Vista System Partition Size

[nwrigley]

I'm going to install Vista 64bit for the first time on a new system. I'm currently using 26 gigs on my old XP Pro system partition (OS + programs). How much space would you recommend that I dedicate to the new Vista system partition (OS + programs)?

 

[Canterwood]

Depends what you're going to store on it.

If its just going to be for the OS only, then I'd say 20Gb would suffice.

 

[nwrigley]

Originally posted by: Canterwood
Depends what you're going to store on it.

If its just going to be for the OS only, then I'd say 20Gb would suffice.

Clarified original post: the partition will be for OS and programs.

 

[Drexl]

I use 40GB on mine, but I also install applications there as well (really no point to keeping them separate when you'd have to reinstall them anyway after a reformat). Vista itself took up about 16GB on a new install, but that included the hibernate and page files which together used 8GB. I would overshoot it some so you can keep at least 15% always free for easier defragmenting.

 

[Canterwood]

It still depends on how much data is going to be stored on the partition, and also how much spare disk space you have to give to Vista.

If you can spare 30-40Gb, then you should be fine.

 

[Nothinman]

Clarified original post: the partition will be for OS and programs.

What programs is still important, for example I believe VS.Net with documentation takes up somewhere between 4-8G and most games these days are about the same. So it's impossible to guess how much you'll need without any idea what you'll be installing.

 

[dclive]

500GB HDDs are $99 these days.

I suggest devoting a hard drive to it - managing partitions is a waste of time, IMHO. Is there a specific benefit you're looking for in order to justify the hassle of managing partitions?

 

[lxskllr]

Originally posted by: dclive
500GB HDDs are $99 these days.

I suggest devoting a hard drive to it - managing partitions is a waste of time, IMHO. Is there a specific benefit you're looking for in order to justify the hassle of managing partitions?

I agree. I have 1 of my hds partitioned into 2 partitions for dual booting, otherwise I like 1 partition per disk. My Vista and programs (very little data) is taking up 140gb

 

[Drexl]

Originally posted by: dclive
500GB HDDs are $99 these days.

I suggest devoting a hard drive to it - managing partitions is a waste of time, IMHO. Is there a specific benefit you're looking for in order to justify the hassle of managing partitions?

I can't speak for him, but I like to have a small partition just for Windows and apps, so that if I want to reinstall I can just reformat that partition and leave the rest of the drive intact. It would be a PITA to have to copy everything off a huge partition so it can be reformatted.

Plus, I find a separate partition to be easier to work with because you don't have all those OS folders scattered around with your document/media folders. I don't look at the OS partition that much in Explorer, so having those folders separated is helpful.

 

[tatteredpotato]

I have Vista on an 80gig disc and then the rest of my files on a 250 gig disc.

 

[soonerproud]

If you are using a larger drive (320 gigs on up) I would go with at least 50 Gigs just to make certain that there is plenty of room for both the OS and any programs you may want to install. You will want between 15-20% free space on that partition for best overall performance. Make an inventory of the programs you want to install and add up what each program will require in disk space. Add the 15-20% to that plus some additional room in case you decide to install more programs on the drive.

Give Vista itself about 20 gigs of space. As a previous poster mentioned, Vista itself uses 16 gigs of space on it's own, but it requires 20 to even install.

 

[nerp]

20-40 GB is a decent size. I have a 36 GB raptor and it fits the bill for an OS/app/game install drive. I don't have too many games installed at any one time. After everything, I have about 17gb of space free on it. I put my created documents, pictures, etc on a second hard drive. I agree with other posters who like to keep the OS and installed applications together on one drive and everything else on a second drive. It makes reinstalling/upgrading the OS a simple matter without fear of your stuff getting mangled or having to move it because of repartitioning.

I used to partition up stuff and eventually found myself borrowing laptops just so I could cram stuff on them temporarily while I repartitioned and formatted my drive.

Now, my OS could blow up or I could find myself facing a reformat and my data is intact, ready for the next go-around. I could easily slap it into an external box and carry it to a future system. It's also less painful moving a whole drive rather than weeding old OS stuff out from photographs and music, etc.

 

[dclive]

Originally posted by: ObscureCaucasian
I have Vista on an 80gig disc and then the rest of my files on a 250 gig disc.

Agreed - but I install apps/etc. to the "Vista" (C) drive, and only have data, documents, ISOs, etc. on the extra drive. But I do it by physical drive, rather than making more virtual drives. Drives are cheap, so .... I don't bother with partitioning.

 

[nwrigley]

Originally posted by: Drexl

I can't speak for him, but I like to have a small partition just for Windows and apps, so that if I want to reinstall I can just reformat that partition and leave the rest of the drive intact. It would be a PITA to have to copy everything off a huge partition so it can be reformatted.

Plus, I find a separate partition to be easier to work with because you don't have all those OS folders scattered around with your document/media folders. I don't look at the OS partition that much in Explorer, so having those folders separated is helpful.

Bingo, those reasons are exactly why I do it. Sure, drives are cheap now, but why spend more money when I don't need to? Also, more drives just means more noise and heat.