Homepage load faster? Hmm. It loads pretty fast for me. 3-4 seconds, maybe? Nice that you're upgrading to a SSD and a new computer though. That 30gb is a big chunk of data removed, even though 30gb is nothing really and easy to fill up today. :P

3-4 seconds is a little long for my liking. If you load Google or Facebook it's maybe 1 second tops.

True. Even though 3 seconds isn't THAT bad. However, faster isn't a bad thing ;)

SSD will help load times more than anything. The 256GB Crucial M4 SSD I put in my laptop runs way faster than the old HDD, and loads Windows 7 in a matter of seconds.

By the way, KUDOS on the speed upgrade, my comment went through near instantly. O.O

Yeah, I'm really hoping the SSD creates a noticeable difference.

@Hawkee, is the website hosted in the USA? If it is, I think it loads extremely fast with ~2-3 seconds for me (I live in Europe).

What kind of CPU are you currently running on?

Going from the Xeon E5620 to the i7 3770. They're both pretty comparable, but the i7 does benchmark a tad faster.

Are they both Dual-Core? I can't Imagine a Quad-Core @ 3.40 GHz bench-marking so closely with a Dual-Core @ 2.4 GHz.

Anyways, on the i7-3770 benchmark page, I see they had the AMD FX-8120 Eight-Core processor. That's the chip I installed in my desktop over the summer. A tad ironic that the eight core got whooped on the performance benchmark by both chips. U.U

Hmm. That's strange. It's a Quad-Core @ 3.40 Ghz, but manages to benchmark closely to a Dual-Core at 2.40 Ghz. To me, that doesn't make sense. Odd. Maybe I should look into each one a bit more, but I got the specifics of the i7 from the Intel site here: http://ark.intel.com/products/65719/

They're both dual core, but the E5620 is quad internally. It's hard to imagine 4 cores being faster than 8 cores, but that's what it seems according to these benchmarks. I guess the CPU speed and number of cores don't really matter. It comes down to the architecture and nanometers.

And its the other way around. It's 4 x 3.4 vs 8 x 2.4.

Oh, so I got my information incorrect? Hmm. Well, if it's dual-core, then that makes more sense. And yeah, quad being faster than 8 doesn't seem right.

The i7 3770 just came out a few months ago while the E5620 is a couple years old, so that probably makes a big difference.

My laptop does the same thing. Windows reports there's 8 cores, when there's only 4 physical cores.

Pretty dumb if you ask me SunnyD. >.> If you're going to give a report, at least make it accurate.

@Hawkee Yeah that would make a difference, but still it's weird to see that 4 cores is faster than 8, but as you said it's about the architecture of the processor. Anyways, hopefully the new one will help improve the site to what you're aiming for. Either way, the site is running great as-is and the updates and all are just helping improve the site more and more. Great job, Scott. :)

http://www.ocztechnology.com/ocz-revodrive-3-x2-max-iops-pci-express-ssd.html

The 1 TB is good:P

960GB Max Performance
Read: Up to 1600 MB/s
Write: Up to 1500 MB/s
Max Random Write 4KB (Aligned): 240,000 IOPS

With 2x
http://ark.intel.com/products/53677/Intel-Xeon-Processor-E7-8830-(24M-Cache-2_13-GHz-6_40-GTs-Intel-QPI)

And these:
http://www.corsair.com/us/memory-by-product-family/dominator-platinum-ddr3-memory/dominator-platinum-with-corsair-link-connector-1-5v-32-gb-dual-channel-ddr3-memory-kit-cmd32gx3m4a2133c9.html

SyS Admin's Deam... :P + Developer's Dream...

I will ask them from my Sponsor. I bet he will punch me in the face...

@ProIcons And you're talking over 6x the cost of what I'm getting. Cost and value go a long way.

Agree :D