Want faster boot times, options?

Toggle sidebar Toggle sidebar
R

Rifter

Lifer
Oct 9, 1999
11,522
751
126
Here is the deal, i dual boot linux and Vista and want it to be faster. The way i see it i have 3 options:

1. Buy another Seagate 7200.12 500GB and RAID 0 it with my current one Cost = $58

2. Buy one GSkill Falcon/OCZ Vertex 60GB Cost $225

3. Buy 2 OCZ Vertex 30GB and RAID 0 them, cost $300

Option 1 i could do right away the other 2 would take a month to get cash for.

What would you do if you were me?
 
B

Blain

Lifer
Oct 9, 1999
23,643
3
81
Originally posted by: Rifterut
Want faster boot times, options

Here is the deal, i dual boot linux and Vista and want it to be faster. The way i see it i have 3 options:

1. Buy another Seagate 7200.12 500GB and RAID 0 it with my current one Cost = $58

2. Buy one GSkill Falcon/OCZ Vertex 60GB Cost $225

3. Buy 2 OCZ Vertex 30GB and RAID 0 them, cost $300

Option 1 i could do right away the other 2 would take a month to get cash for.

What would you do if you were me?
Click to expand...
If I were you and system boot time was my major concern, I'd simply buy a 300GB VelociRaptor.

 
M

Mango1970

Member
Aug 26, 2006
195
0
76
Coming from having 2 Vertex 60 gb (not raid though), the boot times are pretty impressive. I run Windows 7 64. I don't have much of anything kicking in software wise on the setup except for Antivir and Rivatuner really. No crazy hardware to initialize and again the boot times are stupid fast. I am not sure about raid -- maybe someone can chime in but would it not be actually a bit slower to boot up with a raid setup due to its initializing or is that only with a hardware raid solution? Anyhow all you would need is one fast SSD for your OS drive to see some serious improvements.
 
R

Rifter

Lifer
Oct 9, 1999
11,522
751
126
I was under the impression SSD's were faster than the raptors, is this not the case?
 
B

Blain

Lifer
Oct 9, 1999
23,643
3
81
In that old review you linked, the VelociRaptor is only about 1 second slower (at worse) than the SSD up against it in game level load times.
Level load times are the closest benchmark for compairing "boot times", which is what you said you were concerned with.
 
R

Rifter

Lifer
Oct 9, 1999
11,522
751
126
This is true, however there have been no new Raptors released that are faster than that one have there? and arnt there faster SSD's out now than the one used in the review? Or are the OCZ/Gskill SSD's the same performance as that Mtron.
 
B

Blain

Lifer
Oct 9, 1999
23,643
3
81
You keep referring to the "Raptor". The review you linked has benchmarks for the older 150GB "Raptor" as well as the 300GB "VelociRaptor".

When you say "Raptor" are you asking about the older 150GB or are you really asking about the "VelociRaptor"?
I'm asking so that we can compair apples to apples, when finding you a fast booting drive.
 
OILFIELDTRASH

OILFIELDTRASH

Lifer
May 13, 2009
12,333
612
126
I use one 30gb ocz vertex drive for my operating system. Im telling anyone that will listen SSD's are BAD ASS!!! I can probably shutdown and restart faster than I use to be able to just boot up with a mechanical drive. As soon as I see the desktop Im able to start using applications. In my opinion no computer can be considered high end without a SSD. They are that good!
 
R

Rifter

Lifer
Oct 9, 1999
11,522
751
126
Sounds like SSD FTW. I was refering to the faststest WR Raptor drive which from what i can tell is the 300GB 2.5" drive.
 
S

SickBeast

Lifer
Jul 21, 2000
14,377
19
81
An SSD would be great, but if you short stroke that 500gb drive with say a 30gb OS partition, it should be plenty fast. It won't touch the SSD, but it won't be slow either.

IMO it's worth waiting a bit longer for an SSD. They haven't quite worked all the kinks out yet.
 
R

Rifter

Lifer
Oct 9, 1999
11,522
751
126
Yeah i was originally going to wait till SSD matured a bit but then i got to play with one of my buddys laptops on the weekend with a intel SSD in it and was completly blown away by the boot times. I mean my 7200.12 drive is WAY faster than my old HDD but man that SSD has insane bootup times.

Would short stroking the 500GB make that much of a difference to be worth doing instead of SSD? Also would buying another one and short stroking them both and going RAID 0 be worth doing or is RAID 0 not worth it just to speed up boot times?
 
A

alcoholbob

Diamond Member
May 24, 2005
6,365
431
126
No way to magically erase boot up time if you are using Windows. There are instant boot-up OSes but they have little functionality beyond media playback.
 
B

Blain

Lifer
Oct 9, 1999
23,643
3
81
Just use "Sleep Mode" if you absolutely need fast boot times.
It's the closest thing to magic that you can get. :p
 
R

Rifter

Lifer
Oct 9, 1999
11,522
751
126
Originally posted by: Blain
Just use "Sleep Mode" if you absolutely need fast boot times.
It's the closest thing to magic that you can get. :p
Click to expand...

This is not going to help me, i want fast boot times because i dual boot windows and linux and move between OS's often, not because i keep booting the same OS all the time. If that was the case obviously i would use sleep mode but it is not.
 
P

pjkenned

Senior member
Jan 14, 2008
630
0
71
www.servethehome.com
Here's a thought... buy a $199 netbook, run linux on that, and stop booting. 2 raid cards give my main system horrendous boot times, but one boot every 30 days for windows updates isn't so bad since I schedule it at 3am during the week when I'm working (and thusly should be in bed).

Just wondering, why would you use Linux for all but games, and vista 64 for games? Seems like Linux is really the option when you don't want to run a Windows OS or if you have something specific that you need to run. I have boxes of all different varieties, so just wondering why.
 
Zap

Zap

Elite Member
Oct 13, 1999
22,377
2
81
I'm still a bit leery of SSD issues. If I needed something faster than my 300GB VelociRaptor and can live with smaller capacity like the 60GB SSDs, then I'd just short stroke the VelociRaptor and be done with it. The seeks will be a fraction and the throughput will stay in the fastest area.
 
D

davidrees

Senior member
Mar 28, 2002
431
0
76
I have one of those 500GB 7200.12 drives (the 410).

Right now, my whole system is installed on a 750GB drive as a single partition.


Intel E5200 @ 3500mhz
4GB 1099 DDR2 @ 933 (ish)
Gigabyte P35-DS3L
ATI 4850 1GB
Vista Ultimate 64bit

Boot: Seagate ST3750640AS 750GB SATA 7200.10 Barracuda (I have a small, low rpm fan on this drive as it runs hot)
Secondary (Unuses)

I was thinking of partitioning my 500GB to about 75 or 100GB and using it for a boot / apps drive

Right now, I get a Windows Experience Index of 5.7 on hard drive (the 750GB) and a 5.8 on CPU (3500mhz dual core is a 5.8? seriously?) and 5.9 on everything else.

I have a ton of games I keep on here - most of them are in Steam and my games folder can be as large as 300GB or so with everything installed.

I wonder if I should use the 500GB drive for gaming (for the performance) and just move my games over to it. This would be the least disruptive as it would not require a re-install.

I could also go with a short stroked 7200.12 drive for fast booting and windows responsiveness and keep games and apps on the 750GB.

Any advice would be welcome.

Link to the 750GB drive: http://www.newegg.com/Product/...x?Item=N82E16822148134
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

TRENDING THREADS

COMPANY
RESOURCES
FOLLOW
Top Bottom