Crytek is a bunch wuzzies.
Look in what state Crysis 2 came on PC BEFORE the patch.
The game itself was a joke - A hallway shooter more or less and the PC Version looked only a little bit better than the console Version.
Why?Cause Crytek destroyed their own made hype with going for the money from the console gamers.
PC players were pissed and THEN the patch came where it clearly showed how much superior the PC Version should have been from the beginning.
Crysis 2 should have been an open world game as everyone wanted it to be but they did go rather for the money and wondered why no one was interested in their game.

And i don't think Watch Dogs will be the Next Crysis.
There won't be a single Multiplat Game that will push PC hardware if it isn't made in 2 different version like DICE did with Battlefield 3.
They won't do that with Watch Dogs...Its a console game it will only use some of the PC Stuff that will make it look better but it won't be a game made especially for PCs like BF3 was.
Probably Battlefield 4 will be the next game to push PC Hardware if they do again 2 different version(64 Players,Ultra Settings with big ass maps on PC compared to LOL Version for consoles).


The graphics card and the new processors coming this year show how far ahead PC is and how much consoles are holding everything back.
People shouldn't be so cheap and buy a console for 2000$ -- This way the console will be up to date for more than 5 years and PC Gamers get the games they need. As it looks now the NextGen will be outdated again when it comes and only Naughty Dog and co will be able to make decent looking games.

Honestly, OCing is the most fun you can have when it comes to building PC's. Especially with AMD cpus. Intel tends to be very simple and sterile. But AMD has much more variables and comes down to feel versis Intel's science approach...

Still far better than console though! I reckon if I turned AA down more (I can't remember what I have set it at) I would be able to get 60, but it isn't something that hugely bothers me

Not even the 700 series itself? That is kind of rubbish... 

Yes, if you are gaming on a monitor > 1920x1200 resolution, or using multiple monitors or doing things that take advantage of many CUDA cores. If all of these apply, then sure, it might be worth it. Otherwise something like an HD7970/GTX670 is more than sufficient. If you already have a GTX690, you could always wait to see how this GPU performs and sell the 690 if it meets your criteria.

Personally, I'd prefer a GPU with 85% performance of a GTX690 without the micro-stutter and SLI scaling issues. My main caveat for why I personally wouldn't buy the Titan is because I expect HD8970 to be priced at $499-549. In that case, I'd rather purchase 2 of those (despite CF issues) because I could then use them for games and use them for BitCoin mining when not gaming (http://www.bitcoincharts.com/). Because of bitcoin mining, I haven't had to pay for a single GPU upgrade on the PC since HD4000 series. By the time 8970 launches, my 7970s should produce enough coins to upgrade to 8970s at significantly reduced upgrade cost. I am not biased towards AMD but when going with a competitor entails paying $800-1000 out of my own pocket, I choose cards that make $ when not gaming. If this doesn't interest you, then it's a moot point.

With 20nm Maxwell (Nvidia) and Volcanic Islands (AMD) rumored for Q1-Q2 2014, I wouldn't spend $900 on a single GPU though for the sake of future-proofing. I would only buy that if you can afford to buy the latest and greatest every 12-15 months. I also have a feeling NV is launching this limited edition Titan card like they did with 7800GTX 512MB or 8800Ultra. They milked the consumers by pricing those at $700-830 and soon we got GPUs much faster for way less price. Even GTX280 came out for $649 and 7 months later NV replaced it with a $399 GTX285. I am thinking when Maxwell launches, we'll have a $499-549 GPU that is faster than the $899 Titan. 

I also cannot see the future-proofing factor as I feel with PS4/720 launching in Q4 2013, we could see a significant increase in graphical quality for next gen games, which means cards like GTX690/Titan will be quickly outdated (remember what happened when PS3/360 launched?). Essentially, when Titan launches, most games of 2013 will still be shoddy PS360 console ports aside from a few like Crysis 3, Metro Last Light, etc. But by the time actual next gen DX11 games launch in 2014-2015, Titan will be too slow to play them and we'll be on Maxwell and beyond. It seems Titan is launching at an awkward time since it's doubtful that we'll see any next gen looking games until October-November 2013. If you can sell the GTX690 and upgrade to the Titan for minimal cost and Titan ends up overclocking to 1Ghz, then it could be worth it to escape SLI / micro-stutter.

BlueFalcon, the 8970 will be barely faster than the 7970 and not worth upgrading to,

And I was getting excited about getting a GeForce GTX660...

Next gen O.o

What is the bottom .gif from? Looks interesting.

The bottom gif is from Crysis 3

I'd buy 3 or 4.
But AMD generally has better multi-GPU scaling and they're also re-writing the memory management system in the drivers so less frame latency, so probably end up with 3 or 4 Radeon 8950/8970's next time around if they are 15-20% faster per card.
I think only having 3gb of memory per card is holding me back, so probably jump on 6gb versions.

With that said, this specific card is for Compute, like in servers and stuff. Not gaming. :P