2 Hard Drives...

ARS · Post by **ARS** » Wed Dec 20, 2000 11:02 pm

Having two hard drives slow your system down at all? And if I put both hard drives in and take everything and move it to the 20gb i am gettin and then take out the smaller one (5.8gb) Can I do this? Or would that be a waste of time?

-Knine- · Post by **-Knine-** » Wed Dec 20, 2000 11:31 pm

I have 4 hard drives the OS on one Program files on another and mp3's on the rest and haven't seen any degridation in performance as long as i keep the drives defraged. you can if you want copy every thing from the 5 gig and move it to the 20 and pull the old hard drive if you so wish or have 25gig total space if your useing win2k you can span both drives and in essance have 1 25 gig hard drive.

smaier69 · Post by **smaier69** » Wed Dec 20, 2000 11:37 pm

you can do whatever you wish with a second drive in your scenario. if you can put the second drive on your second IDE channel as the master, that would be a little faster than a single channel master/slave config. you can have either set up as your primary/boot drive, and use the other as a data or backup drive.

as for your second question... you can copy over everything to the second drive and then use it as the boot drive, but i would not suggest this. i would just do a fresh install of your o/s and apps. it will definitely be worth the effort. there's something to be said about knowing ex-actly where your system stands in terms of cleanliness. i do a ritualistic format/install at least every 4 months, whether things are perfect or not.

------------------
"Those who fail to recognize the past are condemned to relive it"

-Jim Jones

robbo486 · Post by **robbo486** » Thu Dec 21, 2000 4:52 am

I'd definitly leave the 5.8Gb in there! use it for Mp3s and backup!! don't have to worry about formatting then! that's what I do :-)

bug · Post by **bug** » Thu Dec 21, 2000 5:33 am

I have found that mixing a fast and slow HD on the same IDE channel tends to make the fast HD perform kinda slow.....

keeper · Post by **keeper** » Thu Dec 21, 2000 8:10 am

ARS; It wouldn't be a waste of time...It would be a waste of Hard Drive. Any reason to toss the 5.8?? Thats a lot of space.

Check the RPMs on both your HDDs. My guess is the 20 gig is a little slower. Consider the quality and age of your 5.8, if is OK then do a 'Scandisk /surface' and 'Scandisk /all' to see if you have any bad sectors.

If it has a few bad sectors, not to worry, they will be set aside and not used.

If your 5.8 is making any odd noises, toss it.

I use my smaller [older] HDD as primary and big one as slave. Have big slave partitioned to store various progs. 2 Gig partitions.

I prefer Master/Slave, but 2 channel is good.
Haven't done a 'format' since I built the thing in 1997 as scandisks checked-out ok.
Not to say that format is a bad idea, you have to weigh that one.

After 'scandisk /surface' and 'scandisk /all' [ on BOTH HDDs ] Do fresh install, not transfer, of OS & progs you want to keep backed-up on extra drive.

Most important. Make BOTH drives bootable.

I would suggest you post the Brand names, Specs, RPMs, etc. of your HDDs to get better advice as well as OS & PC data.

Only then can you get best info.

Otherwise, you will get Lame, Generic, Basic, Undetailed feedback like THIS.

onetrueday · Post by **onetrueday** » Fri Dec 22, 2000 6:45 am

I highly doubt the 20 gig is slower. I'm sure they're both 5400 rpm so having them both on the same channel will do you no harm. The 20 gig also probably has a larger cache, so it will be faster. I would also strong suggest partitioning the 20 gig, so if you do choose to reinstall windows... it'll be easier. Good luck!.
\make the 20 the master

keeper · Post by **keeper** » Fri Dec 22, 2000 8:12 am

I would use 20GB HDD as main drive if it is 'Newer'. I use smaller HDD as primary because it is Newer. Recently lost a HDD on PC#3, no warning at all.

The HDD I lost was a Seagate, New in 98. Thought it would last longer, it is going out to the curb this morning.

I lost a lot of pics, letters, addresses, etc. that are not replaceabe. Other PCs have 2 HDDs.

Don't think I would want a single drive system unless it was Well Backed-up.

