Same with process tech. Since about 1995 Intel had 2-3 years advantage in process over the 2nd best.
Now its probably about 0.5-1 years at most. Intel process is probably still going to be the best, but the advantage will be pretty small. So everyone ends up being nearly the same, despite taking radically different route there.
I'm not so sure about this. Here is a timeline of AMD processes vs Intel processes:
AMD:
350nm: June 1996 (K5)
250nm: May 1998 (K6-2)
180nm: November 1999 (Athlon Orion)
130nm: June 2002 (Athlon XP Thoroughbred)
90nm: October 2004 (Athlon 64 Winchester)
65nm: February 2007 (Athlon 64 Lima)
45nm: February 2009 (Phenom II Deneb)
32nm: September 2011 (Llano)
28nm: January 2014 (Kaveri)
20nm: ??
"14"nm: 2016 (Zen)
Intel:
350nm: November 1995 (Pentium Pro)
250nm: January 1998 (Pentium II Deschutes)
180nm: October 1999 (Pentium III Coppermine)
130nm: July 2001 (Pentium III Tualatin)
90nm: March 2004 (Pentium IV Prescott)
65nm: January 2006 (Pentium IV Cedar Mill)
45nm: January 2008 (Core 2 Wolfdale)
32nm: January 2010 (Clarkdale)
22nm: April 2012 (Ivy Bridge)
14nm: September 2014 (Broadwell)
10nm: 2017 (Cannonlake)
So I think the scenario is more the opposite of what you're saying. In 1995 there wasn't much gap and at times they were neck and neck. Now Zen will be 2 years behind in a process that's the same in name only, in reality being in between Intel's 22nm and 14nm. So more like 3 years behind.