Vega 56 performed similar to the 1080 in various low level API games at launch (Look at Doom/BF1 results). We've known AMD performs higher in those games for a while now as they can plug stalls. People actively talked about that when Vega launched so I'm not sure why anyone would be surprised by that (although there was argument about how fast dx12/vulkan would take off) I also don't think Maxwell has aged poorly? The last time I checked the 980Ti wasn't that far behind where it was when the 1080 launched but I haven't look recently. If the overall argument is "AMD cards have aged better" then I definitely agree and I think that should have been obvious once AMD won all the console contracts. That being said there is a question of how much that is worth to someone (typically based on how often they upgrade) and whether that will change with Turing - which is far more geared towards compute (where GCN should Accel so should Turing) and has a number of features like mesh shaders, variable rate shading, dxr etc that are all being implemented in various libraries.. so future games that take advantage of these features will only pull Turing ahead vs architectures without them.