DF compare the R7 260X (which is basically a rebranded and overclocked 7790) to the performance of next gen consoles and it actually holds up pretty well!

Link: http://www.eurogamer.net/articles/digitalfoundry-2014-r7-260x-vs-next-gen-console

My Take:

It's looking like a PC with a current mid-tier graphics card will more then hold its own if this £100 GPU is currently keeping pace with the X1 & PS4. Even in games like Metro, this £100 GPU manages to maintain approx. 30 fps. With Valve looking to improve the user friendliness of PCs and attempting to enter the living room, it's increasingly looking like even a budget built PC will be a viable platform for next-gen gaming.

See below for specific comparisons and highlights from the article:

On Battlefield 4 (superior):

... we have the GPU running Battlefield 4 at 900p - to match the PS4 release - in a direct comparison with both next-gen console versions. Graphics settings are once again left on high with v-sync engaged, and the results are striking. For dense forested areas, the PS4 does take a marginal lead, whereas the 260X lurks at 55fps and Xbox One version trails at 50fps. This all changes during battle though, where we see the £100 GPU trumping both next-gen versions during heavy open-ended gameplay culminating in a giant explosion. This brings both consoles far below the 60fps line, while the 260X only drops a few frames.

On Need for Speed: Rivals (similar):

We elect to run at full 1080p this time to match both console releases, and with lighting, reflection and effects quality pegged at ultra, plus HBAO. The only snag here is that, much like the PS4 and Xbox One versions, the PC build is locked at 30fps by default. On the plus side there isn't a single dip below this figure even with the game completely maxed out, giving us a monotone reading.

On AC4 (similar):

Here we have environment, textures, shadows and reflection settings on high, with SMAA to match post-processing on consoles, and also SSAO. Pushing god rays above the low quality setting causes regular dips to 20fps - and likewise for a bump to HBAO+ - meaning we steer clear of both to achieve a predominately 30fps refresh. At 1080p there are only occasional dips during naval warfare, but running around Abstergo Industries and the Caribbean cities goes without a single hiccup. Success!

On Call of Duty: Ghosts (inferior):

For the 260X, Ghosts defaults to low settings across the board, which isn't an encouraging start. To hit 60fps while matching the PS4's level of visuals, we push for full 1080p, with terrain detail and texture mapping at high. This sounds excessive, but it turns out that anything less gives us muddy, low resolution textures that fall far below next-gen console standards. We also enable 1x SMAA, and high ambient occlusion, but make sure dynamic fur is disabled to avoid sharp drops to 20fps.

That's incredibly good for PC gamers (who most likely will have something better than a R7 260X), but as always there's a fly in that soup:

That said, for all the advantages we found in our tests, we do notice a worrying trend in this recent slate of PC releases. Need for Speed: Rivals is capped to a console-standard 30fps, while Assassin's Creed 4 requires a lot of GPU horsepower to sustain 60fps, dropping down hard to 30fps on less capable hardware. Likewise, the PC version of Call of Duty: Ghosts is in a bit of a state, which despite several attempts to achieve parity with the console settings, was held back, seemingly due to poor optimisation.

Unless developers and publishers start paying more attention to the PC version of their games, we'll still have to own cards a lot more powerful than what's inside the consoles to be able to play the same games.

The beauty of PC though is that there's always ways of unlocking the frame-rate! Normally, it's simply a case of editing the '.ini' file (although it does depend on the engine used).

So it's not quite a fair comparison as your £100 graphics card will likely find itself in a £400+ system. You would also only expect this parity to last another few months and teams get more time and more experience working on next-gen hardware

The problem is as a PC gamer you always want more. My 670 could provide nice 1080p gaming, but once I can't hit ultra and keep the frame rate up, I'm going to want more power rather than just lowering the settings. Star Citizen is going to ruin me

True, and there's also the promise of Mantle for AMD users.

To be fair, the X1 is £400+ so that actually works out quite nicely, and I also doubt the R7 260X would last the entire gen, but for not much more than that £100, you could get a fairly future proof GPU.

@ bolded

Lol, that's true of me as well but at some point you have to realise you're just getting greedy

But 4k..... I am unexpectedly proud of myself for not spending any money on my PC for nearly 2 years. Given that I normally replace my laptop every 2-3 years, it seems reasonable that I can give myself a new graphics card every few years

euro's or dollars people... euro's or dollars.. you crazy left driving people

But they are not Japanese.

unexpected