When they first came out, people were worried they would degrade if constantly overwritten, they still do, but much less of a problem. You can read from them forever, you can only write to an individual memory location so many thousands of times before it dies. As I say, not such a problem these days when the technology has improved, so it's merely a matter of space. You don't want to add extra games even though there is space, you want to leave room for Windows and GPU driver updates and the like. If you have Skyrim on SSD, and say New Vegas on HDD, they run the same, but you will get through doors and into caves a lot quicker with Skyrim, and of course your PC will run quieter and use less energy while you are playing it (less HDD noise). I would leave 80GB for system requirements, though anyone is free to correct me on this.

There's limit how many times the cells in SSD can be rewritten. The cells eventually cease to function. In a normal use however a decent SSD should last at least a decade.

I would not install most games on SSD. Only those that benefit from it, like Skyrim.

I am one of those people not insofar as I get display driver error or anything that severe but the support is just not there. I buy games on release days and want them to work. Jumping ship now to team green.
If you do stay Nvidia wait on the 4GB Classified 770 GTX or the 780GTX(if your a baller). If you want to load down textures you def want as much VRAM as you can get.
More than overkill for Skyrim and def solid for TESO if you plan to play that.

The GTX680 I have on my list currently is a 4gb vram card?

http://www.pccasegear.com/index.php?main_page=product_info&products_id=20744

Will there be a drastic difference?

A 680 4GB will run anything, with future proofing. The 780 is faster, but uses more energy, and as of now, we know what 680s are like, there may be issues with 7xx series that will only surface with time (anyone buy a first gen Xbox?)

680 sounds like the smarter buy for the moment. I will let others deal with potential issues .

As far as cooling goes, is there a specific temp that the hardware should be at to most efficient or is it just a matter of the cooler the better?

As long as the temperature is not too high, it doesn't matter.

If you don't overclock, buy an after market CPU cooler and have a decent enough case, temps should be fine. I can't find a review of your case, so it might be a worry with only two 12cm fans, as a 680 and the PSU needed to run it are serious pieces of kit. Choice of case is very important for cooling.

More expensive, but http://www.pccasegear.com/index.php?main_page=product_info&products_id=22643 has 3 X 14cm fan, and if you remove the top HDD cage, has excellent cooling.

Edit: Temp comparison http://www.bit-tech.net/hardware/cases/2013/05/10/fractal-design-arc-midi-r2-review/3.

GTX 680 actually consumes rather modest amount of power and does not need a nuclear plant to run it. Thus cooling won't be a big issue. Average total system consumption (the whole computer) with GTX 680 is 200-250W, depending on other components.

The case I have selected has provision for, four fans. It simply only comes with two as standard. That should be alright to begin with, shouldn't it?

http://www.pccasegear.com/index.php?main_page=product_info&products_id=18366

Information is there.

Classified is similar to FTW+, http://www.anandtech.com/show/6096/evga-geforce-gtx-680-classified-review/7, 362 for stock 680. And try it with a 450 watt power supply, it will run, for a year, then you are looking at a new PSU or the chance of a burnout. Always over-estimate your PSU, and reckon to lose 10% capacity a year and 10% for electrical safety.

@Soop, oh yes, more fans are good, and pretty cheap if you don't demand absolute silence. What I posted was merely a suggestion.

I appreciate the suggestion. Truth be told, I am allowing myself to be swayed by the cosmetic appearance as well. It seems to have sufficient cooling ability ( and provision for water cooling later on?) and looks good to me.

This is my power supply.

http://www.pccasegear.com/index.php?main_page=product_info&products_id=23168

850w silver rated power usage efficiency.

A quality 450W PSU will NOT burnout or break in within a year. Take average system consumption on load and add 50%, that's enough large PSU. I'd take ~500W quality unit rather than larger, lower quality junk.

edit:

I'd take this PSU:

http://www.pccasegear.com/index.php?main_page=product_info&cPath=15_972&products_id=21502

@Kirottu, don't mean to be rude, but I said a year then a chance, not will break in a year. And yes Seasonic are excellent.

@Soop, woah, that should last a lifetime. Can't find a review, but their cheaper bronze got a good http://www.jonnyguru.com/modules.php?name=NDReviews&op=Story&reid=294, so looks good.

Its only $99 as well. Quite good value as the Corsair equiv is $250.

It is important that the PSU has some headroom since load consumption is not even, it goes up and down. Additionally aging always reduces total output. That's however not an excuse to overshoot the wattage excessively. A quality PSU can withstand aging with minimal loss of output. Furthermore quality units are rated far higher than they are advertised, an example: 500W unit may give ~750W if pushed to the limits. I don't recommend pushing to the limits but that compensates the aging.

One of the most overlooked matters in PSUs is the ripple. It can break components even though everything seem work normally otherwise. I'd recommend reading reviews that have properly measured ripple when choosing PSU. If a PSU has a ripple that is ~50% of what ATX-specs allows (which is 120mV for 12V and 50mV for 5V and 3.3V), think carefully before making any decision. If the ripple is higher than that, don't even bother, find a better alternative.

Talking about ripple, if you are looking for a PSU review, http://www.hardwaresecrets.com/article/Why-99-Percent-of-Power-Supply-Reviews-Are-Wrong/410/1.

Okay, now i'm confused!

You don't want just power and efficiency, you want a good, clean regulated supply. Proper reviews use an oscilloscope to look for spikes in voltage, not just checking whether the voltage itself is within spec. A power supply can burn out through age as the capacitors can degrade over time among other things, but a new cheap supply can wreck your mobo, processor and cards with over-voltage spikes.

Seriously, not to you specifically, a general rule, if you have a strict budget, do not skimp on PSU and to a much lesser extent case cooling so you can spend a few extra bucks on a shinier card, as you may have that card killed.

Indeed. PSU is the most important component in computer. Other components can be lesser quality but lesser quality PSU can cause damage.

The PSU i've selected is cheap, but the even cheaper version you linked to got a fairly well glowing review. Don't know what to think! hahaha.

My general rule of PSUs: the cheaper it is, the more likely it will burn down your house.

Yeah, it's minefield. Most PSUs are OEMs rebranded, and some bigger names will have PSUs from different manufacturers in the same series. There was a time when the corsair CX430 was better than the 500 and 600 watt versions. Trusted brands are Seasonic, Antec, Corsair (TX and above), Enermax, XFX, PC Power and Cooling amongst others, but there are plenty of good, and even more bad supplies out there. The one I linked has everything really good except voltage regulation, which is still within ATX specs, but most importantly it has the excellent ripple suppression you are looking for.