[Lunatique]

I'm about to upgrade my PC from a P4 1.5, 512 MB RAM, to a P4 2.8, 2 GB RAM. I'll also be adding/replacing drives, so I'll end up with two 40 GB IDE(i'll probably turn them into portable external drives), one 80GB IDE(for working files probably), two 200GB IDE(one for archive, the other backing the same stuff up), and one 80GB SATA (probably for the OS, since it's the fastest drive in the bunch). And now I have some questions:

1)I've read that with today's drives/OS, it's no longer necessary to partition your drives. True? Some even say that partioning a drive only makes the head move a lot more from one partition to another, thus decreasing your drive's lifespan. True?

2)Some say having your data files on a seperate drive from the OS drive increases the speed/performance. I don't see how that's true when everything you do on the computer is loaded into the RAM anyway, and the hard drives are only used when you run out of RAM and use swap files. So, someone explain this? (and if your computer starts using swap files, you're screwed anyway, regardless if the paging files are on the OS drive or a seperate one?)

3)Some say that having certain apps on a seperate drive from your OS drive increases performance. For example, if you installed Gigasampler or Cubase SX on a seperate drive. Any truth in this? Is this true for PS or Painter?

[Lionel]

1) As far as I know windows 2000 and XP will only suport a Max partition size of 120 GB out of the box (Not that I own a hard disk that large so this is not first hand experiance). There is a patch to fix this in the latest service pack for XP and probably for 2000. I am not sure but I suspect you may have to play around with partitions when you install on those 200 Gig disks. If you install windows on the 80 Gig drive upgrade windows and then add the 200 Gig hard disk you will probably get away with it.

The idea that having different partitions wears out your hard disk quicker sounds like rubish to me after all it should be pointed out that every file is in a different place on the hard disk anyway so the head of the hard disk will have to move between files anyway.

2) Having your data on separate drive will speed up hard disk access. Obviously if all your image fits is loaded into memory then this will be of no use to you. If you are using photoshop on very large files with lots of layers etc then it is quite possible that it will use its scrach disk (photoshop kinda does its own paging) due to lack of memory. If you find photoshop using its scratch disk then having this file on a seprate disk from your images and OS will help.

3) Having apps on different drives is going to make very little difference as most of the app is going to be held in memory anyway. It will make disk access for the app faster so if the app stores big tempory files in its program directory it will speed things up. I don't think either painter or photoshop do that so in your case I would stick all you apps on your OS drive.

Three things to bear in mind when setting up hard disks.

1) Hard disk can only send so much data at once so if you are doing several disk intensive things at once try to put each file on a different drive. You can also use something called RAID 0 which puts little bits of a file on different hard disk so when you get a large chunck of the file you can get it of two hard disks at once when means you get double the data rate.

2) Hard disks like to access continuous chunks so if you have a fragmented file or programs getting data from two different places on the drive at once the head of the drive will spend a lot of its time going between the two places on the drive and not on reading data.

3) It used to be the case (and I think it is still the case but just to be unhelpful I vagually rember telling me I was wrong) that two IDE (NOT SCSI OR SATA) hard disks plugged into the same cable will interfear with each other and slow each other down. So if you have two IDE devices that you know are going to accesed a lot at the same time put them on different cables.

[Lunatique]

Thanks for helping!

I have more questions:

1)I'm a bit confused about the whole Windows page file and Photoshop scratch file thing. So, should I put Window's Page Files on a harddrive seperate from the the one the OS is on(disable it on the drive)? (I'm assuming having it on the same drive would make the drive work harder and seeking a lot more?) I know that Photoshop scratch disc should never be set to the same harddrive as the OS, but is it ok to set it on the same drive as the one that contains your working PSD files(but on an exclusive partition so that it doesn't fragment my PSD files as I work on them). If I have 2 GB of RAM, how much space should I make the PS scratch disc partition?

2) I also read that you should make a partition just for Windows' Page Files. So, I'll be having 2 GB of RAM--what size should I set the Page File partition to?

[Tomasis]

never make some partitions.. just configure hdd for different purposes..

more harddrives spinning at the same time, then better

take 74gb WD raptor 10 000rpm. this is enough fast comparing with usual raid0 setup which is quite unstable if youre doing "critical" works.

one thing you need to do: make windows pagefile and phtsp pagefile separate . at different drives.. another things dont matter much..

