Osmo, one thing you should note is that the way SSDs work, their capacity affects their speeds as well (up to a certain point). You extract the full performance of an SSD controller by reading/writing through multiple flash channels. The lowest-capacity models do not have all the flash channels populated and hence will perform worse than the higher-capacity models. I'm lazy to link reviews right now, but go ahead and google any SSD with capacity 40GB and below, and compare them with performance numbers of SSDs with higher capacities (make sure it's the same model of course). Anandtech has a couple of articles on this. I would strongly advise you to go for at least 64GB, if you do want an SSD.
Another thing you should be careful of is to
not put too much emphasis on advertised SSD speeds as Freedom Kira said. To quote Anandtech, the four cornerstones of SSD performance are random read+write, and sequential read+write. (there're other performance factors as well, but if you don't feel like reading, then just focus on these four). The advertised numbers are
maximum sequential throughput numbers; numbers you won't see that often in typical desktop use. If throughput is the only important thing to you, a couple of drives in RAID would be about as fast, and cost much less for similar capacity.
Don't neglect those random read/write performance benchmarks.The main determinant of SSD performance is the controller it uses. No shitty controller can be optimised to a level that lets it compete with a good controller (although you can certainly cripple a good controller with slow NAND flash). The current SSD controller poster boy is Sandforce, which is pretty much dominating the SSD benchmarks at the moment.
The Sandforce II controllers are pretty much top dog right now, and you can't go wrong with one at this point; they are really pricey though (OCZ Vertex 3). For something cheaper, go with the Sandforce I controllers (Corsair Force, or see
Sandforce's list), or perhaps some of the Marvell-based ones (Crucial C300/400). Intel's
new SSDs are another possible alternative; the older X25 G2 series has crippled sequential write and isn't really much of a value proposition anymore.
Some might note that I have not included the Vertex/Agility 2 in the list of Sandforce I SSDs. A month or two earlier I would have, but Anandtech has pointed out that performance on
IMFT 25nm and Hynix 32nm flash seems to have decreased compared to the older 34nm chips. Read the whole article for the full picture. If you do decide to buy a Vertex/Agility 2 at this point, do be very sure of what you are buying. I'm sure OCZ will resolve this soon enough, but it will take some time.
Final tips on using SSDs (in case you haven't been doing your reading on them like you should): Make sure AHCI mode is enabled in the motherboard BIOS, don't defrag them, and
ensure TRIM is enabled.
--------------------
For RAM, do as Freedom Kira says and buy for reliability rather than performance. A small heads-up: 4GB DDR3 DIMMs are going pretty cheap (pretty much same price as 2x2GB), so don't rule out a 2x4GB setup as a possibility either.
For PSU, if you want to worry yourself over things other than whether it'll supply enough power for your CPU/GPU, then I suggest buying from
Jonnyguru's recommended list. Note that it is an old list (2007), so many newer PSUs will not be on it. To Tier 1/2 I can easily add the Seasonic X-series and Enermax Modu/Pro87 series, but those are definitely out of your budget. Just find something within your budget;
Corsair TX-750/
TX-650 should be pretty affordable. Avoid Coolermaster if you're looking for a great PSU; they make decent PSUs but reading any good PSU review will show you that their PSUs are designed just barely within the ATX specs (and other certifications e.g. 80Plus), and not with dedication to quality.
You're already going with a graphics card, so forget H67/Z68 motherboards and just go with a P67 board from a reputable motherboard brand. It makes your purchasing decision much easier, unless you really must have every single gimmick that Intel dangles in front of you. Won't be advising you on GPU since that's not my area of interest.
Hard drive, go with a Spinpoint (might not be around too much longer since Seagate's in acquisition talks with them) or Caviar Black for disk-heavy stuff (applications, or anything that will be accessing the disk heavily). Most importantly, make sure it has good warranty (preferably 5 years, though in some parts of the world it might not extend beyond 3 years), and be sure to budget for backups (extra HDD, DVD backups, etc). I will readily go with a disk that's slightly inferior in benchmarks but has longer warranty.
Micharus' build would have been a great build... in January or earlier. Now that Sandy Bridge is out, it offers much more compelling price–performance ratio and there really are very few reasons to go with an i5-750 build (unless you have an unbeatable second-hand deal for it, for instance).
If you want to save some money, go with an i5-2500.* kureshii listens to the collective gasp.
Odd recommendation, I know, but considering you don't seem to have purchase plans for an aftermarket cooler or heavy overclocking, I'd say most of the money you spend on that 'K' suffix is wasted. You won't be hitting anywhere near the full potential of a K-series Sandy Bridge processor anyway, and you can still overclock up to 4.1GHz with a non-K processor. An i5-2500 won't be your bottleneck for gaming. Give it a good think through. As a bonus, if you're not planning on going Crossfire/SLI in the next 2 years, you can save even more money and go with an H67 motherboard!
This should readily meet your needs for HD+gaming, and PS. Forget about spending so little for *real* professional photography; you'll need at least double that budget, and the desktop will be the least of your concerns. Have fun learning about colour management and display calibration
