Hard to know what the f___ AMD are planning IMO. The HD 7000 series arch (GCN) was laid down in 2009 as far as I'm aware -which was while Dirk was still captain. I sincerely doubt that a change in CEO and a BoD can influence a design is intended to keep AMD going in the graphics business for the next 2-3 iterations. I'd assume, like VLIW5 before it, AMD are tied to GCN for at least the HD8000 series if not the HD9000. Like many other facets of AMD's business, I don't think their change in headman and business direction will be readily apparent until the present tech has run it's course.
AMD can't very well back out of the high end (read: workstation/enthusiast) card market in any case- not without cutting the collective throats of dev's that have committed to AMD's OpenCL SDK.
The only points of interest as far as I can discern will be what kind of effort AMD are willing to put into future drivers, gaming development and open source software. Nvidia just posted record revenue and profit numbers from their workstation/hpc graphics- so either that market is now growing or they have taken marketshare away from FirePro's (using Cayman GPU's) while still utilizing an old (Fermi) architecture - I suspect that it is the latter.
Nvidia have been pilloried for their memory controller issues in recent times- a large part of which was due to moving away from the 256-bit memory bus (note that the GTX460/560 don't suffer from memory speed issues) and using 72 bit ECC memory modules (as opposed to 64-bit) in addition to being late to the GDDR5 party. AMD still have to demonstrate both these attributes (or to convince enterprise users that EDC will suffice in lieu of ECC) to deliver in the high ASP/high margin workstation market in addition to providing a suitable software ecosystem and overcoming the inertia inherent in the business sector.
The performance/enthusiast desktop graphics market isn't that big, so I think the prime mover in it's ongoing existance is sharing architecture with enterprise GPGPU -true in Nvidia's case since they have already made a case for Kepler and Maxwell.
TL: DR
I Don't think either company will be exiting the high-end gaming business
unless they are willing to surrender the highly lucrative workstation market.
It's a certainty that Nvidia won't walk away from either -not with the profile that Quadro and TWIMTBP enjoy- and the fact that GPGPU factors highly in Nvidia's future plans.
AMD...well, who knows what's going through their minds- aside from some fist pumping/chest beating from Rory and PR drivel from John Fruehe, I haven't actually heard anything from AMD. And what is anticipated are still products of the old regime.
AMD's main problem is they are fighting a war on multiple fronts - against Nvidia in graphics (who have superior cash reserves and R&D), against Intel (who have cash, R&D, and fabs that are purpose built for their product), and a future problem with ARM x64 in the ultra-low voltage sector. AMD have limited resources- something has to give.
AMD seems to be way behind the curve if it is still years from on die GPU.
Probably depends on if AMD plan on moving into the ultra-portable market. If they plan on getting into smartphones and the like then they are starting from further back than the companys that already have an ARM licence and have to fight smaller more cost efficient chips with SoC's that are burdoned with x86 overhead (i.e. overly complex for what is required). If they plan on desktops/laptops/tablets/enterprise then APU incorporating GCN graphics would serve them just fine and Trinity should stand them in good stead...but an APU isn't a SoC. Moreover, Rory and the Board seem to be putting AMD on the Jenny Craig diet- cutting staff/payroll and divesting yourself of code writers and engineers (amongst the PR monkeys)doesn't -at least to me, sound like they are gearing up to fight on every front. To me it seems like Rory and Co are getting ready to narrow down AMD's portfolio