[Lionel]

1) Leave the swap file on the same drive as the oporating system doesn't tend do any heavy disk access to its filesystem other than too its page file. The benifits from having you page file on a different drive to your OS should be very margional because of this I am afraid that I don't know much about photoshop scratch files I suspect the size you use depends on the size of images you will be working on. I really don't know if having you scratch file and PSDs on the same diak is going to decrease performance much or not. It depends if photoshop needs to write to both at the same time or not.

2) Rember that page files are just normal files so do not need to be on their own partition they just live somewhere on your file system like any other file. I have no idea what size you should make your swap file so I would go with whatever windows recommends. If it is too small windows will always make the file bigger automatically.

It is only worth putting files on different disks if you are doing heavy disk access to both files at the same time. Do what Tomasis says and make sure the swap file is on a different drive to your page file and you should be fine.

You should always bear in mind that with most of these optomisations you will only speed things up such a very little you will probably not notice the difference so don't wast your time trying to get two fancy a set up as it isn't worth the effort.

[Pat]

I think Windows is going to want to match your RAM total for the swap file --and one of the worst performance hits you'll be taking on a system like that is when Windows has to dynamically add to the swap. Sadly, everything doesn't get loaded into RAM...even on my 1 gig Win2K box Windows is swapping out at odd times for no apparent reason. So, your initial instinct to put the OS on the fastest drive is probably the correct one.

Putting Photoshop or Painter's partition on another physical device will increase performance. Putting it on the same device as the OS (but in a partition) will just help keep that disk defragged. Storing PSD files on a dedicated Photoshop scratch disk will impact seek speeds and sustained write speeds, possibly hurting performance. Win2K (and XP too, afaik) create folders at random areas on the harddrive, which WILL fragment your drive. Under Win2K it is difficult to defrag these folders to create large, uninterrupted spaces on your your drives. Under XP it is easier.

Hardware-wise, your mileage is going to vary depending on your drive controller and the chip. They're not all made equally, so if HD performance is really important to a little homework. I've always favored a 2 drive system. But more doesn't necessarily mean faster if they're all running off a controller that shares it's bandwidth. Mixing SATA and IDE and ATAPI drives can impact performance, even though they're supposed to be separate busses, because the IDE drive is being treated as an emulated SATA drive. In my case, I suspect an emulated IDE 40 gig drive is leeching performance from my ATAPI devices.

If you haven't already purchased the drives, I'd go all SATA. I'd leave the 2 40 gig drives out. I'd RAID 1 duplex the 200gig drives so they're mirrored and use the 80 as a dedicated scratch. Lastly, with such a large number of drives, plan on getting a beefy power supply to support them all.

-Pat

[lalPOOO]

"If you haven't already purchased the drives, I'd go all SATA. I'd leave the 2 40 gig drives out. I'd RAID 1 duplex the 200gig drives so they're mirrored and use the 80 as a dedicated scratch. Lastly, with such a large number of drives, plan on getting a beefy power supply to support them all. "

I'd deffinitly go this route over your other one. If the comptuer was for me personally, I might choose a slightly different setup using one of the new 74gb raptor drives for photoshops swap file, and games, and the os. Thats deffinilty not the setup for everyone though, not to mention that it kind of breaks the bank. (so does 2gb of ram though )

You might want to hold on the 2.8c as the newer line of processors (prescott) is supposed to come out Feb 2, meaning you'll probably be able to get your hands on one of them shortly afterward. There has been a lot of talk about them being slower and "SO MUCH HOTTER OMG!" then the current line, but thats a load of shit. Of course the 2.8c would still be a good choice. Which motherboard are you looking at?

I've got a [email protected] with 1 gb of ram and this thing really zooms, you'll deffinitly enjoy your new computer

edit: you guys probably shouldn't bother sending any mail to [email protected]

[B0b]

i recently built an AMD MP2600 system for my colegue and that kicks ass! �700 for 2xcpu, mobo, thermaltake case, and 1.5GB ECC RAM, has onboard RAID as well..

as far as Scratch and Partitions go:

i have 2 80GB HDD in RAID 0 running 2K SP4 , i have a 8GB Partition for the OS and little apps (fastest part of the drive)- 2GB pagefile running on this. i then have a 10GB Scratch for photoshop (2nd fastest point on the drive), then i have my Apps on a 12GB, then i have all the web work i do on a 4GB partition, all my completed movies (dv) are on a 10Gb ready for burning to DVD etc. then i have a 100GB partition for the RAW footage and digital pictures i take. then i have my work on a 9GB and finally i have a 4GB partition for usefull stuff waiting to be written onto CD/DVD..

