sata 10k rpm vs ata133 7200rpm
 

ok, i just bought a 7200 rpm 8mb cache ata133 drive. my mobo will have that
and sata. i bought the WD sata 150 10k rpm 8mb cache 37gb drive. it will be
faster then the maxtor ata133 drive. what should i do ? this is what my pc
will be used for.
gaming
newsbin pro and rar and par stuff.
i want the most important apps on sata 10,000 rpm drive cus it's faster. so
i would think that i would put the newsbin pro on the 10k rpm drive as well
as its downloads. so i could un rar and use par and par2 on them. and also
some dvd ripping so dvd2one would go on it as well i would think. now, i
wanna put win xp on sata cus it'll boot faster, reboot faster and well, the
OS might be slightly faster. I'd use the 120gb maxtor ata133 drive for
storage. does this make sense or should i do it differently? cus what
happens i mean is i might download a lot with newsbin and need more then
37gb. i also would put games on the 10k rpm drive for faster load times.
someone also mentioned putting newsbin and the page file on the sata drive
and install the OS on the ata drive. not sata. however im not sure .

Re: sata 10k rpm vs ata133 7200rpm
 

"Diehard" <Diehard@movies.com> wrote in
news:G43Kb.24258$IM3.10009@newsread3.news.atl.eart hlink.net:

> storage. does this make sense or should i do it differently? cus what
> happens i mean is i might download a lot with newsbin and need more
> then 37gb. i also would put games on the 10k rpm drive for faster load
> times. someone also mentioned putting newsbin and the page file on the
> sata drive and install the OS on the ata drive. not sata. however im
> not sure .
>

I wouldn't put the OS on the SATA drive for two reasons:
A) You will need to install the drivers during the OS installation, and
needing drivers to access the boot drive can make some things a bitch
B) You will probably not notice that big a difference in things like the
boot up times of Windows comparing those two drives. I would put Windows
and stuff like NewsBin pro and your unrar tools on the ATA drive, and put
the data those tools work with (ripped DVDs, etc) on the faster drive.
Again, it is easier to open a 5 MB .exe file from a slower drive and then
load 2 GB of data from the faster one, than to load the 5 MB .exe from the
faster drive and wait while the slower drive reads the huge heap of data.

--
AIM: FrznFoodClerk
email: de_on-lag@co_cast.net (_ = m)
website: under construction
Need a technician in the south Jersey area?
email/IM for rates/services

Re: sata 10k rpm vs ata133 7200rpm
 

DeMoN LaG wrote:
> "Diehard" <Diehard@movies.com> wrote in
> news:G43Kb.24258$IM3.10009@newsread3.news.atl.eart hlink.net:
>
>> storage. does this make sense or should i do it differently? cus what
>> happens i mean is i might download a lot with newsbin and need more
>> then 37gb. i also would put games on the 10k rpm drive for faster
>> load times. someone also mentioned putting newsbin and the page file
>> on the sata drive and install the OS on the ata drive. not sata.
>> however im not sure .
>>
>
> I wouldn't put the OS on the SATA drive for two reasons:
> A) You will need to install the drivers during the OS installation,
> and needing drivers to access the boot drive can make some things a
> bitch
> B) You will probably not notice that big a difference in things like
> the boot up times of Windows comparing those two drives. I would put
> Windows and stuff like NewsBin pro and your unrar tools on the ATA
> drive, and put the data those tools work with (ripped DVDs, etc) on
> the faster drive. Again, it is easier to open a 5 MB .exe file from a
> slower drive and then load 2 GB of data from the faster one, than to
> load the 5 MB .exe from the faster drive and wait while the slower
> drive reads the huge heap of data.

I agree...Data would be the most important thing for speed,
especially stuff for video editing. I would leave all your rpograms on
the slower drive, as once they open, they stay in memory anyways, then
run all my data through the sata drive. This will make ripping,
encoding, saving and opening much faster, which would be something you
do more often than opening a program. Plus having the program and data
on seperate drives would speed things up a little bit as well.

--
Night_Seer

Re: sata 10k rpm vs ata133 7200rpm
 

"Night_Seer" <ecamacho4 at hotmail dot com> wrote in message
news:ivadnSVVm9vPJWSi4p2dnA@speakeasy.net...
> DeMoN LaG wrote:
> > "Diehard" <Diehard@movies.com> wrote in
> > news:G43Kb.24258$IM3.10009@newsread3.news.atl.eart hlink.net:
> >
> >> storage. does this make sense or should i do it differently? cus what
> >> happens i mean is i might download a lot with newsbin and need more
> >> then 37gb. i also would put games on the 10k rpm drive for faster
> >> load times. someone also mentioned putting newsbin and the page file
> >> on the sata drive and install the OS on the ata drive. not sata.
> >> however im not sure .
> >>
> >
> > I wouldn't put the OS on the SATA drive for two reasons:
> > A) You will need to install the drivers during the OS installation,
> > and needing drivers to access the boot drive can make some things a
> > bitch
> > B) You will probably not notice that big a difference in things like
> > the boot up times of Windows comparing those two drives. I would put
> > Windows and stuff like NewsBin pro and your unrar tools on the ATA
> > drive, and put the data those tools work with (ripped DVDs, etc) on
> > the faster drive. Again, it is easier to open a 5 MB .exe file from a
> > slower drive and then load 2 GB of data from the faster one, than to
> > load the 5 MB .exe from the faster drive and wait while the slower
> > drive reads the huge heap of data.
>
> I agree...Data would be the most important thing for speed,
> especially stuff for video editing. I would leave all your rpograms on
> the slower drive, as once they open, they stay in memory anyways, then
> run all my data through the sata drive. This will make ripping,
> encoding, saving and opening much faster, which would be something you
> do more often than opening a program. Plus having the program and data
> on seperate drives would speed things up a little bit as well.
>
> --
> Night_Seer
>
>

So load my OS on the ata and newsbin pro and the data on the sata? I'll just
have to see. and winrar and par and par 2 apps on the ata but the data on
sata? right?

Re: sata 10k rpm vs ata133 7200rpm
 

"Night_Seer" <ecamacho4 at hotmail dot com> wrote in message
news:ivadnSVVm9vPJWSi4p2dnA@speakeasy.net...
> DeMoN LaG wrote:
> > "Diehard" <Diehard@movies.com> wrote in
> > news:G43Kb.24258$IM3.10009@newsread3.news.atl.eart hlink.net:
> >
> >> storage. does this make sense or should i do it differently? cus what
> >> happens i mean is i might download a lot with newsbin and need more
> >> then 37gb. i also would put games on the 10k rpm drive for faster
> >> load times. someone also mentioned putting newsbin and the page file
> >> on the sata drive and install the OS on the ata drive. not sata.
> >> however im not sure .
> >>
> >
> > I wouldn't put the OS on the SATA drive for two reasons:
> > A) You will need to install the drivers during the OS installation,
> > and needing drivers to access the boot drive can make some things a
> > bitch
> > B) You will probably not notice that big a difference in things like
> > the boot up times of Windows comparing those two drives. I would put
> > Windows and stuff like NewsBin pro and your unrar tools on the ATA
> > drive, and put the data those tools work with (ripped DVDs, etc) on
> > the faster drive. Again, it is easier to open a 5 MB .exe file from a
> > slower drive and then load 2 GB of data from the faster one, than to
> > load the 5 MB .exe from the faster drive and wait while the slower
> > drive reads the huge heap of data.
>
> I agree...Data would be the most important thing for speed,
> especially stuff for video editing. I would leave all your rpograms on
> the slower drive, as once they open, they stay in memory anyways, then
> run all my data through the sata drive. This will make ripping,
> encoding, saving and opening much faster, which would be something you
> do more often than opening a program. Plus having the program and data
> on seperate drives would speed things up a little bit as well.
>
> --
> Night_Seer
>
>

wouldn't i want to have games on the sata as well? for faster load times?

Re: sata 10k rpm vs ata133 7200rpm
 

Diehard wrote:
> "Night_Seer" <ecamacho4 at hotmail dot com> wrote in message
> news:ivadnSVVm9vPJWSi4p2dnA@speakeasy.net...
>> DeMoN LaG wrote:
>>> "Diehard" <Diehard@movies.com> wrote in
>>> news:G43Kb.24258$IM3.10009@newsread3.news.atl.eart hlink.net:
>>>
>>>> storage. does this make sense or should i do it differently? cus
>>>> what happens i mean is i might download a lot with newsbin and
>>>> need more then 37gb. i also would put games on the 10k rpm drive
>>>> for faster load times. someone also mentioned putting newsbin and
>>>> the page file on the sata drive and install the OS on the ata
>>>> drive. not sata. however im not sure .
>>>>
>>>
>>> I wouldn't put the OS on the SATA drive for two reasons:
>>> A) You will need to install the drivers during the OS installation,
>>> and needing drivers to access the boot drive can make some things a
>>> bitch
>>> B) You will probably not notice that big a difference in things like
>>> the boot up times of Windows comparing those two drives. I would
>>> put Windows and stuff like NewsBin pro and your unrar tools on the
>>> ATA drive, and put the data those tools work with (ripped DVDs,
>>> etc) on the faster drive. Again, it is easier to open a 5 MB .exe
>>> file from a slower drive and then load 2 GB of data from the faster
>>> one, than to load the 5 MB .exe from the faster drive and wait
>>> while the slower drive reads the huge heap of data.
>>
>> I agree...Data would be the most important thing for speed,
>> especially stuff for video editing. I would leave all your rpograms
>> on the slower drive, as once they open, they stay in memory anyways,
>> then run all my data through the sata drive. This will make ripping,
>> encoding, saving and opening much faster, which would be something
>> you do more often than opening a program. Plus having the program
>> and data on seperate drives would speed things up a little bit as
>> well.
>>
>> --
>> Night_Seer
>>
>>
>
> wouldn't i want to have games on the sata as well? for faster load
> times?

