If money is no object then I'd go with one of the upcoming Polaris cards that fall within the power envelope. Most games will be cpu bottlenecked but I'm sure there are a few games that would benefit from a mainstream polaris card.
I dunno I'm not that big of a gamer anymore but if I could manage to get a low power card either a 750Ti or new low end AMD for relatively cheap ie $150 or less I think I am going to try it to see how it would work out. If the computer dies then wateves..
Apparently Polaris 11 will only be used for mobile gpu's. So I'd be curious to see what the lowest polaris desktop card is available.You're probably going to be well served with a Polaris 11. Rumors point to PS4/Pitcairn performance at less than 75W, meaning it could replace your cuurrent 2600XT at the same size and power budget.
If you can't wait, then you do have the GM107 750Ti right now, but keep in mind that it's a >2 year-old card which is about to be either replaced or have its price lowered as soon as Polaris is launched.
One thing you might want to check is RAM amount. If your system only has 4GB of RAM then you might as well just avoid the investment because odds are many games won't even run in it (or worse: they'll be dependent on page file to run).
As far as I know, the Polaris 11 that was being shown at CES with a power-meter next to a GTX 950 was in a desktop.Apparently Polaris 11 will only be used for mobile gpu's. So I'd be curious to see what the lowest polaris desktop card is available.
Yeah I seen that video but who knows what type of prototype they were using there. Apparently Polaris 11 will be aimed at notebooks...at least initially: http://wccftech.com/amd-polaris-10-polaris-11-launch-event/As far as I know, the Polaris 11 that was being shown at CES with a power-meter next to a GTX 950 was in a desktop.
Polaris 11's reported performance (console performance) will still be well above any integrated GPU to date or near future, so unlike e.g. Oland there's a large market to cover with a desktop card.