I've been running 3 drives in my main machine: one for the OS, one for Program Files, and one for storage. I'll be replacing my primary and wondering if it's worth it keeping installs on a secondary drive.
I just ordered a Caviar Black 750Gb SATA-3 64MB for my OS. How much, if any, performance increase would I see if I keep my installs on a separate drive?
I don't have the specs on the 2nd drive handy, I think it's a Raptor from a few years back.
I don't think there would be much of a performance difference, but I like to keep my programs on the same drive as the OS so that I can image the OS partition along with programs. This allows me to restore the entire OS without having to reinstall my programs.
I do however try to keep my data files on a seperate storage drive and back them up independently of the OS drive.
Minsky, if you are running your HDD on a SATA 3.0 GBps and are shifting to a SATA 6.0 GBps, you will probably see no significant change. HDDs cannot use the bandwidth of 6.0 GBps, only SSDs can use it at this point in time.
Another matter is the difference between the WD Cavair Black and the Raptor. The WD is a 7200 rpm drive, and with its 64 MB cache probably will outperform the Raptor by a noticable margin. However, wether it is worthwhile to keep the Raptor for storage/backup depends on its condition (dump it if it is failing) and its capacity. It may suit as a backup HDD.