IDE/SATA Hard Drive Layout?

H

Holu

n00b
Joined
Jan 6, 2006
Messages
45
Alright, heres the deal.

Currently I have...
60gb IDE - OS/Apps
120gb IDE - Games/Storage

The 60gb is putting out too much noise for my tastes, and is extremely old. Plus, more storage is good... SO I'm purchasing a 320gb SATA 3.0gb/s. All drives are 7200rpm.

My question now is this: What is the best way to lay out my files for best performance?

I also have a 20gb IDE i can put in to devote to the OS if useful.

Below is the layout I planned on going with, however please correct me or tell me its right!

20gb IDE - O/S (Will be Windows Vista shortly.)
120gb IDE - Storage
320gb SATA - Games, Apps, Storage.

I'll use the 60gb as an external for random things.

Thanks in advance!
 
I'd put the operating system on the new drive, it'll be much faster than those older ide ones. Then have the swap file on the other drive

320gig
30gig - os + apps (office etc)
Rest - games + storage

120gig
swap file + storage

Just my opinion. 30 gigs should be enough for vista + office etc, but you might want to go to 40.
 
Holu said:
Alright, heres the deal.

Currently I have...
60gb IDE - OS/Apps
120gb IDE - Games/Storage

The 60gb is putting out too much noise for my tastes, and is extremely old. Plus, more storage is good... SO I'm purchasing a 320gb SATA 3.0gb/s. All drives are 7200rpm.

My question now is this: What is the best way to lay out my files for best performance?

I also have a 20gb IDE i can put in to devote to the OS if useful.

Below is the layout I planned on going with, however please correct me or tell me its right!

20gb IDE - O/S (Will be Windows Vista shortly.)
120gb IDE - Storage
320gb SATA - Games, Apps, Storage.

I'll use the 60gb as an external for random things.

Thanks in advance!
Click to expand...

If it were me, I'd sell the 120, 60, and 20 hard drives since the 320 is still more than all of those combined. I'd create an 80-120GB parittion for OS and Apps (Games are apps too). Then the rest for storage. Much less hassle, noise and expense.
 
I'd create an 80-120GB parittion for OS and Apps (Games are apps too). Then the rest for storage.
Click to expand...
Ditto. You could keep the 120(I'm assuming it's the best performing) and use it just for a page file and data file backup.
 
ryan_975 said:
If it were me, I'd sell the 120, 60, and 20 hard drives since the 320 is still more than all of those combined. I'd create an 80-120GB parittion for OS and Apps (Games are apps too). Then the rest for storage. Much less hassle, noise and expense.
Click to expand...
Yeah, I tend to try to keep the size of my program files folder pretty small though, so put games on a separate partition. As long as I remember to change the install path for each game it works fine. Sure, load times might be a little slower from that part of the disk, but I don't really mind.
 
IanG said:
Yeah, I tend to try to keep the size of my program files folder pretty small though, so put games on a separate partition. As long as I remember to change the install path for each game it works fine. Sure, load times might be a little slower from that part of the disk, but I don't really mind.
Click to expand...
Word, I have C:\Windows, D:\Games, E\Music, F:\Files, G:\Burn, and H:\Downloads all cut out between my 250GB and 200GB HDDs. I like my shizzle organamized.

-bZj
 
I like my shizzle organamized.
Click to expand...
You're better off using logical(i.e. organized) folder structures on a single partition than cutting up the hard drive into a bunch of partitions and slowing things down, though sometimes minute, for no reason.
 
So basically everything that runs should go on the new SATA drive, rather than split it between several?

Sounds good. Thanks guys! That is indeed much simpler :p.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top