Forums | Search | Archives

All Forums  Hardware & Soundcards  Is 5400 rpm fast enough for program drive?

Author	Topic
Kurator Location: Finland Posts: 14	Posted - Mon Jun 23, 2003 5:16 am  Hi! I havenīt found any posts regarding your application drive so I had to post this question hoping to get some answers. Will a 5400 rpm 30 GB hard drive handle being the OS/application drive and in what way will it affect the performance compared to a 7200 rpm drive? Iīm using a single 5400 rpm hard drive now so I need another disk and I figured it would be wise to use the faster drive as the "audio processing"-drive. Is this correct? _________________ You donīt need Viagra, all you need is Heavy Metal! - Rob Halford
AMSG Location: Sweden Posts: 594	Posted - Mon Jun 23, 2003 4:49 pm  Well, I would say that it seems indeed best to use the fast one as the audioprocessing hard drive. I don't think that 5400 rpm would cause trouble if you have the OS and application there. But generally, the faster the better. And also look at the amount of cache. That's also an important factor.
clintfan Location: USA Posts: 455	Posted - Mon Jun 23, 2003 5:15 pm  I've used a 27GB Maxtor 5400 rpm disk for the O/S, programs, and virtual memory for over 3 years, and it's been fine (Win98SE). My CEP temp and data files are all there too, some is spearate partitions, but having the temp there has probably caused me some recording hangs. Soon I'll be moving to having separate disks for the data. But for O/S etc. the 5400 has been totally fine. Hope this helps, -clintfan
VoodooRadio Location: USA Posts: 3971	Posted - Mon Jun 23, 2003 6:46 pm  I use a 16 gig/5400 rpm drive for programs and then a 60 gig/7200 rpm Western Digital for .wav files. _________________ I said Good Day! Voodoo
Kurator Location: Finland Posts: 14	Posted - Thu Jun 26, 2003 10:32 pm  Well now Iīve bought a Western Digital Caviar 7200 rpm with 8 MB buffer, and I must say that I noticed a huge difference when I started using it. Most remarkable was that CEP stopped to eat up my RAM like it did before! Iīve got 512 MB DDR and some sessions used it all, but not anymore! That was a pleasant surprise. I still got another question... I would like to know if it is better to place the virtual memory on the slower 5400 rpm OS/Application drive, or shall I put it on the faster 7200 rpm wave/audioprocessing drive? _________________ You donīt need Viagra, all you need is Heavy Metal! - Rob Halford
clintfan Location: USA Posts: 455	Posted - Thu Jun 26, 2003 11:38 pm  I would not put the VM on the audio drive. I'd let the VM live with the programs. Given a choice, I think you would want the path to the audio drive to be as free of other activity as possible. Hope this helps, -clintfan
Kurator Location: Finland Posts: 14	Posted - Thu Jun 26, 2003 11:52 pm  Would it make any difference when I have the audio drive partitioned in two separate partitions? Here I would store all waves on one partition and let the virtual memory stay on the other. BTW I couldnīt format my drive to anything else but "simple disk" because the disk was a "dynamic" drive. Does anyone know what this means? The other drive is a "basic" type and is formatted in to logical partitions. What is the difference between a basic drive and a dynamic? (Windows XP) _________________ You donīt need Viagra, all you need is Heavy Metal! - Rob Halford
jester700 Posts: 546	Posted - Fri Jun 27, 2003 6:44 am  Kurator wrote: Would it make any difference when I have the audio drive partitioned in two separate partitions? Here I would store all waves on one partition and let the virtual memory stay on the other. Don't do this. A partition doesn't act as 2 seperate drives in terms of performance. In effect, you are making performance worse than it would be if the VM were just on one partition with the audio. Let's say you partitioned the drive in half. That means when the heads seek from reading/writing audio data to reading/writing VM data, they MUST physically move halfway across the drive. This will slow you down any time the situation occurs. Better to just let them reside on the same partition, or (much better yet) put the VM on another physical drive.
clintfan Location: USA Posts: 455	Posted - Fri Jun 27, 2003 9:32 am  Quote: What is the difference between a basic drive and a dynamic? (Windows XP) -Kurator This seems to explain it. If you go down the page, it also talks about "simple". "Basic Storage Versus Dynamic Storage in Windows XP" http://support.microsoft.com/default.aspx?scid=kb;en-us;314343 To find this I went to the Microsoft website, under Support- Knowledge base, then chose "Windows XP" and the three search terms basic dynamic drive, and chose this article out of the 25 hits. You can learn a lot in the MS KB. -clintfan
	Topic

Page: