New Win7-SSD-PC-installation Data-HDD-installation right from the beginning?
Should i attach 2TB-data-HDD right at the beginning of my new 8 gb win7-64-SSD-installation?
Will a bit later update to 16gb.
Should i leave swapfile on systemdrive or-since i will work with 3dstereovideo-and large panorama-files- move that onto a seperate SSD? but i have only one slow- sata-slot free. second speedy slot reserved for esata-external backup-drive. and i have only one pc-express for videocard. no chance to add a sata-card.
I have only the one hdd/SSD hooked up while doing a install. After I am happy with things, THEN hook up additional drives.
Due to your limited space you may be forced to keep the swap on your primary drive. I edit and encode video with my files stored on my D drive and my OS and Swap on C. It works well for me as the C drive is SD and D is mechanical.
I agree it is easiest to set up windows with a single drive and then add volumes after setup. It makes it easy to mange volume letters and mouth points without accidentally selecting the wrong volume. For example I have one 240GB SSD and two 2TB drives. I can not tell the 2TB apart until after setup when I can see their contents.
my ASROCK Alive Dual eSata2 has limits:
2x SATA2(3gb/sec) one of them for esata2(external drive)
2x SATA (1.5 gb/sec) both pair have raid 0, 1 and JBOD(dont know what this is)
And i have a new idea-Raid:
given up esata2 -slot in favour of 2x 240 gb SSD-Raid?
of using slow SATA alltogether? and then using one quick slot for data-hdd and esata2 like before.
I do not have experience with RAID on a desktop PC. If you use RAID 0 you should increase performance since you are accessing to drives in parallel, I just do not know how much.
JBOD stands for "just a bunch of disks" and all it does is make multiple hard drives look like a single device to the software but it provides none of the raid benefits. Raid 0 would be better in my opinion due to stripeing (performance boost). Raid 1 would limit your space to 1/2 and it looks like you want more space. I gave up on eSata and use USB external drives.
Last edited by rraehal; 06-16-2016 at 09:28 AM.
Reason: Tablet auto correct
I still maintain the SSD is so much faster you will not need raid.
Haviving said that, so reading for you from 2013.
I will keep it simple. always helped. but will leave the raid-idea open-also for that board. for next installation.
yes better 512 instead of 2x 256 raid.
the Samsung 840 Pro 512 GB performs about the same as the two 256 GB SSDs in RAID 0. The same is true for the single 256 GB SSD and two striped 128 GB SSDs
There are of course exceptions. SATA 6Gb/s currently limits us to 500+ MB/s reads and sub-500 MB/s writes. Sometimes, that's just not enough. Just take those raw AVI captures mentioned earlier as an example. We use four Crucial m4s in RAID 0 to make sure we aren't dropping any frames. In a case like that, RAID 0 is a must-have, and the fact that only captured video resides on the array means that a failure would be a fairly superficial loss (except the cost of the drive). If you have an application like that, well, then you already know what you need, and you know that a large, single drive isn't going to get the job done.
I dont understand:
and the fact that only captured video resides on the array means that a failure would be a fairly superficial loss (except the cost of the drive)
Last edited by europanorama; 06-17-2016 at 12:22 PM.
Understandable when one has usb 3.0! I have not. esata over usb 2.0
Originally Posted by rraehal