..... Help ..... doing some tinkering and need your help

The_Neon_Cowboy · Apr 29, 2003, 09:23 AM

i herd alot of thngs this so I just lay out what i am trying to do and see what you guys sugest......

I am putting my 60 gb 133 740 dx ata133 hdd back in on the seconday ide channel with my cd rom drive...

I looking to get a performance boost I am going to keep all my games on my main faster drive and put my data programs like ms offlice etc. that speed is not an issue on the old hdd ... I also plan to put all my clogging junk on my second drive like mp3's , movies, photos etc....

my questions ...

should i ajust the cluster sizes from defult of 4k?

should i puy my paging file on the second drive?
-this is said to be faster becouse then my computer can be reading (games) writieing/reading pagefile at the the same time. as a single drive cant read and write at the same time

Should i put my page file on both drives ? i read aslo you can put your page file on more than one drive is there any advantage to this?

any help would be hot...... thanks guys

ps: this is my 1000th post

The_Neon_Cowboy · Apr 29, 2003, 09:55 AM

I did some testimng useing 3dmark and found the following useing 1024 mb swap file size

11554 shared swap file on two drives
11564 single drive primary
11410 single drive secondary

patje · Apr 29, 2003, 10:46 AM

Honestly I think that with 1 GIG of Ram there will not be a lot of swapping unless the benchmark creates a large file.
Putting the swap file on the second disk could be an increase i guess.
"should i ajust the cluster sizes from defult of 4k?" I don't really know about that one
But I do not see any advantage of putting a swap file on both drives, i think that would even slow it down.

Also make sure your second disk is master and that the CDrom is slave, but i guess you knew about that one.

On the other hand, placing your swap file on your faster disk, would give the computer faster read/write access to the swap file.
that's confirmed with the bench test if i'm correct.

The_Neon_Cowboy · Apr 29, 2003, 11:39 AM

i kinda figured that ... but wasnt sure ... benchmarks are not everything

adverage file size on my system is 634kb lest thats what windows defrager says....... if that helps

I am just wondering if its woth the effort to resize my clusters

Matth · Apr 29, 2003, 04:25 PM

Larger clusters can aid large file / sustained throughput applications such as video capture.
They can also help in defragmenting, as more smaller files will be one cluster instead of two, and there are fewer clusters to organize.

Not sure I'd bother struggling to change them, unless I was really convinced the workload pattern justified it!

For the swapfile, I think the old rule holds good....

The MOST used partition, on the LEAST used drive.

Why the MOST used partition? - Because using a "backwater" partition on the same drive, increases the likely seek distance.

DrBeltway · May 1, 2003, 02:18 AM

If you're using XP, I remember reading something to the effect that if two swapfiles are in use on different drives, the OS actually uses the swapfile on the drive with less activity. I could be wrong, but hope this helps.

Really though, re: cluster sizes, swapfiles or other hard drive tweaks, I doubt the performance gains would be very noticeable unless the application is very narrow and the tweak targets that specific kind of access. I've never really noticed major gains from tweaking, but I still do it anyway. Every bit helps. LOL. Here's hoping cheap solid state mass storage is right around the corner...

~~Asuka~~ · May 1, 2003, 03:22 AM

You should consider that all devices on a IDE channel can just be as fast (or slow) as the slowest device - so you should never combine a harddrive with a CD-Rom

The swap file should always be on the first partition of a HD (because that's the fastest partition).

