Not really. It just happens to read reviews the last few years and it also just happens to not being a hardcore Nvidia fanboy, to enjoy double standards and biased reviews.
Anyway it is funny how you rush to do a little damage control after reading my post.
I don't think they have to cut any profit margins. Other than doubling their memory on the cards, I don't think an RX480 costs more than a R9 380X to be made. 14nm might be more expensive, but the chips are also smaller.
Believe me, I would love to have NO reason to start winning. But after a few years of reading reviews, editorials and looking at how the tech press covers the market, it stopped being just winning. It is experience. It is as easy to guess that the tech press will try to find or create negatives for Polaris, as to guess that in a football much between Germany and Malta, Germany will win.
As for TPU, other than that beautiful editorial, I don't have something negative to write. Reviews here do try to stay objective.
Bias is something we ascribe to. You are in AMD's camp -
not in a fan boy way but you prefer AMD. A comment I would see as a slight critique of an AMD card, you would see as a terrible injustice. People use all forms of cognitive behaviour when we evaluate things and unfortunately an inherent bias resides in all but the best of us. This bias leads you to make the comments you have already made.
Ironically, in making those comments you have set your self up to find a negative review and use it to justify your inherent bias. When people expect to find something (be it poor reviews, ghosts or god - you will find it) it is simple human nature.
I'm in Nvidia's camp but only so much as they give me the fastest card. I get pissed off at the Async nonsense but then maybe that is my bias that Nvidia surely cant make such a mistake?
Regardless, the only way to read a review is from a purely subjective point of view - is the article stating a fact of the condition or is it conjecture about the results? And if the conclusion is justified based on evidence it is a fair conclusion. Though as always, read many reviews to smooth over a reviewers inherent bias.
The Germany versus Malta match is an unfair comparison as Germany has a far more advanced team with a massive financially invested football league. Malta are minnows. The best comparison is if you read the West's accounts of a news article and then read Russia Times account - the difference is hilarious.
Like listing 8Gb as cons. Yeah, thanks... Thank god there is 4GB card available this time...
By your own WCCFTech linked graph, look at the 'awesome' benefits 8Gb yield over 4Gb. That's what the negative press on 8Gb was. It has very little benefit, except on cards that have the gpu grunt to actually run very high resolutions. Most folk agree that adding double the RAM to a mid tier gfx card will only serve as a marketing gimmick.
EDIT: quick maths - your graph from WCCFTech = double memory gives 1.5% improvement.