For Disk performance RAID 0 is the way to go.. but u need to make sure ur stuff is backed up on a regular basis, i haven't had my drives fail yet.. but u can never tell..

if u gonna run work and games together, have a seperate partition for the games..

fragmented files under 2k and xp are a pain in the butt, but with regular care this shouldn't be to much of a problem SATA atm doesn't give u that much performance increase over a good ATA drive.. the raptor is indeed a very fast drive, but for the money vs speed (couple of MB/sec faster) isn't that much of an asset. for best drive speed go SCSI

[Lunatique]

Ok, I got the parts today, but goddammit the monitor won't work. The signal light just blinks yellow(like it's got nothing to sync to). I've had this problem in the past when dust got into the AGP slot(blew it out and everthing was fine again), or when the video card died, but AFAIK my video card is fine, unless I broke it somehow during installation.

I can't take some of you guys's advice because some of the parts you tell me not to get are actually leftovers from the previous machine. I've modified my strategy a bit, and here's the new tentative setup(I say tentative because I couldn't get the f*ing monitor to sync, so I couldn't install or format jackshit.).

(the following parts are all now in my studio--either purchased this afternoon, or leftovers from the old machine)

Main Workstation:

P4 2.8(I never buy the latest--it's just a stupid waste of money. Good rule of thumb is to always guy one generation lower than the cutting edge).

2Gb Corsair DDR RAM

ASUS P800 MOBO

Audiotrak Prodigy 7.1(this was a killer discovery while researching soundcards. It actually has GSIF driver for gigasampler--which is unheard of in a non-pro card).

ATX I-CUTE 450 Watt 2 fan Chasis (I can't believe they gave me one with red, green, and blue lights. I wonder if they'll let me exchange it.)

AVR(automatic voltage regulator)

Philips 109B43 19" CRT monitor(placed a downpayment on it--they were out of stock. I wanted a Samsung SyncMaster 957mb as my first choice, but the whole shipment is still in Korea, and no one knows when they will become public in Malaysia. I thought long and hard about flat panel LCD's, but after extensive research, they either don't have enough resolution, or the pixel refresh rate is too low, or too high, if I meant by millisecond.)

80GB Maxtor SATA (I'm going to do 28GB partition for Win XP and Programs, 2GB partition for windows page files, and 50GB partition for storage.)

80GB ATA (6GB partition for photoshop scratch disc, the rest partitioned for working files, sound files for samplers..etc)

200GB Western Digital SATA (Everything I own will be archived on this big boy--no partitions, unless I'm forced to).

Surfing machine:

P4 1.5

512 RAM

any generic MOBO that I can find to replace the old one that broke(which prompted this whole upgrade in the first place).

any crappy video card that'll work.

40GB Maxtor (Windows, apps)

40GB Seagate Baracuda (Downloads)

200GB Wesern Digital Caviar (Backup of everything I own--basically, it'll be disconnect at all times, until I want to do a periodic backup of the 200GB SATA in the main workstation. No reason to have it spinning all day long if it's not doing anything.)

I bought a KVM Switch so I can go back and forth between the two machines and use only one set of keyboard/mouse/monitor.

I also got a switch hub so that I can network the two machines and also have both be able to access internet.

So, is this a good setup?

[Tomasis]

its good so far, Lunatique..

Bob, check for storagereview .. WD raptor is next fastest drive after 15k Maxtor Atlas SCSI.. raptor crushes all SCSI 10k and some 15k in all possible tests without server app. it will be interesting when they are able to test some card which supports TCQ.

[B0b]

ok trouble shooting non-working pc after building for the first time..

remove all pci + ide devices (not agp video)
turn on, does the pc boot so u can see bios post?
if u still can't see bios post (monitor doesn't turn on) remove all RAM
turn on, do u get warning beeps? if so, place 1 stick in and boot, do u see post? if not switch RAM, see post? continue building PC 1 step at a time.. RMA duff RAM

hope this helps some bit difficult doing this on a MB without seeing the PC..

[B0b]

tomasis , i never go by benchmarks, they don't do anything for real world performance.. but i must say it looks good on paper

[wigin]

Hey Luna,

this is plouffe.

anyways not to barge into your thread. But i didnt see the point of starting a new thread.

