2 New HD's or 1?

Verios · Jun 29, 2005, 11:10 PM

Hi guys, a few quick question for you all.

Would I be better off to go with 2 new HD's and putting the operating system on 1, including all my games, etc.. and the pagefile on the other or operating system / pagefile on one, games on the game in their own partition..or if anyone has a general suggestion of what would be best I would be very greatful.

Second question is would I be better off in general just to buy 1 larger HD and partition it for the OS, games, pagefile, etc...

Thanks a bunch guys.

mkk · Jun 29, 2005, 11:28 PM

Two individual drives are always good, as long as you won't have to buy two small drives or old models to keep the budget. Having the operating system on one and major applications on the other is a good example of how it would be helpful. Unless you are short on RAM or run extreme applications the pagefile won't be used too much, but sure one might as well put it on the second drive if one is available. In general it would do more good to put the TEMP folder on the second drive, as well as other folders that are often accessed or saved to.

CDsDontBurn · Jun 30, 2005, 05:54 AM

two HDDs. I have a 36Gb raptor for my OS, OS apps, and Games, and the larger HDD (actually 2 80's in RAID 0 set up) for all my crap i have saved over time. It adds up i must say.

The_Neon_Cowboy · Jun 30, 2005, 05:59 AM

two drives of the same size in raid 0 is the fastest

Sandok · Jun 30, 2005, 05:59 AM

I had two 200 giga HDs for my games and downloads/video encoding/etc and I totally loved it. Unfortunately, my PC is silent and my new HD was loud as hell so after a month, I just gave it to my bro!

CDsDontBurn · Jun 30, 2005, 06:50 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by sandok

I had two 200 giga HDs for my games and downloads/video encoding/etc and I totally loved it. Unfortunately, my PC is silent and my new HD was loud as hell so after a month, I just gave it to my bro!

noise is of no concern to me

, and i want all the space i can get.

Judas · Jun 30, 2005, 08:35 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by The_Neon_Cowboy

two drivers of the same size in raid 0 is the fastest

not always the case.

2 drives without raid on completely isolated ide channels or sata channels with the primary being partitioned with one for OS/Programs, the other partition with games, then having the other drive setup as the primary partition being swap file (5gb) the second being whatever you'd like (downloads, other stuff)

this produces on hell of an excellent responding rig. Load times are low. Even vs raid, the lack of stutters loading is a hell of alot less in this configuration then a dual drive in raid 0 setup similarely partitioned.

Now dual raid would be slick, setup similarely as having just 2 hardrives.

I wouldn't mind having a set of 8 drives, 2 sets of raid 0... (or better raid 5 on the second for my downloads and backups)

Sandok · Jun 30, 2005, 08:47 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by CDsDontBurn

noise is of no concern to me

, and i want all the space i can get.

i need silence... a annoying HD working is jsut not good...

My PC is a whisper and hta's what i need!

CDsDontBurn · Jun 30, 2005, 08:49 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by sandok

i need silence... a annoying HD working is jsut not good...

My PC is a whisper and hta's what i need!

then get yourself some Seagate Barracuda HDDs.......w/liquid bearing technology, they are among the quietest drivers available with a five year warranty!

Judas · Jun 30, 2005, 08:51 AM

i've got in my server 5 HDs, the only thing you can hear is the louder one, it doesn't seem to applify the sounds or make anything louder by adding more enless they are louder

CDsDontBurn · Jun 30, 2005, 08:57 AM

to me HDDs make the least amount of noise of any device that has moving parts. But Judas is right, the more stuff you add to anything, the louder it will become.

Judas · Jun 30, 2005, 09:00 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by CDsDontBurn

But Judas is right, the more stuff you add to anything, the louder it will become.

i don't think i said that... maybe i worded it wrong..

generally that is the case, but with todays hardrives, i haven't found it to be true. Hardrives are now quiter then any anything else running in the case. Adding more of these hardrives doesn't seem effect anything.

seems that we can only hope for case fans to become completely silent... oh and DVD roms...

CDsDontBurn · Jun 30, 2005, 09:03 AM

just DVD roms???? optical drives in general

. i hated the older HDDs where all you heard was chatter. You are right about that Judas.....today's HDDs are very quiet

Sandok · Jun 30, 2005, 09:14 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Judas

i've got in my server 5 HDs, the only thing you can hear is the louder one, it doesn't seem to applify the sounds or make anything louder by adding more enless they are louder

it was the same HD from WD but a newer version, so a bit faster but boy was it damn loud (much louder than the same older version) so I gave it to my bro where he can't hear it (his case is louder)

I agree, todays HDs are damn quite but this one was very loud (compared to my old one) and quite audible!

and dvd roms are loud as hell too

Judas · Jun 30, 2005, 10:23 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by CDsDontBurn

just DVD roms???? optical drives in general

. i hated the older HDDs where all you heard was chatter. You are right about that Judas.....today's HDDs are very quiet

you should hear these old quatum Big Foots (5 1/2 inch HDs), boy fast buggers considering the ATA2 interface (pio mode 3? )

Matth · Jun 30, 2005, 03:15 PM

Unless the pagefile is little used (eg. you have a surplus of RAM, and the PF is allocated but rarely called on), then don't put it in an "out of the way" partition, as the head will have to traverse to it.

