Riggings :
Currently have a Dell Inspiron 620 running a i3-2100 with 6 gb of ddr3 ram mainly used for encoding and converting movies to dvd. Would it be worthwhile to upgrade?
The big question would be, how long does it take your current system to encode a (say) 1 hour video?
For video encoding and conversion, the CPU is usually the biggest bottleneck. A SSD is almost irrelevant since any read/writes will just be sequential and not at the full speed of even the HDD.
The desktop i3 is a dual core with turbo boost and hyperthreading.
The desktop i5 is a quad core with turbo boost.
The desktop i7 is a qud core with turbo boost, hyperthreading, and a little extra L3 cache.
Of the three, I think the desktop i5 is the best bang for the buck CPU. Because it's a quad core vs. the i3's dual core, it should cut your encoding times almost in half. With one big caveat:
Video encoding is no longer a CPU-only task. Many programs now take advantage of the GPU as well. Intel's Quick Sync is specifically made to leverage their CPUs' integrated GPU for video encoding. And from the benchmarks I've seen, it will make a much bigger difference than i3 vs i7.
So if your encoding software doesn't use Quick Sync, then an upgrade to an i5 is probably worth it. If it
does use Quick Sync, then you'll have to research how much faster Quick Sync is in the newer Intel CPUs you're thinking of upgrading to.
BTW, Quick Sync first appeared with Sandy Bridge processors, so your i3-2100 already has it. If your encoding software isn't using it, you should try turning it on. Or try different encoding software which supports it. From what I've seen, there's a tiny almost-imperceptible drop in quality, while (for Sandy Bridge) you get roughly double the encoding speed. The speed difference is even bigger on newer gen CPUs.