I just BOught a NEw computer like 2 days ago. Its sweet. heres my specs

-19 inch LCD samsung syncmaster 191t ( dual monitor setup with a 17 inch KDS CTR)
-Amd 64bit 3200 +
- 1 gig ddr ram pc3200 400mhz
- 120 gig hd (20 gig part for win xp and programs , 50 gigs for photoshop and 50 gigs for everything else ie: junk , downloads ect..)
-Msi 5600XT geforce 4 128 mb
-Msi mother board with sound and ethernet onboard

Anyways im really happy with it so far . i havent got around to using it much. It does work faster then the old one. BUt i download that 3dmark benchmark test program. YOu know to check how your computer runs and if it runs 3d games well. And i was REALLY REALLY REALLY suprised my computer sucked .. it scored SOOOOO bad... like 1500 lol. i went on the site and some popele were scoring like over 9000 ,..its crazy. their setups were pretty much the same as mine some poeple had less ram and they even scored better. the only difference was the vid card they had which was a ati 9800 xt. I dont know about you but i seriously doubt a vid card would make that much score difference. Which brings me to my next point i tested my old computer ( amd 1800 , 64 mb geforce 2 , 1 gig of ram) and i think it scored better then my new system.. I dotn know how accurate these benchmark tests are but im pretty pissed off and worried my computer sucks now 0_o. It ran the test pretty bad some of the tests it was running at like 8 fps making the graphics slow and chopy.

Kinda worried now 0_O...
_________________
http://plouffe.f2o.org

[lalPOOO]

The 3dmark benchmarks are at least 70% based on videocard speed/type. The reason you scored a lot lower is probably because you didn't have your settings optimizied. I do some 3dmark benching myself actually, albiet not with a 9800xt because thats just too damn much money. I actually hold the "world record" for geforce2 mx400 cards in 3dmark03 and I'm near the top in 3dmark2k1, I just need some more time to mess around. The highest scores are gotten by EXTREME cooling on both the graphics cards and cpu. Think -80 on the cpu and videocard .
That rig should be really fast though, so just forget what 3dmark is saying to you If you feel your 3dmarks are important to you, pm me and I can give you a hand.
Also, are you sure you tested your old system with the same version of 3dmark? theres 3dmark03 and 2k1 and they differ by a lot score wise.

B0b, your partitions literally crush my mind. (I mean that in a good way) I disagree with your opinion on benchmarks, but I think I've spewed enough techno jargon for the day.

[Tomasis]

Bob, you can check forums too.. the 36gb raptor users notice quite obvious improvement with the newer 74gb why dont believe if the tests are serious?

[lalPOOO]

I think what hes trying to say is that differences in benchmarks don't always mean you'll see a difference in real life. You are right though, the 74gb raptors are a fair amount faster then the 36gb ones.

[Lunatique]

I've got my main workstation setup now. I ended up doing this:

80 GB SATA (28GB= Windows/apps, Rest=storage+Page File)

80GB ATA (Working files for art and music, Page File)

200GB SATA (4GB=Photoshop scratch, Rest=Archive of everything I own, no Page file.)

Now I'm looking for an older motherboard to finish building my Surf box.

I'm looking for a motherboard that fits the following spec:

ATX, socket 423 (P4 1.5), SDRAM. The rest is not that important.

Where is a good place to order one from? I tried ebay, but I'm having problems with using paypal for some reason.

I'm looking for a cheap video card too for the Surf box.

[B0b]

i've just been given a 1.4 P4 with mobo and 256MB RAM..

[Gort]

Rob:

I'd look for something from the GeForce family--2 or 4 (MX). They're typically very, very cheap ($20 US), although I haven't looked for any of recent. You could always try Pricewatch.com.
_________________
- Tom Carter

"You can't stop the waves but you can learn to surf" - Jack Kornfield

[The Real Mark]

[Riven]

Wigin,

Sounds like a great setup, but just be careful when using an LCD. Colours tend to be largely off in relation to print colours if you are doing and kind of painting/graphics or anything that will end of in print (but of course you would be right, otherwise why would you frequent this forum?). CRTs still tend to be the most accurate.

[B0b]

cheap TFT's will give you false colour, but there are quite a few decent TFT's if your willing to spend the money.. a colour eye will also help with calibration ..

[bRyaN2003]

You guys have been seriously, indirectly helping me out...
Thanks...

Quick question

I have 1 80gig HD(it's really around 76 tho) in my system(plan on getting another sometime in the near future)

How should i partition it?
Right now i have it partitioned at
20gigs- WinXP+Basic Apps(chat clients, AOL, etc)
15-Programs(Photoshop, Painter, StudioMX,etc)
10-Games
14-Saving work files
14-which i don't know what to do with...

And what is a page fiel used for? Same question for Scratch disk?
And should i set them up?