For AMD X2s... best to put games and apps on different hard drives?

[davidos]

If you want to game while encoding a DVD (for example) is it best to put games on a D: drive and have apps and OS on C: drive? (I don't know anything about RAID...)

 

[PKing1977]

more importanly diffrent buses, but that is doing stuff that writes alot to a hard drive. Just having diffrent harddrives in a master/slave relationship will bog down your bus and hurt performance.


PKing

 

[Duvie]

Originally posted by: PKing1977
more importanly diffrent buses, but that is doing stuff that writes alot to a hard drive. Just having diffrent harddrives in a master/slave relationship will bog down your bus and hurt performance.


PKing

I like to keep all apps including the games on the C: drive. I then install and run my encoding apps from the larger second drive. that way it is on the hDD the files to be read and write to are on....Now in some encoding apps the bottleneck is still the encoding and cpu power but like dvdshrink I found the IO system extremely limited. I actually found most optimal would be 3 HDDs for this scenario....I would read the file on one drive and write the finshed vob file data to the other HDD...Then my main drive was still available for anything else I was running (like a game).

This is only really becoming an issue now that we have cpu power to spare and we are seeing how poor our IO sub-system is.....

Both of my HDDs are SATA and that allows me to leave my IDE channel 1 and channel to have a dvd-rom and dvd-burner..each a master of their own....seems to be a perfect balance....

 

[TGS]

You will always get performance by running applications on seperate physical disks. There will be more performance from running on a seperate ide channel as well, though even on the same cable you are still getting a lot better overall performance by using two disks.

 

[Topweasel]

Originally posted by: Duvie

Originally posted by: PKing1977
more importanly diffrent buses, but that is doing stuff that writes alot to a hard drive. Just having diffrent harddrives in a master/slave relationship will bog down your bus and hurt performance.


PKing

I like to keep all apps including the games on the C: drive. I then install and run my encoding apps from the larger second drive. that way it is on the hDD the files to be read and write to are on....Now in some encoding apps the bottleneck is still the encoding and cpu power but like dvdshrink I found the IO system extremely limited. I actually found most optimal would be 3 HDDs for this scenario....I would read the file on one drive and write the finshed vob file data to the other HDD...Then my main drive was still available for anything else I was running (like a game).

This is only really becoming an issue now that we have cpu power to spare and we are seeing how poor our IO sub-system is.....

Both of my HDDs are SATA and that allows me to leave my IDE channel 1 and channel to have a dvd-rom and dvd-burner..each a master of their own....seems to be a perfect balance....

I have you beat there Duvie, I don't have to be worried about that, 3HDDs and a DVD burner all on SATA... My E-Pen1s just grew a little know that I have at least one up on you

 

[Duvie]

Originally posted by: Topweasel

Originally posted by: Duvie

Originally posted by: PKing1977
more importanly diffrent buses, but that is doing stuff that writes alot to a hard drive. Just having diffrent harddrives in a master/slave relationship will bog down your bus and hurt performance.


PKing

I like to keep all apps including the games on the C: drive. I then install and run my encoding apps from the larger second drive. that way it is on the hDD the files to be read and write to are on....Now in some encoding apps the bottleneck is still the encoding and cpu power but like dvdshrink I found the IO system extremely limited. I actually found most optimal would be 3 HDDs for this scenario....I would read the file on one drive and write the finshed vob file data to the other HDD...Then my main drive was still available for anything else I was running (like a game).

This is only really becoming an issue now that we have cpu power to spare and we are seeing how poor our IO sub-system is.....

Both of my HDDs are SATA and that allows me to leave my IDE channel 1 and channel to have a dvd-rom and dvd-burner..each a master of their own....seems to be a perfect balance....

I have you beat there Duvie, I don't have to be worried baout that, 3HDDs and a DVD burner all on SATA... My E-Pen1s just grew a little know that I have at least one up on you

How do you have the burner on the SATA?? Do they have a SATA drive or is it one of those IDE/SATA converter??? Does it benefit being SATA...

I have a stand alone SATA card that gives me 4 more channels. I could not as an ocer on this NEO2 have more then 2 SATA drives since ports 1-2 ar enot locked and I would lose my ability to OC....

 

[aka1nas]

Plextor has a SATA DVD burner now. Don't know if anyone else has come out with one yet.

 

[TGS]

Considering you are still limited by the ddrives read/write speed, being on SATA should provide no advantages save for perhaps using the smaller cabling.

 

[MercenaryForHire]

Originally posted by: TGS
Considering you are still limited by the ddrives read/write speed, being on SATA should provide no advantages save for perhaps using the smaller cabling.

