Stange effect of partition on drive performance


  1. paul1149
    Posts : 1,025
    Linux Lite 3.2 x64; Windows 7, 8.1
       New #1

    Stange effect of partition on drive performance


    I just had a strange experience I don't know how to interpret. I got a used laptop that was distressed and would not boot. I pulled the 500GB SATA II drive and ran some tests on it, and was dismayed to find transfer rates of under 20MB/s. I ran CHKDSK on it, which produced no errors and did not change the performance. The drive passed all SMART and self-tests.

    So I put the drive back in its machine and began to try to repair the boot. That led to trying to do a factory recovery, but that also failed. Finally I decided to install Win7 afresh from a DVD, and as part of that I deleted the two existing installation partitions and let Windows create new ones. That went very smoothly, and after all the dust settled I ran some performance tests on the drive again. Now the drive was clocking somewhere in the 70MB/s range!

    Great news, but I'm trying to figure out what changed. The machine had been dropped, so I feared HDD damage. There is one CRC SMART error, but aside from that everything is perfect. I don't know what reformatting the partitions has to do with drive performance.
      My Computer
    Quote Quote

  3. TVeblen
    Posts : 6,292
    Windows 7 64 Bit Home Premium SP1
       New #2

    Probably a bad sector that had been written to previously, then damaged. If the damaged sector contains data the OS needs then you have trouble. When you run chkdsk /r or format a drive the system will try and mark bad sectors as unusable and ignore (skip) them. So your new install will have all the data it needs available.

    Probably a good idea to run the manufacturer's diagnostic - extended test - on the drive to be sure. I have seen drives pass the SMART checks but fail the extended tests.
      My Computer
    Quote Quote

  4. paul1149
    Posts : 1,025
    Linux Lite 3.2 x64; Windows 7, 8.1
    Thread Starter
       New #3

    Thanks, but the performance I cited had nothing to do with the OS. It was raw testing of the drive itself. And the self-tests I mentioned included the extended test. That's exactly why this situation puzzles me.
      My Computer
    Quote Quote

 

  Related Discussions
Hello there. Recently, (A couple of days ago to be exact..), I switched from Malwarebytes to Avast! Due to my Malwarebytes trial expiring. I switched to Avast! because it was the second best antivirus I knew about, at least, from what I remember. :huh: I ran a full system scan shortly after...
Hi, I have four hard disks and three operating systems (Windows 7, Ubuntu and Fedora) and I want advice on partitioning the disks. In my opinion, I have two options: 1. Install all the operating systems on one hard disk (since only one partition will be in use at a time) and use the other...
I like to keep an entirely clean desktop, so to do this I have all my apps down in the Windows taskbar. None of these items are in my startup, BTW. Anyway, I;d like to know if keeping a little over 2 dozen icons in the TB will effect performance in any manner?
I know home, personal, ultimate etc, come with certain options that a user may or may not want. But what i want to know is if there are any performance changes in using a specific edition. For instance in my case, I'm a gamer, I run several programs at a time always, Stream media to my PS3...
Back in the IDE days...I believe the items and/or types of IDE devices on either IDE cable/channel would effect system performance. In other words if you have a fast HDD as a master and a CD player as the slave on the dame cable/IDE channel..system and/or drive performance Does the same issue...
Our Sites
Site Links
About Us
Windows 7 Forums is an independent web site and has not been authorized, sponsored, or otherwise approved by Microsoft Corporation. "Windows 7" and related materials are trademarks of Microsoft Corp.

 © Designer Media Ltd
All times are GMT -5. The time now is 12:15.
Find Us