I wonder how two 970s in SLI will compare to the TitanX, though.
But dos FPS bruh! Oh sheeet.
"Overall then it should come as no surprise that from a gaming performance standpoint the GTX Titan X stands alone. Delivering an average performance increase over the GTX 980 of 33%, GTX Titan X further builds on what was already a solid single-GPU performance lead for NVIDIA. Meanwhile compared to its immediate predecessors such as the GTX 780 Ti and the original GTX Titan, the GTX Titan X represents a significant, though perhaps not-quite-generational 50%-60% increase in performance."
The GPU memory is a big deal though. There's a number of GPU rendering software and since you have to load your entire scene to each GPU you'll want as much memory as possible. 4GB is very low for doing rendering, 12GB is much better. You could get 4 of these and have a really fast GPU rendering workstation.
My 780s is starting to feel a bit old now with only 3 GB of VRAM . Especially now that some games like Shadow of Mordor, and AC Unity can max 4 GB of VRAM on the highest settings.
Personally, I wouldn't go for a TitanX, but I can see how it would be a more cost-effective solution, than say, buying two 980s for SLI.
Really? At what res? I still have my EVGA GTX 680sc, it runs pretty much everything I throw at it still hence as tempted as I have been by the Gigabyte 980G1, I haven't upgraded yet. I'm running it with an Core I7 at 4.4ghz. Even plays my hardcore DCS games on max at 1920..