Setting up partitions
- Thread starter dario03
- Start date
- Status
Most 7200rpm drives have loads more cache than their older 5400rpm counterparts. Not to mention the VERY OLD 4gb variety that you mentioned. Not to mention much lower seek times.
EDIT: And that isn't even counting faster drives. My swap file is on my 10,000rpm Raptor. Do you think I could get better performance by throwing in an old 5400rpm drive for the swap file? I've got a few laying around here and I'd be happy to do it, but I'm quite certain it would be a foregone conclusion.
EDIT: And that isn't even counting faster drives. My swap file is on my 10,000rpm Raptor. Do you think I could get better performance by throwing in an old 5400rpm drive for the swap file? I've got a few laying around here and I'd be happy to do it, but I'm quite certain it would be a foregone conclusion.
Published specs from Google on, for example, older Maxtor drives:
http://www.sunstarco.com/Hard Drive Inf/Maxtor/Maxtor DiamondMax 2880 Ultra DMA 33.htm
* Maximum Capacity of 11.5 GB
* Supports Ultra Mode 4 for up to 33 MB/sec data transfers
* 256 Kb Cache Buffer
* 5,400 RPM Spin Speed
* < 9.0 ms average seek time
Another factor that I even forgot was that most older drives like that don't even support the faster DMA modes.
http://www.sunstarco.com/Hard Drive Inf/Maxtor/Maxtor DiamondMax 2880 Ultra DMA 33.htm
* Maximum Capacity of 11.5 GB
* Supports Ultra Mode 4 for up to 33 MB/sec data transfers
* 256 Kb Cache Buffer
* 5,400 RPM Spin Speed
* < 9.0 ms average seek time
Another factor that I even forgot was that most older drives like that don't even support the faster DMA modes.
TheHeadFL said:
wow....
it wasn't that serious
we weren't talking about a 10,000 rpm drive. a guy asked a question. I answered. somehow you missed the part about windows having to find the swap file within windows will slow it up. but who cares really?
I know that maxtor use to have an 7 or 10 gig 7200rpm drive, because I use to have it.
Let me rephrase the answer. dario03, go get the cheapest 7,200 rpm drive that you can find and use it.
TheMajor
PowerQuest / Opera
- Messages
- 10,176
- Location
- Netherlands
I still have a 10GB 7200RPM.
I still maintain my opinion that he would just be wasting his time for the potential performance improvement he would gain. For the vast majority of computer users, 1 hard drive is enough. Partition that in whatever way makes you feel good, there is no need to seek out additional hard drive. Your mileage may of course vary, that is to say, feel free to disagree if you like.
TheHeadFL said:
that is your opinion. all of the expert will tell you to position the swap file at the beginning of your second disc for optimal performance. they have been saying this for years. I guess all of them is wrong too, because you don't agree with it?
Explain this for me then. Why do linux automatically place their swap like this? you can actually put the swap file at the beginnning of the first hard drive with linux. like I said window's missed the ball, on that tip.
I guess linu don't know what they are doing too, even though they are years ahead of windows in technology.
Go back and show me where I said that there is no way that putting the swap file at the beginning of a drive would not increase performance.
I dispute your suggestion that he should go acquire more hardware (and old stuff too) and run that in the hopes of achieving any kind of better performance.
So, yes, call it my opinion, but I don't think the 'experts' that you reference would agree with your advice either. If he already had two disks, and neither one of them was an old POS, then sure, follow your advice. However, that was not what the question was about.
The question is about ONE drive. This guy has one drive, and you're telling him hes going to improve performance by going out and finding another piece of hardware and sticking that in there? As long as we're on the subject of adding hardware to fix a problem, why not just tell him to get a few more sticks of ram and get rid of the page file altogether? You could certainly do that for about the price of a decent second hard drive, and the performance improvements would be MUCH more profound.
I dispute your suggestion that he should go acquire more hardware (and old stuff too) and run that in the hopes of achieving any kind of better performance.
So, yes, call it my opinion, but I don't think the 'experts' that you reference would agree with your advice either. If he already had two disks, and neither one of them was an old POS, then sure, follow your advice. However, that was not what the question was about.
The question is about ONE drive. This guy has one drive, and you're telling him hes going to improve performance by going out and finding another piece of hardware and sticking that in there? As long as we're on the subject of adding hardware to fix a problem, why not just tell him to get a few more sticks of ram and get rid of the page file altogether? You could certainly do that for about the price of a decent second hard drive, and the performance improvements would be MUCH more profound.
Look, I don't need to read pages out of some 'tweaker' book. I have written virtual memory/paging algorithms for classes many times. I already know the deal with it. I know all about paging, page faults, and all the schemes that various OS's use to decide which pages get paged out, blah blah blah. I read your pages there, and its not telling me anything I don't already know.
The compelling reason to always have a page file is that you just *might* need to exceed your physical memory size, and therefore you have that room. There is no reason that you are absolutely required to do so, its just a good idea. The point was, whatever the case, he would have spent his money MUCH better by just buying more RAM, rather than monkeying around with buying another hard drive just to put the page file on. Talk about all time biggest wastes of time and money just to gain a few percent performance increase.
You still haven't answered my main point. Why tell this guy to get another hard drive just for swap space when he would be better served just getting more RAM and using a smaller pagefile? And for about the same price, since about the cheapest commercially available hard drives you find in stores right now run around $80. I can get a gig of cheapo PC3200 for that.
The compelling reason to always have a page file is that you just *might* need to exceed your physical memory size, and therefore you have that room. There is no reason that you are absolutely required to do so, its just a good idea. The point was, whatever the case, he would have spent his money MUCH better by just buying more RAM, rather than monkeying around with buying another hard drive just to put the page file on. Talk about all time biggest wastes of time and money just to gain a few percent performance increase.
You still haven't answered my main point. Why tell this guy to get another hard drive just for swap space when he would be better served just getting more RAM and using a smaller pagefile? And for about the same price, since about the cheapest commercially available hard drives you find in stores right now run around $80. I can get a gig of cheapo PC3200 for that.
- Status
Similar threads
