has a MAX TDP of 150w (75 board, 75 6 pin), nor do we know what the performance is exactly, only that it is above 970/390. So how can you claim to have any perf/watt #s?
The products are priced that way because,
they said that's what the pricing would be 6 months ago.
If Nvidia is ahead so far, why can't they keep tiny amounts of under performing overheating "premium" 1080's in stock anywhere? Why didn't they have more than a few hundred per store? You claim they've sold thousands everywhere but when asked for sources you have never provided any.
Start putting up sources, stop spouting FUD.