Not according to the benchmarks posted in this thread.

just check benchmarks of games like metro: last light with highest possible settings and a resolution of let's say 2560x1600. even a titan doesn't handle that as if it would be nothing.

If you think 2-5 fps difference on average is worth $500+ then be my guest.

Moot point anyway - it seems that the RX 290X is more powerful.

It's not a moot point, it's exactly the point.
If you already have a Titan or two, there is zero point in side-grading to AMD.

There's more than a few fps differences from Titan to the 290 according to the benchmarks on page 7.

I only go by Anandtech, with a spinkle of Linustechtips.
So with that in mind...

Metro 4K res, High Quality: Titan is 1.1fps slower.
Metro 4K res, Low Quality: Titan is  4.9fps slower.
Metro 1440P, High Quality: Titan is 2.6fps slower.
Metro 1080P, Very High Quality: Titan is 5.4fps slower.

Keep in mind, you can generally have a margin of error of around 2%.

Hows about an AMD endorsed Title? Battlefield 3?
4k res, Ultra Quality: Titan is  2.5fps slower.
4k res, Medium Quality: Titan is 0.1fps slower.
1440P, Ultra Quality: Titan is 8.3fps faster.
1080P, Ultra Quality: Titan is 14.6fps faster.

Crysis 3?
4k res, Medium Quality: Titan is 3.2fps faster.
4k res, low quality: Titan is 1.7fps faster.
1440P, High-Quality: Titan is 5.8fps faster.
1080P, High Quality: Titan is 7fps faster.

Another AMD title?
Bioshock Infinite.
4k res, Ultra quality: Titan is 3.4fps faster.
4k res, Medium Quality: Titan is 1.3fps slower.
1440P, Ultra Quality: Titan is 6.6fps faster.
1080P, Ultra quality: Titan is 9.8fps faster.

Not exactly a home run for AMD is it? I ask you... Is that kind of performance delta really worth it to upgrade from Titan to the 290X?

Do keep in mind that the "uber" or "fast" bios is essentially an overclock, it's really not fair to compare unless you also do the same for Titan.
Also, Titan runs cooler and uses less power and is far more silent.
nVidia also offers PhysX and Adaptive V-Sync (You need a 3rd party tool for AMD to have the same functionality.), faster game profile releases for Multi-GPU set-ups.

AMD have also yet to fix the frame latency issues too, it's been how many months?

You can check my numbers here: http://www.anandtech.com/show/7457/the-radeon-r9-290x-review

Hasn't anyone ever taught you that spewing info you pull from your rear end is bad? Atleast try to make it educated guesses if it's to be second hand at best.  Let me clarify.

first, the 780ti will have 3gb of vram - if we are lucky 4gb

second, 6gb is nowhere near the minimum for 4k even, nor will we see 12gb for a very very long time.

now for the kicker. This is non butt-pulled info. I run tri monitors at > 4k reso (currently 4320x2560) and use 4 titans. I have only seen one game use more than 3gb vram, even at that resolution. It was crysis 3 on max with aa enabled as well. And I got up to 4gb or so.  

My EDUCATED guess is 6gb will be the MAX we see for quite awhile. Also, the 780ti will possibly be as fast as a titan due to slightly higher clockspeed, but will still have less cuda cores and less vram, making titan still superior albeit not by much.

PM me for my psychic guesses on next years Stanley Cup winners!

Ah, to be so naive again. I miss my youth.  Without wasting precious time on the plethora of reasons why this instantly tells me it's a crock.

ill ask you this.  When was the last time gpu power has increased half as much from generation to generation? Do they have the tech? You bet. Will they let it out the door? Not a chance. Nvidia is so greedy that they will release enough iterations to cause you to need a Rolodex in order to stretch out that money train.

Ignorance is bliss!

I like your definition of destroy .... (That's sarcasm btw)