Given that all current drives use variable density, so the far end is slower, it's always a good move to reserve the tail end for archived installs, and other stuff that will not be used often and certainly not used "live".

Two drives or one - if you have to pair them on IDE cables, more drives are not necesarily better.

A RAID pair should certainly be better than the same class of drive singly, but might not be as good as the best possible load division of an independentent pair.

Where the workload is > RAM (and cannot be resolved by adding RAM) so the system is swapfile-heavy, then a drive of similar speed reserved for swapfile and "holding area" may be useful - even if it's one generation lower in speed & capacity.

Biggest problem with "hand tuned" drive pairs compared to RAID, is getting a worthwhile load division - that can also negate any advantage of two drives over one.

Verios · Jun 30, 2005, 05:02 PM

[color=black]Well if it helps my current system is:[/color]
[color=black][/color]

[color=red]AMD Athlon(tm) 64 Processor 3000+[/color]

[color=red]1GB PC/3200 400Mhz DDR RAM (2x512, dual channel)
MSI K8N Neo2 Platinum w/ DualDDR400
Gigabyte Geforce 6800 GT 256MB GDDR3 AGP
Creative Sound Blaster Autigy2 ZS[/color]
[color=red]LiteOn 52x32x52x/16x CD-RW/DVD-ROM Combo Drive[/color]
[color=red]VA3000BWA Tsunami Dream Tower, Black w/ Window[/color]

[color=black]Also thinking of upgrading to 3500+, would that generally be a good idea?[/color]

CDsDontBurn · Jun 30, 2005, 05:39 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Judas

you should hear these old quatum Big Foots (5 1/2 inch HDs), boy fast buggers considering the ATA2 interface (pio mode 3? )

those are before my time. I didn't start all my tinkering until p3 600Mhz, and HDDs were ATA 33 and the largest one available was 20Gb for $100 (USD). The smallest HDD i've worked with though has been 1.5Gb and boy, were those loud in every manner.

Judas · Jun 30, 2005, 06:39 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Matth

Unless the pagefile is little used (eg. you have a surplus of RAM, and the PF is allocated but rarely called on), then don't put it in an "out of the way" partition, as the head will have to traverse to it.

Only apon first install, if you set a 10 gb partition (being the first partition on the drive) and then set a 5b swap file partition directly after, it may not preform as good as a 10gb partition with windows/swap file combined at first. But within a VERY short period (for me, within a day) the seperate partition dedicated to the swap file will out preform and improve overall system preformance not to mention the integrity quite a bit. Why? Having the swap file set to the startand or shared on any system with other data is generally quite bad. It's not absalutely going to cause havoc, but it sure can put some nasty wrinkles in it. As the swap file expands and contracts (even if you set a large specific size) data is still written around it and will cause heavy fragmentation quick. Allowing a Swap file to have it's own dedicated partition prevents this, it keeps the swap file itself from fragmenting at all, and the other data from fragmenting.

Also, if windows and program files are on the first partition of 10gb, followed by a 5gb partition for the swap file followed by another partition for games. This ends up being the best for a single drive solution. Games load data, and doesn't have to go far, Windows loads data, and doesn't have to go far.

Also, the advantage of a seperate partition is how quickly it can go to the swap file. If the swap file is inmingled in the standard windows installation partition, the read/writes heads go to the partition, then it has to SEARCH for the swap file data to be read/wrote/rewritten. However, with a seperate partition, it can go to the dedicated partition and emediately begin writing. It's a hell of alot faster to skim passed free space then to sort through thousands of files and data not to mention fragments.

Think of it as having a file cabinet. In the case of a single hardrive. Say one cabinet have 2 drawers. 1 is labled C and the other is labled D (partitions). Another cabinet has 3 drawers labled C through to E.

In the first cabinet you have in C 1000s of folders with 10s of thousands of files within them. In D you have a similare case.
In the second cabinet, you have a similare case for C, however, D being dedicated to swap file has 1 Folder, within that folder is of course a single file. E is similare to the first cabinet D.

If i told you to look for the folder Swap File in either cabinet, which cabinet would you find the folder quickest?

