Hey guys, im still abit confused on what i should do & just want to make sure..
The parts of my first computer build are coming in tommorrow...so, im abit concerned that I do this all properly...i am gonna use (2) 250GB SATA Hard drives...
but I still wasnt sure if its reccommended that I partioned the 1st drive for only the OS and the rest for whatever I want...or if it will be okay just to install the OS as normal without worrying about partioning the drive etc..
Will that be okay? And performance will be just fine?
Well in all reality I don't know about the exact performance difference between partitioning a drive and leaving at as a whole, but the main deal is how do you deal with backups and formatting? I personally use 1 hard drive for the OS and one for data. The OS drive is where I install the programs and so when I have to reformat the drive I only reformat one drive and don't have to worry about losing music, documents, blah blah blah.
Partitioning is really when you want to dual boot off a single hard drive or if you want to enable easy reformatting off a single drive. So if you partition one drive into 1 partition for the OS and 1 partition for data, then when you reformat and install windows again you only have to format the OS partition not the entire hard drive.
In the end after all my rambling, I would say, in general, not partitioning a drive is fine since you have 2 hard drives. It all depends on use. If you need clarification let me know, sometimes I am not clear in what I say.
thanks for the reply...i think that answers my question....Since i never partioned before i wasnt sure if maybe there was a real need for me to do it or not....I just wanted to make sure that on my first build that i do everything right.....Im normally used to have a pre-built system & everything is done for me like installing the OS etc.....
So, basically if i install the OS without partioning the main drive then that will be normal & just as good?
I mainly was going to use my 1st drive for the OS, Games & Applications & some extras here & there....and the 2nd drive for mainly Music, Video & extra storage.
Also, if i have a 250GB drive and only using lets say 80GB....does that help performance for the drive since its not completely full?
About that performance question...Yes, performance is increased by having the drive not full, but its not necessarily because the drive is not full. On a hard drive the information is intially stored towards the edge of the magnetic platter, the exact opposite of when you write to a CD-R. So, principles of geometry get brought in. A hard drive spins at a constant RPM, so the distance from the center of the platter has a direct effect on speed. The closer you are to the center of the hard drive the smaller the the area covered reletive to if you were far away from the center. Which means that as the hard drive is filled and information is closer to the center of the hard drive, the more time it takes for the platter to fully cross the read/write head.
This is my generic understanding, I am not a hard drive expert FYI. I reached this conclusion by looking at HDTach diagrams which graphicly represent the transfer speeds of a hard drive across the entire size of the drive. As the program reaches the end of the drives capcity transfer speed always decreases, always. So, this is the exact opposite of when writing to a CD-R which the write speed gets faster as the burn process continues because I know for a fact the laser starts in the center and works its way out. So, to produce the opposite effect on transfer speed it seems like the hard drive would start by storing data on the outside. Why it does that is anyones guess, and like I said I could be wrong because hard drives are not my area of expertise. I just wanted to share my train of thought with you in case you know something I don't, or if another poster corrects me.