It's that time again...

[Salazaar]

It's been a while but I'm getting the urge to upgrade once again but I'm wibbling about what to go for. The front running options are as follows:

A SSD, smallish, around 64-100Gb to replace my current boot drive.

A new GPU, I'm thinking about a 6850 or similar.

A whole new mobo, CPU and memory once sandy bridge hits.

What are people's thoughts on improvement to my system vs value for money? My current system is the one listed in my profile (<--) and is largely used for gaming.

[kalniel]

CPU - not limiting
GPU - limiting some games at that res
HDD - irrelevant for gaming, but limiting the system response feel.

I'd keep the CPU for sure. Then it's a question of whether you feel the GPU limitation for your current games or not. If there were more games that could use the power I'd say get the 6850 no question, but there kind of aren't. Wait until you notice it, then upgrade, for best bang for buck.

So that leaves the SSD - it will probably deliver the biggest improvement factor out of the box, and you will notice the difference again as soon as you try going back to a computer without one. Prices should be quite low for the current gen as next gen are on their way, but the improvement from an SSD doesn't come from the headline figures so even getting a current gen one would be a more noticeable improvement than the difference between the current gen and next gen (which I don't think you would actually be able to tell).

But you'll need to reinstall the OS to get the most out of it. So if that sounds like too much hassle get the GPU.

[Ulti]

As you say your system is largely used for gaming I would immediately suggest for you to get a 6850. I had a 4770 which I overclocked and it performed similar to a 4850 IIRC and on 1920*1080 it wasn't exactly the best performer.

A SSD would be my second option. If I had your system I would actually make the SSD my priority, however I do not game that much, well not games that actually require that much graphics power and I'd just generally prefer a snappier system.

After seeing the preliminary prices of Sandybridge I'm not sold on it at all. However I haven't seen any performance comparisons though. The Q6600 is still a very good performer though and still has a lot of life to it. Also, changing the system isn't likely to make the system that much snappier nor will it increase the fps in games hence why I would stick with the Q6600.

[nibbler]

I recently upgraded GPU and SSD. I went from a rank old maxtor 200GB to a 120GB vertex2E and from a 9800GTX to a GTX460. I'd say that while I notice that itunes opens slightly faster (although that's negated by the fact that I stored all the 35GB of music I have on my HDD so it loads around the same time), windows boots a hell of a lot faster, and I am first to spawn in BC2 it's perhaps not as amazing as people are claiming. Sure it's a lot quicker and I don't regret it for a second, but it's not literally mind blowing - to me at least.

GPU wise, a GTX460 or 6850 is where it's at, and for the res we play at (we even have the same screen ) they fit the bill very nicely. Everthing I have runs at full settings except crysis, and even then I can run it at "gamer" (read: high) smoothly. I'd say go for a GTX4601GB.

[Queelis]

Since I voted before I'd read the first post, kinda voted for the wrong option, but nevertheless. For gaming, I'd upgrade the GPU - at full HD a 4850 is limiting, especially since I assume you'd be playing new games.

But personally, I'd pick an SSD, since now I can feel the PC be sluggish and even hang for a second or two - annoying.

[Salazaar]

I might see if I can squeeze my budget enough to go for an SSD and a 6850 (rather than a GTX460 purely on the ground of power consumption). I'd then be in a fairly good place if I decided to go for sandy bridge down the road.

The C300 is a good SSD right? I haven't been paying them that much attention recently.

[Ulti]

I think the main point with the C300 was that it's capped at SATA II speeds so to make the most of it you need a motherboard with SATA III ports.

[nibbler]

I'd recommend a vertex2e rather than a C300 purely for the write speed.

[MSIC]

I'm due to get an SSD shortly for my laptop, which I will post my experiences about, and if it goes as well as I anticipate then i'll be also getting an SSD for the desktop

[mikemikemi]

I might see if I can squeeze my budget enough to go for an SSD and a 6850 (rather than a GTX460 purely on the ground of power consumption). I'd then be in a fairly good place if I decided to go for sandy bridge down the road.

The C300 is a good SSD right? I haven't been paying them that much attention recently.

I was going to say GPU + SSD in cost will probably be less than a sandy bridge upgrade; so I'd recommend go for both.

I'd say the SSDs with Sandforce controllers are the best on the market at the moment, the marvell controller in the c300 is not bad, but unless there's a massive price difference the Sandforce drive is the better choice.