I would go AMD for the CPU. Just like with cars, maybe don't buy the very first stepping of a new product (so don't get the ryzen 4000 series yet) but the 3000 series and older should be fine now. They did have some very embarrassing bugs re linux compatibility that marred an otherwise very strong launch. Intlel hasn't been all that great these days (understatement) with all the Speed Holes they've been putting in their products. The only reason I would go Intel on a new build is if the one and only thing you plan to do with your computer is game. Intel still has a thin lead of about 10% in frame rates on some games, but they squeeze this edge out by just running fucking fast and hot. like seriously socket-melting hot, intel TDP means nothing at all these days, check out the meme measurements under synthetic loads. If I was in the market for a 'reasonable' machine I would probably go with an 8c/16t ryzen. If you're going to go balls out I would get one of the memerippers with 16c/32t which should sort of future-proof you for a world that is begrudgingly moving towards multi-threaded software.
I wouldn't get an AMD gpu though. it's my understanding that the one good thing is they are a little cheaper for same performance in the lower end but you pay for it with heat and power distribution, not very efficient. Every single year some AMD people say "just wait" and it never gets here as far as I can tell. If you're serious about the $4k price range I'd probably just get a 1080ti. I think the only real improvements to the 2080ti is the snake oil RTX stuff, they upped the transistor count a bunch but GFLOPS basically the same. Or go all out and get the latest Titan or something if you want to go balls to the wall with 24 GiB ram but $2500 is pretty fucking steep if it's not a work expense for CUDA. If I was buying a GPU at a more 'reasonable' price point i'd look at the 2070 Super, 1070Ti, 1070, 1660 Super, etc in roughly descending cost order.