Oh, so you wouldn't have a problem with running all your devices off one ATA133 cable.

Does the phrase "shared bandwidth" hold any meaning for you?

- M4H

 

[Duvie]

Originally posted by: MercenaryForHire

Originally posted by: TGS
Considering you are still limited by the ddrives read/write speed, being on SATA should provide no advantages save for perhaps using the smaller cabling.

Oh, so you wouldn't have a problem with running all your devices off one ATA133 cable.

Does the phrase "shared bandwidth" hold any meaning for you?

- M4H

I think he was referring to me....

36.7gb HDD = SATA port 3
80gb HDD = SATA port 4

16x DVD-rom = IDE1 master
16x DVD burner = IDE2 master

Where are my bandwidth limitations??? I dont see any. So he is commeting on whetehr IDE drives are sent to SATA drives would I see any tangible advantages...

 

[MercenaryForHire]

Originally posted by: Duvie

Originally posted by: MercenaryForHire

Originally posted by: TGS
Considering you are still limited by the ddrives read/write speed, being on SATA should provide no advantages save for perhaps using the smaller cabling.

Oh, so you wouldn't have a problem with running all your devices off one ATA133 cable.

Does the phrase "shared bandwidth" hold any meaning for you?

- M4H

I think he was referring to me....

36.7gb HDD = SATA port 3
80gb HDD = SATA port 4

16x DVD-rom = IDE1 master
16x DVD burner = IDE2 master

Where are my bandwidth limitations??? I dont see any. So he is commeting on whetehr IDE drives are sent to SATA drives would I see any tangible advantages...

Actually I think he was talking to TopWeasel

But the same thing applies - individual channels are best. Which I'm sure you know, given your setup.

- M4H

 

[Mogadon]

If you are sharing the bandwidth by having say a DVD-Burner and DVDROM setup as master and slave, you would only be sharing that bandwidth if you were using both at the same time and wouldn't see any performance hit if using one or the other, right?

 

[Duvie]

Originally posted by: Mogadon
If you are sharing the bandwidth by having say a DVD-Burner and DVDROM setup as master and slave, you would only be sharing that bandwidth if you were using both at the same time and wouldn't see any performance hit if using one or the other, right?

Only one read or write operation can take place at a time on the IDE channel...You have 2 channels...a primary and a secondary...With each as a master a read and write, or a read and read,or a write and write can be done at the same time....SATA each has it own channel as well so multiple read write operations can happen simultaneoulsy....I guees the limit may eventually be the southbridge chipset itself.

 

[Topweasel]

Originally posted by: Duvie

Originally posted by: Topweasel

Originally posted by: Duvie

Originally posted by: PKing1977
more importanly diffrent buses, but that is doing stuff that writes alot to a hard drive. Just having diffrent harddrives in a master/slave relationship will bog down your bus and hurt performance.


PKing

I like to keep all apps including the games on the C: drive. I then install and run my encoding apps from the larger second drive. that way it is on the hDD the files to be read and write to are on....Now in some encoding apps the bottleneck is still the encoding and cpu power but like dvdshrink I found the IO system extremely limited. I actually found most optimal would be 3 HDDs for this scenario....I would read the file on one drive and write the finshed vob file data to the other HDD...Then my main drive was still available for anything else I was running (like a game).

This is only really becoming an issue now that we have cpu power to spare and we are seeing how poor our IO sub-system is.....

Both of my HDDs are SATA and that allows me to leave my IDE channel 1 and channel to have a dvd-rom and dvd-burner..each a master of their own....seems to be a perfect balance....

I have you beat there Duvie, I don't have to be worried baout that, 3HDDs and a DVD burner all on SATA... My E-Pen1s just grew a little know that I have at least one up on you

How do you have the burner on the SATA?? Do they have a SATA drive or is it one of those IDE/SATA converter??? Does it benefit being SATA...

I have a stand alone SATA card that gives me 4 more channels. I could not as an ocer on this NEO2 have more then 2 SATA drives since ports 1-2 ar enot locked and I would lose my ability to OC....

Duvie, My Drive is a Plextor 716SA (which is SATA semi native, i am sure there is some converter in there some where), They make a 712SA as well. I was angry to Find out MSI stopped selling the only other Optical SATA drive, they had CDRW/DVDROM drive that I was going to purchase as a second optical drive so I didn't have to wait till I got into a game before ripping a DVD. While there is no performance reason to get a SATA optical it was a need for me since my case only has 2 120mm fans one in the front and one in the back I was really worried about air flow.

 

[Topweasel]

You know I hate going back and reading my own posts, I always see half completed sentences and obvious spelling errors. I hope I got the couple hundred I left in this thread.