New build questions - drive partition scheme, SSDs

[oboe]

I'm working my way toward a new build, and wonder what the prevailing attitude toward partitioning of large drives is (I'll have a 1TB drive).   Some advice I found poking around is that its a good idea to have one drive for the OS and a second drive for data, that way you can do a clean install of the OS if needed without disturbing the data.    But others have said if you end up reinstalling the OS you'll likely have to reinstall most of the programs you use anyway, so its not worth it and one large partition is OK.

Also Im on the fence about SSD.   Is it mature technology enough to be worth using?   I'm just building a game machine here - a fast boot time would be nice but not essential.   My understanding considering SSD is you want to get one with the SandForce controller, and then build the machine and install the OS on the SSD before adding the hard drive into the mix.

I think there have been some comments on the board in the past about installing and running AH on a SSD, but that its not a great idea if you film alot of sorties?   

Thanks help.

[Spikes]

I'm going to hold off on SSDs until they get cheaper. I just built a new PC myself...old specs:
Core 2 Quad Q9550/4GB DDR2 ram/250gd 5400RPM HDD (my OS)/120gb 5400RPM data (music mainly)/2x HD5770s
New:
i5-3570k/16GB DDR3/1TB 7200RPM hdd/2GB HD6870

I didn't partition it...the new PC is like night and day. Boots very fast...probably 30 seconds? Fast enough for me. It'll get slower over time due to the OS getting older (until I reformat).

I'm sure an SSD could do it better, but for my needs I just don't see a need to open Firefox or a game 1 second faster than it normally would with a normal hard drive. Plus, the price per GB is terrible...I guess it is better than what it used to be, though.

As per the film comment...I'm pretty sure the SSDs have a flaw with writing speed, correct? They can read super fast but can't write any more than the normal HDD can?

[gyrene81]

I'm working my way toward a new build, and wonder what the prevailing attitude toward partitioning of large drives is (I'll have a 1TB drive).   Some advice I found poking around is that its a good idea to have one drive for the OS and a second drive for data, that way you can do a clean install of the OS if needed without disturbing the data.    But others have said if you end up reinstalling the OS you'll likely have to reinstall most of the programs you use anyway, so its not worth it and one large partition is OK.

running 2 physical drives is always better than partitioning a single drive. you want to plan for drive failure. storing actual data files on a secondary drive is a good idea if you want to reduce the chances of losing it. there are some small utility programs that do not rely on the windows registry to operate, those you could install on a secondary drive and not have to worry about doing a reinstall if the operating system needs to be reinstalled for whatever reason.

As per the film comment...I'm pretty sure the SSDs have a flaw with writing speed, correct? They can read super fast but can't write any more than the normal HDD can?

uh, no...at least not for the latest bunch to hit the market. fastest desktop mechanical drive averages 164 megabytes/s the fastest ssds are pushing over 785 megabytes/s.

[cattb]

If you were to go the SSD route my suggestion would be to get at least 128 GB. I bought the vertex 4, it has a 5 year warranty and was 100.00. Recently it was 89.00.

I am sure come Christmas there will plenty of deals on SSD.

I also agree with spikes the market is maturing, drives getting bigger, better, faster, and cheaper.

My computer starts in seconds. I also put my most frequent used software on the SSD. Its not alot of software.

Gyrene has a valid point of backup and 2 drives. I use backup software and backup  to second  physical HD. Some data I also backup to a thumb drive aside from the HD.

If it were me and were to run just 2 physical drives. I would run the OS and software on 1 drive and backup and store data on the other.

[Bizman]

Some advice I found poking around is that its a good idea to have one drive for the OS and a second drive for data, that way you can do a clean install of the OS if needed without disturbing the data.    But others have said if you end up reinstalling the OS you'll likely have to reinstall most of the programs you use anyway, so its not worth it and one large partition is OK.

There's data and there's data. Programs are data, and so are files. Programs can be reinstalled, but you can't retake photos. The idea of two drives is to have your personal data (My Documents) on a separate disk/partition in case something lethal happens to the OS. Also, having all your valuables in one place helps to make a backup copy of them to an external storing device.

The ideal partititioning depends on what you use your computer for. If your disk storage is used only for installing games and downloading stuff, one partition is enough. But if you take lots of photos, write stories, create music or other digital art etc. having a separate disk/partition for OS and another for your creations makes more sense. You might even want to have one for the OS, another for programs and a third for saving your valuables.

[oboe]

Great food for thought.  Biz, isn't,t the MyDocuments folder always inside the users folder in the OS install partition?  Or do you just create a second one in the data partition?

[Bizman]

I suppose you're talking about Windows7. Yes, and not exactly: There's the [YourName] folder inside the Users folder, inside of which are the folders that would have been inside MyDocuments in XP. As you know, you can access it through (My) Computer, or directly from the Start Orb menu by clicking [YourName].

