AMD has nothing to worry a/b when it comes to their share in the console market. NVIDIA was just the smarter choice for Nintendo for the Switch due to power efficiency since Nintendo's making a portable system. AMD's price efficient APU's and the lower price they were willing to bargain w/ the likes of Sony and M$ is the reason those console manufacturers sided with AMD for their GPU.
The switch is going to be a lemon in the west. Nintendo promised devs easy portability from the other two competitors, and delivered something that is decidedly -not- very cross-compatible. compare the "partner list" from their initial reveal to now. This, combined with Nintendo's incompetence when it comes to networked anything, and their post-columbine aversion to adult titles will make the switch a tripling-down on a failing formula.
The market will respond accordingly.
if Nintendo stains the semi-custom tegra brand badly enough, then things will continue on the x86/AMD and POWER track it's been on for the last 3 generations onto the next.
Best case scenario for nvidia is mediocrity from Nintendo. that way, they can court the bigger companies. Note that it isn't likely microsoft will ever go back from x86, with their UWP and windows store lock in initiatives getting up to speed with Scorpio.
Sony is out of the portable business, probably for good, which means an nvidia contract is also unlikely from them, though not as set in stone as MS.
So no, the switch is not an indicator of where the market is going. At best, it is an oddity. At worst, a disaster for both companies involved.
I see the oposite from what was posted in the title. But what do I know.