I think Speed is over-rated, would concentrate on back-up and reliability.

We have all heard 'Back-up. Back-up, Back-up' and 'If it doesn't Crash...Its not a PC'.

Why don't we listen??

onetrueday · Post by **onetrueday** » Fri Dec 22, 2000 10:59 am

You have to remember that they dont make 5.8 gig hard drives anymore, so i'm sure that's it's older. You also have to check what kind of computer yo have. I have a compaq. I've changed almost everything inside of my computer except for the power supply. As a result, when i recently bought a new hd; i ran into some serious voltage problem when i had both hd's in. I didnt have enough wattage. I was lucky and came across that info. I had to remove my old hd. Good luck.

keeper · Post by **keeper** » Fri Dec 22, 2000 11:13 am

Good info. My Compaq is my next job. Thanks for the warning on voltage. Will now know to do my homework first.

iceman3233 · Post by **iceman3233** » Sat Dec 23, 2000 12:44 am

If you do a lotta games and stuff I would do a format. I always do formats and see a large improvement....

mrst3v3n · Post by **mrst3v3n** » Thu Dec 28, 2000 4:05 pm

My best Advice is to:
Keep your 5 gig in as Primary.
Clean off everything but Windows
Partition 2nd HD into two or three
Install all the Programs on the other partitions and remember to Defrag weekly.
I just bought a 40 Gig, 7200 RPM HD and I have a 20 Gig 5400 RPM HD as my Primary. I have not seen any preformance Hits since.

If you want to make $ .70 an hour for being online goto www.uniquesurf.com and if your nice tell them that Mrst3v3n referred you.
Thanks

keeper · Post by **keeper** » Fri Dec 29, 2000 7:29 am

mrst3v3n; THIS SITE IS NOT FOR SPAMMING.

EvilAngel · Post by **EvilAngel** » Fri Dec 29, 2000 7:48 pm

Originally posted by bug:
I have found that mixing a fast and slow HD on the same IDE channel tends to make the fast HD perform kinda slow.....

I heard that your system will only go as fast as thge slowest drive wether it's master/master or master/slave. I dunno

------------------
This is the most clever signature ever....ooohhh....aahhh.oooooo

onetrueday · Post by **onetrueday** » Sun Dec 31, 2000 4:01 am

because of the voltage problem, I was only able to keep the two drives on my computer for a short time. The whole idea though that the slowest drive determines speed was not true in my case at least. My seagate 8 gig usually benched at 24megs/s before I installed my maxtor. I benched it after I installed my maxtor and the seagate jumped to 31, while the maxtor was running at 32. It is common wisdom to believe the slower drive has the last work, but I dont believe it. Just keep them on the same channel. Also, I did see a speed increase when I went to 80pin ribbon, even though my board doesnt fully support the two way.

cy88 · Post by **cy88** » Sun Dec 31, 2000 3:43 pm

I suggest u set ur 5.8GB one as ur master and ur 20GB one as ur slave.
Do a normal/surface scandisk on ur old one (5.8), then format it, reinstall Windows.
Put all the system related stuff onto ur 5.8(assume it's C

, then put all ur MP3s or whatever on ur other one. Do defragment once in a while....that's what i did, i have a 4GB and a 15GB and it's running well now

.........
CHris

Jon · Post by **Jon** » Sun Dec 31, 2000 6:00 pm

So whats the conclusion? Does having 2 hard drives on the same IDE channel hinder performance? Will the fastest hard drive only perform as fast as the slowest drive?

glc1 · Post by **glc1** » Sun Dec 31, 2000 9:54 pm

<font face="Verdana, Arial" size="2">Originally posted by Jon:
Does having 2 hard drives on the same IDE channel hinder performance? </font>

Yes, if both hard drives are being accessed at the same time.

<font face="Verdana, Arial" size="2">Originally posted by Jon:
Will the fastest hard drive only perform as fast as the slowest drive?</font>

If you have an ATA100 and ATA66 drive on the same channel, the 100 drive will be forced to run at 66.

[This message has been edited by glc1 (edited 12-31-2000).]