i7 920 to ????

[ToddW2]

It's UNIQUE to personal experience, 20% may not be a lot to someone but to someone else it may be VERY noticeable.

I can safely say when I went from x58 to x79 (i7-930 to 3930k) I noticed a huge improvement. Not simply due to the CPU but the SSD performed better too, and that was noticeable for me and the primary reason I upgraded (well and I wanted more cores too). I could tell the difference on my macbooks between generations from the intel chipset and ssd performance too.

Now, add the fact that I can run OSX Virtualized and not slow down my system, and keep all my other apps open and I`m very happy. Then again, I run a lot of apps at once on 2 x 30" screens and a 3rd 21" screen doing work. Not the normal usage but there are cases where 10% can mean a LOT, and that 10% is mostly just CPU performance it doesn't take into account the SATA performance increase, RAM, etc...


If you are on an i7-920 I say by all means upgrade to the latest generation CPU, and get a latest generation SSD and you will notice HUGE improvements in not only game load time but also every day browsing. When my non-tech friends can tell their system is faster just browsing the web from a SSD upgrade that's telling you something.

I got a SSD years ago and wish I got them as soon as they came out.

The whole waiting until next year to get 40% increase instead of 20% this year screwed me out of a good 1-2 years of really fast computing because I was thinking the same as a lot of people here.

 

[Arklight]

SSD is probably a better upgrade than cpu at this point in time unless you have reason otherwise. I wouldn't go smaller than 240gb though. I prefer 480gb+ ones myself though I understand not everyone wants to drop that much on storage.

The problem is I have a P6T Deluxe (not the V2) and I don';t think I have any of the newer gneration SATA slots. So, the SSD I got would have to be one of the earlier gneratiuon models.

With regards to stickiugn with the 920, many people here may have not read that Iplay mostly simulators. I would say 90% of the games I play are HEAVILY cpuy dependent. FSX/P3D/XPX can all run an i7 920 @ 4ghz into the ground at certain settings. It really needs at least 4.4 ghz, and preferably 4.8 for decent play at high settings. For reference, in FSX, I get the same performance with my GTX 680 Classified as I did with my GTX 480 SC @ 2560x1600.

 

[Dangman]

The problem is I have a P6T Deluxe (not the V2) and I don';t think I have any of the newer gneration SATA slots. So, the SSD I got would have to be one of the earlier gneratiuon models.

No it wouldn't: While yes you will see a hit in sequential performance (i.e transferring files from a SSD to another) with a newer SSD, you'll still get the key advantage of having a SSD in the first place: The fast random read/write speeds. That won't get affected no matter what SATA interface you have. So yes, it's still a good idea to get a new SSD for yourself. Personally I recommend the Samsung 840 Pro or the regular 840 if you're on a strict budget.

With regards to stickiugn with the 920, many people here may have not read that Iplay mostly simulators. I would say 90% of the games I play are HEAVILY cpuy dependent. FSX/P3D/XPX can all run an i7 920 @ 4ghz into the ground at certain settings. It really needs at least 4.4 ghz, and preferably 4.8 for decent play at high settings. For reference, in FSX, I get the same performance with my GTX 680 Classified as I did with my GTX 480 SC @ 2560x1600.

Then wait for the Haswell reviews to come out and see whats up. Last I checked, some of those Flight Simulators aren't that much multi-core aware and are more reliant on straight-up clock speeds.