Apr 29, 2003, 09:23 AM	#1
The_Neon_Cowboy HardwareHeaven Extreme Member Join Date: Dec 2002 Location: U.S.A. Posts: 16,009 Rep Power: 92 System Specs	..... Help ..... doing some tinkering and need your help i herd alot of thngs this so I just lay out what i am trying to do and see what you guys sugest...... I am putting my 60 gb 133 740 dx ata133 hdd back in on the seconday ide channel with my cd rom drive... I looking to get a performance boost I am going to keep all my games on my main faster drive and put my data programs like ms offlice etc. that speed is not an issue on the old hdd ... I also plan to put all my clogging junk on my second drive like mp3's , movies, photos etc.... my questions ... should i ajust the cluster sizes from defult of 4k? should i puy my paging file on the second drive? -this is said to be faster becouse then my computer can be reading (games) writieing/reading pagefile at the the same time. as a single drive cant read and write at the same time Should i put my page file on both drives ? i read aslo you can put your page file on more than one drive is there any advantage to this? any help would be hot...... thanks guys ps: this is my 1000th post __________________

Apr 29, 2003, 09:55 AM	Thread Starter #2
The_Neon_Cowboy HardwareHeaven Extreme Member Join Date: Dec 2002 Location: U.S.A. Posts: 16,009 Rep Power: 92 System Specs	I did some testimng useing 3dmark and found the following useing 1024 mb swap file size 11554 shared swap file on two drives 11564 single drive primary 11410 single drive secondary __________________

Apr 29, 2003, 10:46 AM	#3
patje Former Mobility Modman Join Date: Oct 2002 Location: Belgium / Antwerp Posts: 1,475 Rep Power: 66	Honestly I think that with 1 GIG of Ram there will not be a lot of swapping unless the benchmark creates a large file. Putting the swap file on the second disk could be an increase i guess. "should i ajust the cluster sizes from defult of 4k?" I don't really know about that one But I do not see any advantage of putting a swap file on both drives, i think that would even slow it down. Also make sure your second disk is master and that the CDrom is slave, but i guess you knew about that one. On the other hand, placing your swap file on your faster disk, would give the computer faster read/write access to the swap file. that's confirmed with the bench test if i'm correct. __________________

Apr 29, 2003, 11:39 AM	Thread Starter #4
The_Neon_Cowboy HardwareHeaven Extreme Member Join Date: Dec 2002 Location: U.S.A. Posts: 16,009 Rep Power: 92 System Specs	i kinda figured that ... but wasnt sure ... benchmarks are not everything adverage file size on my system is 634kb lest thats what windows defrager says....... if that helps I am just wondering if its woth the effort to resize my clusters __________________

May 1, 2003, 02:18 AM	#6
DrBeltway DriverHeaven Junior Member Join Date: May 2003 Location: Virginia Beach Posts: 21 Rep Power: 0	If you're using XP, I remember reading something to the effect that if two swapfiles are in use on different drives, the OS actually uses the swapfile on the drive with less activity. I could be wrong, but hope this helps. Really though, re: cluster sizes, swapfiles or other hard drive tweaks, I doubt the performance gains would be very noticeable unless the application is very narrow and the tweak targets that specific kind of access. I've never really noticed major gains from tweaking, but I still do it anyway. Every bit helps. LOL. Here's hoping cheap solid state mass storage is right around the corner... __________________ Bennown.

Apr 29, 2003, 04:25 PM	#5
Matth Flash Banner Hater Join Date: Jun 2002 Location: UK Posts: 3,426 Rep Power: 93 System Specs	Larger clusters can aid large file / sustained throughput applications such as video capture. They can also help in defragmenting, as more smaller files will be one cluster instead of two, and there are fewer clusters to organize. Not sure I'd bother struggling to change them, unless I was really convinced the workload pattern justified it! For the swapfile, I think the old rule holds good.... The MOST used partition, on the LEAST used drive. Why the MOST used partition? - Because using a "backwater" partition on the same drive, increases the likely seek distance.

May 1, 2003, 03:22 AM	#7
~~Asuka~~ BANNED Join Date: Sep 2002 Location: Germany Posts: 579 Rep Power: 0	You should consider that all devices on a IDE channel can just be as fast (or slow) as the slowest device - so you should never combine a harddrive with a CD-Rom The swap file should always be on the first partition of a HD (because that's the fastest partition).