Yeah most your rpograms would be fine on the ata, even newsbin, if it
allows you to change where you download your files TO. As for
games...you'll probably get faster load times on the sata, so it might
be good for that. I would suggest having a seperate partition for the
data and the games though. Your running out of space quick though, what
with only 36 GB with games AND videos (which get quite large [about 10
gigs an hour]).

--
Night_Seer

Re: sata 10k rpm vs ata133 7200rpm
 

"Night_Seer" <ecamacho4 at hotmail dot com> wrote in message
news:rKKdnQCsfZLokWeiRVn-gQ@speakeasy.net...
> Diehard wrote:
> > "Night_Seer" <ecamacho4 at hotmail dot com> wrote in message
> > news:ivadnSVVm9vPJWSi4p2dnA@speakeasy.net...
> >> DeMoN LaG wrote:
> >>> "Diehard" <Diehard@movies.com> wrote in
> >>> news:G43Kb.24258$IM3.10009@newsread3.news.atl.eart hlink.net:
> >>>
> >>>> storage. does this make sense or should i do it differently? cus
> >>>> what happens i mean is i might download a lot with newsbin and
> >>>> need more then 37gb. i also would put games on the 10k rpm drive
> >>>> for faster load times. someone also mentioned putting newsbin and
> >>>> the page file on the sata drive and install the OS on the ata
> >>>> drive. not sata. however im not sure .
> >>>>
> >>>
> >>> I wouldn't put the OS on the SATA drive for two reasons:
> >>> A) You will need to install the drivers during the OS installation,
> >>> and needing drivers to access the boot drive can make some things a
> >>> bitch
> >>> B) You will probably not notice that big a difference in things like
> >>> the boot up times of Windows comparing those two drives. I would
> >>> put Windows and stuff like NewsBin pro and your unrar tools on the
> >>> ATA drive, and put the data those tools work with (ripped DVDs,
> >>> etc) on the faster drive. Again, it is easier to open a 5 MB .exe
> >>> file from a slower drive and then load 2 GB of data from the faster
> >>> one, than to load the 5 MB .exe from the faster drive and wait
> >>> while the slower drive reads the huge heap of data.
> >>
> >> I agree...Data would be the most important thing for speed,
> >> especially stuff for video editing. I would leave all your rpograms
> >> on the slower drive, as once they open, they stay in memory anyways,
> >> then run all my data through the sata drive. This will make ripping,
> >> encoding, saving and opening much faster, which would be something
> >> you do more often than opening a program. Plus having the program
> >> and data on seperate drives would speed things up a little bit as
> >> well.
> >>
> >> --
> >> Night_Seer
> >>
> >>
> >
> > wouldn't i want to have games on the sata as well? for faster load
> > times?
>
> Yeah most your rpograms would be fine on the ata, even newsbin, if it
> allows you to change where you download your files TO. As for
> games...you'll probably get faster load times on the sata, so it might
> be good for that. I would suggest having a seperate partition for the
> data and the games though. Your running out of space quick though, what
> with only 36 GB with games AND videos (which get quite large [about 10
> gigs an hour]).
>
> --
> Night_Seer
>
>

what are u talking about videos? this pc only for games and downloading
stuff from usenet.

Re: sata 10k rpm vs ata133 7200rpm
 

"Diehard" <Diehard@movies.com> wrote in news:2KpKb.11241$6B.7420
@newsread1.news.atl.earthlink.net:

> what are u talking about videos? this pc only for games and downloading
> stuff from usenet.
>

Apparently downloading a DVD from Usenet (not questioning the legality of
what you do) is not a video?

--
AIM: FrznFoodClerk
email: de_on-lag@co_cast.net (_ = m)
website: under construction
Need a technician in the south Jersey area?
email/IM for rates/services

Re: sata 10k rpm vs ata133 7200rpm
 

"DeMoN LaG" <n@a> wrote in message news:Xns94686BADBF7Wobbly@216.168.3.30...
> "Diehard" <Diehard@movies.com> wrote in news:2KpKb.11241$6B.7420
> @newsread1.news.atl.earthlink.net:
>
> > what are u talking about videos? this pc only for games and downloading
> > stuff from usenet.
> >
>
> Apparently downloading a DVD from Usenet (not questioning the legality of
> what you do) is not a video?
>
> --
i never said i would download dvds.

Re: sata 10k rpm vs ata133 7200rpm
 

"Diehard" <Diehard@movies.com> wrote in news:gytKb.28131$IM3.15924
@newsread3.news.atl.earthlink.net:

> i never said i would download dvds.
>

In:
Message-ID: <G43Kb.24258$IM3.10009@newsread3.news.atl.earthlin k.net>
You mention using DVD2One and ripping DVDs. DVDs are videos. DVDs take up
lots of space. Are you now /not/ using this PC for that purpose, or what?

--
AIM: FrznFoodClerk
email: de_on-lag@co_cast.net (_ = m)
website: under construction
Need a technician in the south Jersey area?
email/IM for rates/services