The main thing is, that the "My" folders inside the [YourName] folder are movable. Just right click each of them (Music, Pictures, Videos, Documents etc.) and choose Properties. On the Location tab type the new location on the address line, like "E:\MyMusic" and when prompted, create a new folder. OR choose Move and navigate to the new address, creating a new folder where necessary. Pictorial guide here: http://www.w7forums.com/change-location-my-documents-folder-t338.html.

[Pudgie]

I'm kinda starting to look at SSD's as well.

Outside of bootup & program load up improvements will a SSD help w/ AHII running, even if you have 16Gb of mem onboard?

I am looking at this one: OCZ Vertex 4 VTX4-25SAT3-256Gb

Thinking bout getting 2 to replace my excellent WD Caviar Blacks & go full SSD's............................ .............

Box is used to game on mostly now.........................u se my IPad2 for all other internet stuff.

Curious.....................g ot the itch again........................ .......

 

[MrRiplEy[H]]

I'm kinda starting to look at SSD's as well.

Outside of bootup & program load up improvements will a SSD help w/ AHII running, even if you have 16Gb of mem onboard?

I am looking at this one: OCZ Vertex 4 VTX4-25SAT3-256Gb

Thinking bout getting 2 to replace my excellent WD Caviar Blacks & go full SSD's............................ .............

Box is used to game on mostly now.........................u se my IPad2 for all other internet stuff.

Curious.....................g ot the itch again........................ .......

 

SSD should not make much difference in how your AH runs - maybe with the exception of the odd plane texture being loaded mid-flight. It will however make things load much much faster.

When my sons computer started bluescreening a week ago, I reinstalled windows and installed a Revodrive3 pci-e SSD at the same time. It is about 3 times faster than a single SATA based SSD. A file copy of gigabyte size just happens in a snap compared to regular hdd:s - but the difference in Steam game load times wasn't anything breathtaking. I suspect this is because loading a game involves decompressing and syncing things online - stuff that the ssd does nothing for.

[Pudgie]

SSD should not make much difference in how your AH runs - maybe with the exception of the odd plane texture being loaded mid-flight. It will however make things load much much faster.

When my sons computer started bluescreening a week ago, I reinstalled windows and installed a Revodrive3 pci-e SSD at the same time. It is about 3 times faster than a single SATA based SSD. A file copy of gigabyte size just happens in a snap compared to regular hdd:s - but the difference in Steam game load times wasn't anything breathtaking. I suspect this is because loading a game involves decompressing and syncing things online - stuff that the ssd does nothing for.

Thanks, Ripley!

I asked this question as I generally understand it most/all of AH should load into system mem (if you have enough usuable mem available) upon load up & should run from there & if so then an SSD would not do much for the game running...................... ............

But as I understand the OS as well (Windows, regardless of vers), 1 of the main reasons why Windows is "backwards compatible" is that the OS still contains old code logic to enable it to run legacy software from an era where these workarounds were necessary, both from a software & hardware standpoint & so I believe will still page out data to the HDD from mem & from the HDD back to mem regardless of the amount of mem installed. This is why I'm asking if a SSD can help in this area. The terrain files that are d'ld when a new TOD is started are going on your HDD (why you don't need to DL them every time you start the game) & I suspect that the OS is paging this data back & forth as it thinks it's needed regardless of the amount of mem onboard & it is this reasoning as to why I'm looking at using SSD's as these will at least boost the speeds that this paging is done & thus has to help the game to run smoother (not necessarily faster) w/ less hitching, stuttering, etc. I just don't believe that all this stuttering is caused from CPU, FSB, vid card issues. Some of this has to be coming from this old legacy coding within the OS & to a certain extent the software (including AH) still looks to make use of this coding if the software is intended to operate across a wide OS/hardware platform.

Skuzzy please correct me if I'm wrong here.


Heck the OS will still use system mem as dedicated graphics mem regardless of how much graphics mem is on a vid card. I can see that taking place even w/ AHII & is 1 of the reasons why IMO we see stuttering ingame w/ modern graphics cards (due to the difference between graphics mem speeds & graphics bus bandwidth & speeds vs system mem speeds & FSB bandwidth & speeds when frame data is being transferred across the buffers). This should not be happening w/ modern graphics cards but it is. I remember Nvidia drivers of yore had a setting in them that you could use to limit the amount of system mem to use to help w/ stuttering (by forcing the use of as much graphics mem as you had onboard before going out to system mem because of what I have posted earlier). I wish they still had this setting in their drivers...................... .

I know that this issue here has nothing to do w/ a SSD but I was already on my soapbox...................... ..................

So from my understanding of all this it appears that a SSD can help out considering all that I'm thinking is true & is thus why I'm finally looking into them for use in my "flight simulator". Since this is the main usage of my box then the issues concerning current SSD's are not a major factor w/ me using them.

Don't misunderstand me here, AH runs VERY GOOD on my box right now...........I have NO complaints w/ AH running on my box at all.

I'm just always looking to enhance the experience & sometimes we may overlook something due to the details.....or the costs of those details.

Or maybe I'm bored........................ ..alright gonna go fly some!