Wow, you said that without even one hint of irony. Basing your advice on a flawed Furmark test on a leaked Chinese review is hardly logical. Come on man, you are usually a far more sensible poster than that.
Furmark is not even remotely indicative of actual thermal results from gaming. That test/review was from an R9 290X set at 40% fan speed. Are you going to suggest 40% fan speed in a Furmark test gives an accurate indication of the thermal cooling solution on a GPU?
Here is another review of an Asus DCII R9 280X hitting 90c in Furmark with only 40% (lowest) fan speed at which point the reviewer stopped the test. 50% fan speed resulted in a much lower and temperature of 71c.
http://www.ocaholic.ch/modules/smartsection/item.php?itemid=1110&page=19
Or let's go one better. Here is a screenshot of my GTX780 with a fan speed of 40% hitting 95c after 2 minutes 23 seconds. I stopped the test before my GPU caught fire, as would any sane person. This is a GTX780 that normally runs at 1045 boost clock, note how throttling has dropped it to 914 Core clock.
I suppose I should tell people to avoid one of the better custom cooled GTX780s because it gets to 95c after only two minutes of gaming.
My advice to the OP is to wait until the R9 290 and R9 290X are released. I would expect an R9 290 to match a GTX780 for a much lower price point. One would think a GTX780 should drop in price if that is the case.