hard disk help ?

Question

which option is better in hard disk for performance.
single hard disk with large capaity or two hard disk first is for operating system and second is for data only.

Answer 1

i suggest you to go with 250 GB single hard disk and make two partition in it. one for OS and second for data. this will cost u down also for the cost of two HDD.

Answer 2

One point to note is the use of Virtual Drive by Windows XP, which uses empty hard drive space to act as a data cache. This is a major reason why PCs get slower when hard drives get full.

With a single large hard drive, you can partition it into 2 or more logical drives. However, if the hard drive fail, you lose everything on it. Whether with 1 or 2 hard drives, what is important is the data, not Windows or programs that can be re-installed.

For performance, I think that separate drives for Windows and data would be best. This can also be done with a single large hard drive with 2 partitions or getting 2 hard drives.

In this way, Windows will have consistent empty space for Virtual Drive because data (that keeps getting more and more) is stored elsewhere. Furthermore, defragmentation of files will be easier and faster.

Answer 3

The Hard Disk is the slowest part of the computer. For best performance get one with at least a speed of 7200rpm ang a large cache memory, at least 16MB. if you have the cash, look in to the 10,000rpm drives.

Also, the SATA interface is much faster than traditional IDE drive interface.

Having a second smaller drive for only the operating system could help, but it is usually used as a recovery image to be ghosted onto the main larger drive in case of a crash. As a recovery partition.

For data protection and speed, a raid configuration can also be useful, as you can have the same image on both drives read and written to simultaniously (and since they are identical, data proitection as well if one fails).

Answer 4

OMG - do NOT listen to Wildcat747 -- does not have a clue what he is talking about.

But to answer you question -- it is better to have two disks. And just like you said; a dedicated disk for your operating system, and one for all your files. (actually separate physical disk, not just another partition on the same disk -- I think thats what your talking about but just want to make sure).

Answer 5

If you have a 100 gig drive and the computer has to earch thru the drive for the info if it has to search all 100 gigs it takes it longer to find, if you split it into 2 50 gig drives it cuts the search time in half comepared to 100 gig, and if its 4 25 gig drives then it's faster, also wisdom has it if you lose one partition you don't lose all your information, but there are dwarbacks as well.

Answer 6

I prefer to have 2 separate partitions in my computer, one for windows, and the other part for data. The rationale is that if your window is corrupted and you need to reinstall, you will only have to reformat the partition of the window software, and all your data files would not be affected at all.

Answer 7

Sounds to me like you could benefit by grabbing one of those external cases that allow you to put a hard drive in and hook it up to your USB port for storing data-------you would NEVER run out of storage since you would simply obtain as many hard drives as you would need.--this is a low cost solution that works really well.

Answer 8

Raid 5/0
with hot swap high RPM SCSI drives it gets costly...

Raid 0 is fastest but 3 times more likely to fail...

Answer 9

Go Multiple... if you put to much stress on one drive it will drag in preformance... trust me i have 5 HDs hooked to my laptop