http://ca.pcpartpicker.com/p/2jgkgs Don't go I7 4770k. It's the same price as the 4790k and the 4790k will run cooler and usually faster. And if your doing any editing, it's almost always worth it to get the I7. An I5 is good at editing but the extra 4 threads of logical performance really accelerate editing. And with a $1800 budget, there's no reason to not get the I7. Also don't go Gtx 770. The R9 290 is way faster and the same price. The R9 290 is as fast as the Gtx 780 for Gtx 770 money. Also, to the guy that said that a 4gb 770 was good at that price point... why?
Most definitely. Games are all heading in the direction of more threads. The new consoles all use Amd 8 core processors, and since almost all games have a console port, they will all be using all 8 threads eventually.
The difference comes in when recording and playing, editing and also there will be a difference once games start optimizing more for 8 cores which should happen soon
He said he want's to make it cheaper if possible. Check I did that without compromising overall performance of his originally selected parts with extra Vram and storage to boot.
As I plan on not doing much video editing, i decided that I won't be getting the i7. But I will get an i5 instead, but I am not sure which one to get. 4670K or the 4690K
Agreed with comic and drunkenpanda, i5 4690k is the better choice. Always get the latest and greatest (z97 is the newest chipset).
Keep in mind Arma runs better on nvidia, and for such a budget you can fit a 780ti in, depends on how peckish you are with settings and resolution. A r9 290 is a better buy for the bigger budget, but a gtx 770 is just fine, and in some cases (like arma) even better, considering 290/gtx 780 is overkill on 1080p.
+1 for the Xeon. So many people don't realize that the LGA1150 Xeons are i7s with no integrated graphics, and sometimes have a little bit more of L3 cache.