If this card is stronger than TITAN then it will need way more than 3GB...

6GB is the mininum... 3GB is the recomended for the next-gen games... this cars is not to run recomended setthings but ULTRA SUPER HIGH.

12GB seems likely for 4k.

who ever spends 1000 on a card is nuts

But we are looking at it from 2 different points. You are assuming that it will be faster than a Titan while I think it will go between the 780 and the Titan. For you it makes sense for this card to have 6 or 12 GB, for me it makes sense to have 3 or 6 GB.

nVidia sugested it will be faster than Titan... not me.

You know Titan uses a capped GK110...

GK110 Full Specs

+ 16 SMX
+ 2880 SPs
+ 240 TMUs
+ 48 ROPs

Titan

+ 15 SMX
+ 2688 SPs
+ 224 TMUs
+ 48 ROPs

I said early this year... nVidia is being conservative with Titan... so they didn't showed all the power of GK110 because they didn't need... Titan had no copetition from AMD.

nVidia didn't need to create anything new to show a more powerful card... it is just they are holding this ace. A full GK110 running at 900 (Titan runs at 837mhz) will increase at least in 10% the performance of the card... this is the minimum.

BTW the GK110 is close to two years old... it was released in early 2012... nVidia Tesla used it a year before GeForce.

What we are seeing now is the rebranded tech war: AMD same vs nVidia same.

DAT 20nm that killed the progress.

@ethomaz: But if that's the case, Nvidia have make a really bad move calling it 780Ti.

Is the 650Ti faster than a 660? No. Is the 660Ti faster than a 670? No. Then why is the 780Ti is faster than a Titan? It makes no sense, marketing wise.

I will spend close to $1000 on PS4 + SSD

Plus I will spend more $500-700 in a new super wheel for PS4 late 2014.

Ok so a 10% performance boost.  The 290X seems to beat the 780 by 20%, which means it will match or beat the Titan already.  So what is Nvidia going to do?  Release a card that matches the 290X for $1000?

What happens when AMD releases a super version of the 290X (Like the GHz edition of the 7970)?  If Nvidia releases a full GF110 that still can't beat AMD's best... aren't they screwed until Maxwell?

Then what happens if mantle adds even just 10-20% more performance to AMD cards?

Why?  In a 7970 GHz Toxic review (Card runs at 1200/1600 with 6GB of VRAM) they tried running 3x6GB super cards that are around as strong as a stock 780.  Even going into tripple 1440p they couldn't get any game to use over 4GB of RAM.

I am not saying VRAM usage will not go up, because it definately will.  But 8GB will still be overkill for another 2 years, so 12GB is really just Dick measuring at this point isn't it?

R9 290X rumored price is $750... I think it will be on pair with Titan (some games one win others the other)... so nVidia put the full GK100 at $999 and down the Titan to $799.

I'm saying here the R9 290 can't compete in terms of performance with GK100... AMD will try to give you better prices.

The issue here is the bus... 384bits give you 3GB, 6GB or 12GB... 8GB is kind weird unless nVidia change the bus to 256bits or 512bits.

And remeber... most games have 3GB VRAM recomended... Battlefield 4 is craching in 1440p on 3GB cards... I can see it using over 5GB for 4k.

Edit -

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Jn_Ktpyn3z0

Battlefield 4 @ 4800x2560 4xMSAA = 5.1GB VRAM

Next-gen