Jun 29, 2005, 11:10 PM	#1
Verios DriverHeaven Lover Join Date: Nov 2002 Posts: 103 Rep Power: 0	2 New HD's or 1? Hi guys, a few quick question for you all. Would I be better off to go with 2 new HD's and putting the operating system on 1, including all my games, etc.. and the pagefile on the other or operating system / pagefile on one, games on the game in their own partition..or if anyone has a general suggestion of what would be best I would be very greatful. Second question is would I be better off in general just to buy 1 larger HD and partition it for the OS, games, pagefile, etc... Thanks a bunch guys.

Jun 30, 2005, 05:54 AM	#3
CDsDontBurn Lurking DriverHeaven Join Date: May 2003 Location: Southern California Posts: 22,795 Rep Power: 235 System Specs	two HDDs. I have a 36Gb raptor for my OS, OS apps, and Games, and the larger HDD (actually 2 80's in RAID 0 set up) for all my crap i have saved over time. It adds up i must say. __________________ Her First Day \| A year later

Jun 30, 2005, 05:59 AM	#4
The_Neon_Cowboy HardwareHeaven Extreme Member Join Date: Dec 2002 Location: U.S.A. Posts: 16,009 Rep Power: 92 System Specs	two drives of the same size in raid 0 is the fastest __________________ Last edited by The_Neon_Cowboy; Jun 30, 2005 at 03:39 PM.

Jun 30, 2005, 08:57 AM	#11
CDsDontBurn Lurking DriverHeaven Join Date: May 2003 Location: Southern California Posts: 22,795 Rep Power: 235 System Specs	to me HDDs make the least amount of noise of any device that has moving parts. But Judas is right, the more stuff you add to anything, the louder it will become. __________________ Her First Day \| A year later

Jun 30, 2005, 09:03 AM	#13
CDsDontBurn Lurking DriverHeaven Join Date: May 2003 Location: Southern California Posts: 22,795 Rep Power: 235 System Specs	just DVD roms???? optical drives in general . i hated the older HDDs where all you heard was chatter. You are right about that Judas.....today's HDDs are very quiet __________________ Her First Day \| A year later

Jun 29, 2005, 11:28 PM	#2
mkk Cthulhu/Dagon 2012 Join Date: Oct 2003 Location: Gefle, Sweden Posts: 4,495 Rep Power: 132 System Specs	Two individual drives are always good, as long as you won't have to buy two small drives or old models to keep the budget. Having the operating system on one and major applications on the other is a good example of how it would be helpful. Unless you are short on RAM or run extreme applications the pagefile won't be used too much, but sure one might as well put it on the second drive if one is available. In general it would do more good to put the TEMP folder on the second drive, as well as other folders that are often accessed or saved to.

Jun 30, 2005, 05:59 AM	#5
Sandok DriverHeaven Extreme Member Join Date: Jul 2004 Posts: 9,472 Rep Power: 0	I had two 200 giga HDs for my games and downloads/video encoding/etc and I totally loved it. Unfortunately, my PC is silent and my new HD was loud as hell so after a month, I just gave it to my bro!

Jun 30, 2005, 03:15 PM	#16
Matth Flash Banner Hater Join Date: Jun 2002 Location: UK Posts: 3,426 Rep Power: 93 System Specs	Unless the pagefile is little used (eg. you have a surplus of RAM, and the PF is allocated but rarely called on), then don't put it in an "out of the way" partition, as the head will have to traverse to it. Given that all current drives use variable density, so the far end is slower, it's always a good move to reserve the tail end for archived installs, and other stuff that will not be used often and certainly not used "live". Two drives or one - if you have to pair them on IDE cables, more drives are not necesarily better. A RAID pair should certainly be better than the same class of drive singly, but might not be as good as the best possible load division of an independentent pair. Where the workload is > RAM (and cannot be resolved by adding RAM) so the system is swapfile-heavy, then a drive of similar speed reserved for swapfile and "holding area" may be useful - even if it's one generation lower in speed & capacity. Biggest problem with "hand tuned" drive pairs compared to RAID, is getting a worthwhile load division - that can also negate any advantage of two drives over one.

Jun 30, 2005, 05:02 PM	Thread Starter #17
Verios DriverHeaven Lover Join Date: Nov 2002 Posts: 103 Rep Power: 0	[color=black]Well if it helps my current system is:[/color] [color=black][/color] [color=red]AMD Athlon(tm) 64 Processor 3000+[/color] [color=red]1GB PC/3200 400Mhz DDR RAM (2x512, dual channel) MSI K8N Neo2 Platinum w/ DualDDR400 Gigabyte Geforce 6800 GT 256MB GDDR3 AGP Creative Sound Blaster Autigy2 ZS[/color] [color=red]LiteOn 52x32x52x/16x CD-RW/DVD-ROM Combo Drive[/color] [color=red]VA3000BWA Tsunami Dream Tower, Black w/ Window[/color] [color=black]Also thinking of upgrading to 3500+, would that generally be a good idea?[/color]