Well, let me qualify what I have said.
AMD Bulldozers have many averagely performing cores in their cpus.
Intel have a few very high performing cores.
The 8150 is good in very specific circumstances where its 4 (8 cores) modules are all fully tasked, in fact in these situations it is very good. Problem is that it has very poor single thread performance so it falls quickly behind Intel when there is an uneven load across the cores or the threads are few and complex or only lightly threaded.
8150 is slightly but noticably better in specific situations where the workload suits it, but in every other situation a 2600k is better.
But the big point for me is that the 2600k will work at 3.8ghz on turbo whereas the 8150 will turbo itself to 4.2ghz under workload. Now if you overclocked a 2600k to 4.2ghz the 8150 is just history at eveything.
Take a look at the content creation, productivity and Media encoding (or read the whole thing) to get some perspective on the situation and you can make up your own mind
http://www.tomshardw...990fx,3043.html
In other news...
an SSD will increase apparent speed of your PC because content will load much, much faster.
16gb will do you fine to be honest, you probably won't use all that even for rendering because you will become CPU limited first.
680 is a good gpu but it isn't much better than a 670 but costs a lot more at the moment. If you overclock them both then they perform the same. Also note that we will be getting close to the AMD 8000 series release towards the end of the year!
