Sign in with
Sign up | Sign in
Your question

Will this lower my random seek time?

Last response: in Storage
Share
October 3, 2006 2:10:29 PM

So lets suppose I have a 320gb segate 7200.10. It has an average seek time of 14ms. If I make a partition that is 160gb, will the average seek time reduce? If yes, then how small of a partition can you make, and what will the average seek time be?

If I were to compare (using an identical harddrive) ....

A) WindowsXP installed on a 320gb partition

vs

B) WindowsXP installed on a 5gb partition

Which would load faster?

More about : lower random seek time

October 3, 2006 2:30:35 PM

There will be no performance loose or gain. The results will be the same.
If your HDD has fragmented files then you will loose some seek time.
October 3, 2006 2:37:37 PM

That is my point....if the fragmented xp startup files are spread across the whole partition, then the time getting from front to back of harddrive is factored in. But if the fragmented xp startup files are spread across the first 5gb of a 320gb harddrive, then the time getting to the files should be reduced. Right?
Related resources
October 3, 2006 2:47:04 PM

Yikes, I would go no less than 15 to 20GB for an OS partition, especially windows. I did use 10GB partitions for WinXP but over time with updates and what not, you end up running out of space. Fragmentation won't get that bad either, I don't see how it would make any difference. The only reason I partition the OS from the rest of the physical drive is in case of system failure. That way I can clean isntall XP without losing any data.
October 3, 2006 3:05:24 PM

Quote:
That is my point....if the fragmented xp startup files are spread across the whole partition, then the time getting from front to back of harddrive is factored in. But if the fragmented xp startup files are spread across the first 5gb of a 320gb harddrive, then the time getting to the files should be reduced. Right?


In theory that is cotrrect, putting the Os athe beginning of the drive will make it faster but, the gain in performance is in miliseconds. You probably will not notice the difference. It is always a good practice to place the OS at the begining of the HDD on a seperate partition so you do not loose files during reload.
October 3, 2006 3:07:47 PM

It depends on how the hard drive manufacturer has defined the platters. Some make the beginning bit of the drive the fastest. Some the end. Some do odd things with radial geometry.

However, in general, you will notice *no* difference wherever you put the startup files.
October 3, 2006 3:22:54 PM

Quote:
That is my point....if the fragmented xp startup files are spread across the whole partition, then the time getting from front to back of harddrive is factored in. But if the fragmented xp startup files are spread across the first 5gb of a 320gb harddrive, then the time getting to the files should be reduced. Right?


I get your point.
You've said that the seek time of HDD is 14ms, so it's 0.014 second. Have you ever imagine how fast is it 0.014 second ?

Your normal eyes blink speed is 300/400ms. So the HDD is 28 times more faster than your eyes. That's why you won't notice anything.
October 3, 2006 3:34:58 PM

Quote:
So lets suppose I have a 320gb segate 7200.10. It has an average seek time of 14ms. If I make a partition that is 160gb, will the average seek time reduce? If yes, then how small of a partition can you make, and what will the average seek time be?

If I were to compare (using an identical harddrive) ....

A) WindowsXP installed on a 320gb partition

vs

B) WindowsXP installed on a 5gb partition

Which would load faster?

Your correct but I would suggest a 20 to 30GB partition for the OS. Other advantages for partition are defragging only fragmented partitions saves time. Your more likly to keep your OS defragmented in a partitioned HD as it take far less time to defrag 30GB over 320. Heres some more detailed information on the subject and ways to prove to yourself the best partition layout for your HD.
http://partition.radified.com/partitioning_2.htm
October 3, 2006 4:44:46 PM

Thanks that link help out alot :D 
October 3, 2006 10:38:36 PM

The transfer rate of a hard drive is at its maximum at the begining of the drive and steadly drops to its lowest point at the end.

My partitioning the first 10-30GB and using if for your OS and applications you will recieve a nice boost in average tranfer rates.

If you are worried about reducing access times your best bet would be to defragment your drive so that files can be read off of sequential sectors.

Even then a hard drive has to be badly fragemented before you will actually notice a difference.
!