Jump to content


 


Register a free account to unlock additional features at BleepingComputer.com
Welcome to BleepingComputer, a free community where people like yourself come together to discuss and learn how to use their computers. Using the site is easy and fun. As a guest, you can browse and view the various discussions in the forums, but can not create a new topic or reply to an existing one unless you are logged in. Other benefits of registering an account are subscribing to topics and forums, creating a blog, and having no ads shown anywhere on the site.


Click here to Register a free account now! or read our Welcome Guide to learn how to use this site.

Photo

To Partition or Not XP HD


  • Please log in to reply
7 replies to this topic

#1 jtcdds

jtcdds

  • Members
  • 3 posts
  • OFFLINE
  •  
  • Local time:11:54 PM

Posted 05 December 2008 - 03:48 AM

I'm getting a new laptop with XP Home (SP2) installed on a 320 GB HD. I was all set to partition the hard drive until I came across a website that recommended NOT to do so because XP runs more efficiently on one large drive. Most sites I came across extolled the benefits of partitioning and this one was the only one that recommended otherwise. Does XP really run better on one large HD?

BC AdBot (Login to Remove)

 


#2 dc3

dc3

    Bleeping Treehugger


  • Members
  • 30,276 posts
  • OFFLINE
  •  
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Sierra Foothills of Northern Ca.
  • Local time:12:54 AM

Posted 05 December 2008 - 04:07 AM

Hi jtcdds, and welcome to BleepingComputer.

The size of the hdd shouldn't make any difference to the performance of XP, the only problem that I could see would be if the hdd was too full which will reduce the swap space which could slow the hdd. There actually is an advantage in having two partitions rather than just one, with the operating system installed on a separate partition exclusively for that purpose you can reformat the partition and reinstall the operating system without effecting the applications and files that are on the other partition. I have a 200GB hdd that I set up with two partitions, 30GB for XP, and the remainder for my files and applications.

Family and loved ones will always be a priority in my daily life.  You never know when one will leave you.

 

 

 

 


#3 boilerman

boilerman

  • Members
  • 13 posts
  • OFFLINE
  •  
  • Local time:03:54 AM

Posted 05 December 2008 - 06:10 AM

If you use imaging as backup to your operating system it is desirable to keep the C drive as small as possible to reduce or eleminate the spanning requirement if backing up to CD/DVD. A partition for just the operating system with MyDocuments, Programs, Misc data and Backups on separate partitions will result in an operating system image that may fit on one DVD which will result in a more reliable image.

The Programs partition should be backed up at the same time as the operating system is imaged.

Edited by boilerman, 05 December 2008 - 06:16 AM.


#4 speedbird76

speedbird76

  • Members
  • 27 posts
  • OFFLINE
  •  
  • Local time:03:54 PM

Posted 05 December 2008 - 07:56 AM

I used to be a partition maniac, but I find that except in certain circumstances, and usually only when you have more than one physical drive, partitioning does not help much. I run 4 drives on my desktop now, and none are paritioned except one (only for the page file).

I have a 500GB WD Scorpio drive in my laptop, and that's not paritioned either. Works perfectly.

My suggestion is to leave it alone and use the drive as is. You can set the pagefile to be static by specifying the same maximum and minimum size so that it never changes. Use a reasonable size like 4GB.

#5 hamluis

hamluis

    Moderator


  • Moderator
  • 55,252 posts
  • OFFLINE
  •  
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Killeen, TX
  • Local time:02:54 AM

Posted 05 December 2008 - 11:14 AM

Well (my two cents)...it's foolish, IMO, to place all eggs in one basket...and it's inefficient for certain tasks. There was a time when some of us had few options other than to do that or use (horror of horror) ZIP drives, but those days are over.

If you backup the system routinely...you need another partition or some other media to store the backup on.

Running chkdsk and defrag on a very large drive...when you really only want to do so on the Windows files...can get irritating and time-consuming.

As dc3 pointed out, it's probably better to reduce the implications of disk failure or problems...to something less than the entire hard drive.

I put both programs and Windows on the same partition, but no data files. My Windows partition is circa 20GB, which leave plenty of room for pagefile and other Windows functions to operate as planned. With programs, XP updates, and XP...my C: partition still has 14GB of free space today.

I have a ton of hard drives which I use to store data files.

Louis

#6 jtcdds

jtcdds
  • Topic Starter

  • Members
  • 3 posts
  • OFFLINE
  •  
  • Local time:11:54 PM

Posted 05 December 2008 - 12:47 PM

Thanks all for the replies. I personally prefer partitioning as an effective way to manage a large HD. Having the ability to reinstall the OS via imaging without affecting all the other things on the HD makes partitioning worthwhile. With that said, could all you "partitioners" out there comment on my proposed scheme:

c: XP only 25 GB NTFS
d: Programs 30 GB NTFS
e: Data 50 GB NTFS
f: Games 30 GB NTFS
g: Downloads/Drivers 30 GB NTFS
h: Backups 60 GB (image files) NTFS

The rest will be unallocated space to be partitioned and used as needed in the future. Please comment on my partitions (sizes and order); I understand that the HD is faster accessing things near the top or beginning of the HD and slower on items located towards the middle.

I have a few games that run only in Win 98 and was considering installing Win 98 into its own FAT32 partition. If I do, where should this partition be placed. or will it matter? I would make this a 7 GB partition.

#7 hamluis

hamluis

    Moderator


  • Moderator
  • 55,252 posts
  • OFFLINE
  •  
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Killeen, TX
  • Local time:02:54 AM

Posted 05 December 2008 - 01:58 PM

If you are going to give the O/S and updates its own partition, I see no reason to allocate more than 10 MB for that.

If you are going to put programs on a separate partition...size it according to your habits. My programs installed don't total more than 5GB, so if I followed your tentative scheme...I would have a partition for programs of no more than 10GB. 30GB of programs is an awful lot, IMO...too many to have installed at once, since I would be unable to keep most of them active enough to justify the real estate.

Even though I have the space to waste...why would I create an entry in my house that is more than 15 feet high...when I am only 6 feet tall on my best days :thumbsup:?

The only hard drive requiring any breathing room...is the one containing the C: partition.

Louis

#8 boilerman

boilerman

  • Members
  • 13 posts
  • OFFLINE
  •  
  • Local time:03:54 AM

Posted 06 December 2008 - 09:24 AM

I have WXP HE and my C partition is 15GB. Current usage is appx. 7.5GB and rising. I set up my Progams partition with 3.5GB and am using 1.5GB but have no games installed. And no office or specialty programs so my size might be too small for others.




0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users