Marketing loves nothing so much as it loves carefully chosen statistics. As you review that site, in addition to Brian's observation that they only came up superior in five areas, ask yourself, what information is NOT provided, and how are the tests relevant to driving/racing conditions, if at all?
The NOACK test doesn't tell you what temperature ranges we're talking about, nor does it actually say that Mobil 1's 9% loss is bad or problematic, just that Amsoil shows slightly less loss.
How does the four ball wear test (conducted at 150 C, which is 302 F) relate to real-world conditions? If my motor oil is subjected to 300 degrees for an hour, I'm probably not driving my car.
Same goes for the flash/fire point. They're talking about temperatures in excess of 400 degrees. For automotive applications, I just don't care about that. Safer to transport and use? Does anybody buy motor oil on the basis of that kind of decision?
Pour point... again, who cares? Not many people are doing a lot of racing at -60 degrees F, which happens to be the point at which your skin freezes solid on contact with the air.
The TBN test is well and good, but again, we aren't told what the numbers mean. What kind of scale are we talking about? If the difference is 12:8 and the scale is 1000, who cares?
Not only does this not convince me, but the presentation makes me sufficiently suspicious to sway my opinion against them.