• We’re currently investigating an issue related to the forum theme and styling that is impacting page layout and visual formatting. The problem has been identified, and we are actively working on a resolution. There is no impact to user data or functionality, this is strictly a front-end display issue. We’ll post an update once the fix has been deployed. Thanks for your patience while we get this sorted.

Nevermind

B

BigCoolJesus

Banned
well im going to be a getting a SATA2 250GB Hitachi for my new computer, but i was wondering if itd be worth it (load up wise) to just get a cheap 40GB drive just so windows can load up faster?

And how would i set it up so that windows strictly gets one drive, and everything else of mine runs off the other drive?

im kinda new to this type of set-up........


any help is appreciated
 
Nah, like sniperruff said, get a Raptor or a small SCSI drive if you want better speed.

Those SATA 2 Hitachis are nearly as fast or faster than Raptors now anyway though.

I'd just partition the drive.

Maybe make a 30 GB partition for Winblowz & appz, & the rest for storage, etc.
 
Originally posted by: n7
Nah, like sniperruff said, get a Raptor or a small SCSI drive if you want better speed.

Those SATA 2 Hitachis are nearly as fast or faster than Raptors now anyway though.

I'd just partition the drive.

Maybe make a 30 GB partition for Winblowz & appz, & the rest for storage, etc.
Click to expand...


see, thats where i kinda get lost..... im no good at partitions, etc


also, the 40GB drive i was talking about would be SATA2 also (if that makes a difference)
 
The Raptors just don't yield enough real world performance improvement to justify it, IMO. If you really want speed, you'd have to look to a SCSI 15k RPM Ultra 320 drive but then you're getting a little ridiculous on the price side of things, and throwing quietness out the window to boot.
 
K, paritions are a piece of cake to make.

When you first install Windows, it gives you the option to make one.

You type size you want it, & voila.

It's not hard at all, d00d.
 
Originally posted by: BigCoolJesus
yea, im not going to spend $100+ on this, just want to know if its worth it for a cheap 40GB SATA2 drive?
Click to expand...


I would say definitely not peformance-wise. Plus, you're adding another point of failure, which isn't buying you anything.
 
probably actually. with 1 drive dedicated to windows only, the page file and MBF are less likely ot be fragmented(my opage file was in around 1200 pieces before i got diskeeper). It'll probably speed it up as long as nothing else is no the disk, or at least that partition.
 
The only issues with just partitioning your drive would be...
* All partitions cooked if HD goes bad.
* Swap file has to stay on partitioned HD.
 
meatball is right about those SCSI drives (I own an X15). They are fast 3.6ms access time.

sniperruff is correct that the smaller HDD would be slower and the reason is because the 250GB HDD has a higher data density than a 40GB would and therefore can deliver more data faster than the 40GB.

With your budget I'd stick with the 250GB and partition it.

http://www.storagereview.com/

This site tests most all HDDs you can see for yourself.
 
Originally posted by: n7
Nah, like sniperruff said, get a Raptor or a small SCSI drive if you want better speed.

Those SATA 2 Hitachis are nearly as fast or faster than Raptors now anyway though.

I'd just partition the drive.

Maybe make a 30 GB partition for Winblowz & appz, & the rest for storage, etc.
Click to expand...

no,there faster I have seen the benchmarks.

 
Partitioning a drive and putting the OS on a seperate partition will not make the OS any faster, its still the same drive. I would get an 80 gig Seagate and use that as an OS drive and put the page file on another drive. If at all possible, if you want speed, keep the OS drive on its own connection. Dont share with another device. If you have SATA get a SATA drive. No need to spend way too much money (IMO) on a raptor or SCSI.
 
Originally posted by: w00t
Originally posted by: n7
Nah, like sniperruff said, get a Raptor or a small SCSI drive if you want better speed.

Those SATA 2 Hitachis are nearly as fast or faster than Raptors now anyway though.

I'd just partition the drive.

Maybe make a 30 GB partition for Winblowz & appz, & the rest for storage, etc.
Click to expand...

no,there faster I have seen the benchmarks.
Click to expand...

You mean like this real world benchmark?
The hitachi is almost exactly tied with a raptor while other drives like the seagate are faster. Read up more before you state things, raptors really dont offer enough "real world" performance advantage to justify their price. Newer 7200rpm hd's are much much more cost beneficial and also bench better in certain areas.
http://anandtech.com/storage/showdoc.aspx?i=2396&p=13
 
i like having 2 physical drives in my computer. I have my primary drive that has all my programs and files stored on it. My secondary drive is simply a backup drive. All of my important informationa and files are also stored on that drive as well. thay way, if 1 drive goes bad, i still have all of my information. partitioning doesnt offer that kind of security
 
Originally posted by: nick1985
i like having 2 physical drives in my computer. I have my primary drive that has all my programs and files stored on it. My secondary drive is simply a backup drive. All of my important informationa and files are also stored on that drive as well. thay way, if 1 drive goes bad, i still have all of my information. partitioning doesnt offer that kind of security
Click to expand...


well i will be getting a seperate drive later on for backup, but for right now i just want to know if getting an 80GB (its the same price as the 40Gb) Hitachi Sata2 drive to run windows off of will help boot up time?
 
No it will Not help with boot times.

Only a substantial decrease in access time, increase in throughput, or decrease in startup tasks will increase boot times on a Windows box.

Gigabyte i-RAM that Anand just reviewed cut boot times in half & its running on DDR which means its light years ahead of HDDs and it only increased boot times from 14sec to 9sec. (If I remember correctly)
 
Ok, so definatly i dont need to spend extra for a hard drive

what about partitioning?
does that help any, or is there any reason to do it?
 
Originally posted by: madthumbs
I'd only bother partitioning for a multiboot system. I'm not in the format c: cult as you can see.
Click to expand...


Ok, thanks for all the help

i guess ill just keep things simple and use one drive and one partition
 
Originally posted by: BigCoolJesus
Originally posted by: madthumbs
I'd only bother partitioning for a multiboot system. I'm not in the format c: cult as you can see.
Click to expand...


Ok, thanks for all the help

i guess ill just keep things simple and use one drive and one partition
Click to expand...

My recommendation is to have Windows on its own partition. Have Windows separate, because if you need to reformat and reinstall, you can do so without having to wipe your MP3's, videos, etc. Helpful for when you install that security update that BSOD's your computer on startup.

Is it worth it to buy another hard drive specifically for Windows? I don't think so. You may see faster boot times, but that would be about the only benefit.

Partitioning is easy! I use Partition Magic on a bootdisk and I can have it all done in 10 minutes. PM if you'd like some help. Plus, it makes things faster to defrag.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

TRENDING THREADS

Back
Top