Buy whatever you want. I like AMD because it's sexy and everyone else circlejerks Intel.

For example, in StarCraft 2, the best game ever made, my friend has an Intel i5 4460 or something and I got an AMD FX 8320. He gets a whopping 10 more frames than I do. And his CPU cost twice as much.

Really depends upon budget because individual current prices on parts could allow you to raise specs without increasing the overall budget.

Offhand, you might want to consider getting a video card with 4GB DDR5 rather than 3 unless you're planning on sticking with 1920x1080 resolution. Even then, video memory requirements for the new generation of PC games is rising for suggested/optimal performance specs.

I would also consider going a bit higher for the PSU, particularly if you plan on overclocking. Even if not, the extra $20 you spend going from 600w to a 700 or 750w power supply is worth the insurance to protect the rest of your components. It goes without saying to stick with a good quality PSU.

It´s not woth to take 280x over 280.

10% more power is NOT worth 50-70€ more.

Dude, you sound silly. Why would I even sit here and try to prove anything to you? We are going into the year 2015. You can just go to Youtube and search for 8350 and get all types of real world reveiws, opinions and performance information from real people.  Am I saying that the 8350 is the best cpu on the market? Of course not but if you are saying that a AMD 8350 is not a good cpu for gaming then me and you dont have anything else to even talk about.

BTW, that right there is classic. I will be remember this one for a very long time as one of best lines I have heard a person say on this site. Thats actually sig worthy 

The 8350 loses most games to the i3. Every professional review site reflects this. This is called EVIDENCE.
The 8350 loses virtually EVERYTHING to the i5. Again, every professional review site reflects this.

The AM3 chipsets are extremely old. PCI Express 2.0 is the limit, USB 3.0 is not native and results in lower throughput and higher CPU usage, SATA is not native 6gbps, resulting in slower performance with SSDs along with higher CPU usage. Power usage on both the mainboard and the FX CPU are MASSIVELY higher on the 8350, resulting in more heat/noise/electric charges.

Perhaps the worst part is that the FX AM3 in 2014 is that you need a board with extremely good VRM and capacitor quality to run an 8350 with a mild OC, and should you decide to upgrade CPUs in a couple of years, the 9590 is the best you will ever see.

With an 1150 build, you could start with the i3 or i5, then later on drop a 4790K in for performance way beyond the 9590 even on liquid cooling.

I have owned many AMD CPUs over the years. I wish they were still competitive. I had a 6350 in my HTPC until a few months ago, and it was okay for the task. If you already own one, great, depending on how it does for you it may not be worth replacing for quite some time. Things like ram, GPU, SSD can have priority over the CPU if you have limited funds and/or have some parts to work with already.

What IS extremely irresponsible, is recommending an obsolete product for no savings, for a gaming box at the end of 2014 headed into 2015.

The 8350 is $169, stock with a tin-can cooler, at newegg.

The best deal on an AM3 motherboard that will last long enough at the 125w+ that the 8350 needs is $102 AR right now :

http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16813131874

So, you're talking $272.98 for that combo. Is that a good deal? Let's compare it with a combo that will beat it in every game out there :

http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16819117372

i5-4690K $219.99, unlocked and ready to run at 4.5Ghz+

http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16813135386

Z97 series board, PCI-Express 3.0, DDR3-3000 Speed, capable of running that 4690 @ 5Ghz if you upgrade the cooler. $69.99

Total $289.98, so we're talking less than $20 more, for something that is in another league of performance. In almost every game tested, the AVERAGE FPS of the FX-8350 is significantly lower than the MINIMUM FPS of the slower i5-4330. The i5-4690K is better still.

It's just irresponsible to give bad advice to someone with limited funds. Someone may be stuck with their build for years before getting the time and money to upgrade again, so give the best advice you can. And building an FX-based PC now is just ridiculous. It's bad value, old tech, and is not competitive even $ for $ with the Intel.

LOL 8GB of RAM just became the standard.  Right now is just how 4GB became the standard 7 years ago.  The consoles only have 8GB TOTAL, and so I can 100% guaruntee everyone here that 8GB will be enough for at least 5 more years.

Agreed 8gb is fine.

Really the gold standard for good gaming right now is i5, 8gb, 280/760 or better. Adding an ssd, i7, 16gb, etc is all gravy.

FYI to everyone out there debating CPU's:

1) Basically these are the best price/performance in order of price:

...Athlon X4 < FX-6300 < FX-8320 < i5-xxxxK < i7-xxxxK...

2) Do not think for a second that just because the i3 wins in some games of over AMD NOW that they will next year. Yes, in some lazily coded games the i3 wins, but in some games the i3 loses REALLY REALLY badly. Within a year you can expect to compete with the FX-4300 in performance.

I think your post may be incomplete. The Athlon x4 is a dumpster fire at this point. I do think the i5 is worth the investment though over the i3. I don't know if the 4300 will ever take off though, it's a 2 module 4 thread chip, whereas the i3 is 2 core 4 thread. Even upcoming games like Project Cars and Evolve have the Haswell i3 beating the 4 module 8 thread 8350, let alone the lowly 4300. I'm not saying it's impossible, but that's a tall order for it to improve that much. Either way the Haswell i5 should be the entry level, no sense going with slow ipc of FX anything, or dual core i3 unless funds are crazy limited.