I don't really consider Youtube video processing as "rendering".

We have a video rendering team at my company and they have to process a single MOV file in to 7 different renditions and various bit rates. That is rendering where you need CPU horsepower.

X79 (and 1155) CPUs are better no doubt, but there is nothing on Youtube that FX8350 can't handle in terms of video rendering. 

Assume the same except for benchmarks. I guess you can find benches where an 8-core AMD is faster than a 6-core/12-thread Intel CPU, but you should look up some more specific benchmarks for the games you use. 

I know that for general purpose use Intel is faster, but not fast enough to just enough the 6-core price premium.

I agree with disolitude that a much cheaper build may serve your purposes, but AMD is not a /clear/ better choice.

I say he should wait for either the Steamroller or the next AMD CPU which is kinda long way off if he wants to go AMD, while I think the Piledriver works great for the price and is excellent for a server(like oh god it's good for the price!), it's not very future proof for gaming due to no native USB3 or PCIE3 support from even their own chipset. It's kind of weird that AMD makes PCIE3 video cards but their higher end PC builds don't have the option to use it o_O; The 3rd party USB3 chips are also really iffy at times, performance is not very stable on them at all.

I do think that build is overkill though, unless he does a lot of raw video editing, after effects, and photoshopping, but then that RAM amount is kind of bad for that kind of workstation. If it's a real workstation, I'd just get high bandwidth RAM at 64GB quad channel.

You say that but here we are with an AM3+ mobo and PCIe 3.0 coming out soon  - http://www.xbitlabs.com/news/mainboards/display/20130111104316_Asustek_Weds_AMD_FX_Platform_with_PCI_Express_3_0_in_New_Mainboard.html

Also I've not had many issues with USB 3.0 controllers on AMD boards. They may not do the full 5 Gbps as advertised but they are faster than USB 2.0

I think that PCIe 3.0 support isn't everything. For example, Haswell and 1155 boards only have 16 lanes of PCIe 3.0. Current AM3+ has native 32-40 PCIe lanes depending on the board, meaning that it can be faster than Intels platform for  multi GPUs. 

After all PCIe 3.0 of x8 + x8 in SLI = PCIe 2.0 of x16 x16

So I think AMD will be just fine in terms of gaming, especially now that more developers/engines are learning to use more than 2-3 cores when making games.

I think AMD are done making CPU-only dies. And they will find it hard to sell 28nm CPUs against 14nm ones from Intel. I think upgrade path is a very weak argument for AMD at this time, even assuming they remain solvent.

I'm personally waiting to see what the 1090FX will look like and I'm really interested in the Steamroller :).

I've had issues with instability with some 3rd party USB3 chipsets including onboard stuff on AMD mobos, and I've used quiet a few of them :( which I'm sure will be resolved once AMD has a native solution.

I understand the PCIe3 thing with Intel but I actually want to go back to single card setup  and if I get a card with dual GPU then only PCIe 3 can draw more potential with it. As much as I like the crossfire and sli, I think I still prefer single card setups in the end and I want to go back to that :/

Hey if you have money go for broke... At this point in my life id rather put 1000 bucks towards a computer and 1000 bucks towards a Hawaii vacation. :)

I would tolerate the extra 10 seconds it takes to encode a clip at that price.

Also, regarding the whole "he wants it to last"... X79 platform still uses current/last generation PC technology...USB3, SATA3, DDR3. Strong CPU performance it self doesn't guarantee that a PC wont be out of date in 3 years (which it will). You're better off buying a cheaper platform now that does the job as good but maybe doesn't have as much "future proofing", and then another cheaper platform later with all the new technology goodies. 

Also also... as a current ivy bridge user, its very difficult for me to see any gaming performance difference between now almost 4 year old Phenom X4 965 and less than 1 year old 3570k running GTX 670 GPU on a single screen or even 3 screens on most games. Few frame dips here and there and lower AA settings sometimes, but a powerful GPU chews up most games on both platforms as long as your goal is 60 fps.  

So if 4 year old AMD quad core is competent at gaming still today, imagine how much headroom an new 8 core has. 

You're wasting your money spending that much as no game needs a £1000 rig, let alone one that price. 

Honestly, wait until next gen games appear later this year/early next year and see what specs they demand, THEN build a PC.

1) There may be better cases out there. Overclockers.co.uk have a better selection. You can get lush & efficient with the likes of Lian Li and Corsair if you want

2) With your budget, go SLI if you can. Two 670's will beat one 680. 

3) CPU fan isn't the best. SilverArrow or DH14 are the way forward, or considering your budget, get an open loop cooling system? Have a look at bit-tech.net customising section for pc case porn. 

4) That PSU is totally overkill. Get a modular one instead that's only around 750W. 

Still, you're going to have a great build ^_^

lol... thats fair but would you say that what you're describing above is the norm?

I appreciate the discussion as all we are doing here is presenting different points of view.

People that know me around here know that I built some beefy machines in the past. I spent over 3000 dollars at one time on my watercooling rig 2+ years ago. One thing I learned over the years is that everything is fun while I build, benchmark and all that jazz...but when the dust settles and I just want to play games, I tend to realize that I blew a shitload of money for something that 1/3 would probably suffice.