Solved partitions can affect performance?

Ripshock

New member
Local time
4:34 PM
Messages
96
Location
Bayt jala, Palestine
dividing you HDD into many partitions would affect your performance?
 

My Computer

Computer type
Laptop
Computer Manufacturer/Model Number
Asus
OS
windows 7 home premium 64 bit
CPU
intel cor i3-3110m
Motherboard
k55a
Memory
ram 4gb
Graphics Card(s)
intel hd graphics 4000
Hard Drives
500gb
Cooling
within laptop
Keyboard
built-in
Mouse
touchpad built in
Internet Speed
4mbs
Antivirus
trend micro titanium internet security 2012
Browser
google chrome
I've never tested it, but from what I hear there is little effect on performance.

The more important issue is that there typically isn't any advantage to using more than 2 or 3. I've seen people on this forum with a dozen or more partitions when they could have just used a folder structure on one partition. It just chops up the drive so that you run out of space on one or more partitions---usually sooner than you expected. It's not efficient in that way.
 

My Computer

Computer type
PC/Desktop
Computer Manufacturer/Model Number
Ignatz Special; 4 speed manual gearbox; factory air conditioning; one of one
OS
Windows 7 Home Premium SP1, 64-bit
CPU
Intel Skylake i5-6600K, not overclocked
Motherboard
AsRock Z170M Extreme 4, micro ATX
Memory
8 GB HyperX DDR4-2666 (2 x 4 GB)
Graphics Card(s)
none; graphics are integrated on CPU
Sound Card
onboard: Realtek ALC1150; external: USB Behringer UF0-202
Monitor(s) Displays
Dell S2340M 23 inch IPS
Screen Resolution
1600 x 900
Hard Drives
System: Crucial MX100 series SSD, 128 GB;
Data: Samsung Spinpoint 103SJ, 1 TB;
Backup: WD Caviar Green WD30EZRX-00D8PB0, 3 TB
PSU
Rosewill SilentNight 500 watt fanless, semi-modular
Case
Antec Solo II
Cooling
Noctua NH-U12S; Noctua F12 intake, Noctua S12A exhaust
Keyboard
Microsoft 200 6JH-00001 USB
Mouse
Dell or Microsoft optical wired; USB
Antivirus
Microsoft Security Essentials and Malwarebytes Premium
Browser
Pale Moon
Other Info
All fans PWM; speeds at idle: CPU circa 500 rpm; intake circa 600 rpm; exhaust circa 600 rpm; CPU temps 27 idle and 47 C load in a warm room (27 C/81 F) when running Intel Extreme Tuning Utility stress test.
As soon as there is enough free space on "C" drive, there won't be any performance drop because of multiple partitions. On an NTFS file system, first 12.5 percent of the partition will be reserved for MFT and it is called "MFT Zone". This is to control fragmentation of MFT and improve performance. NTFS will write data to the "MFT Zone" only if the partition's data portion run out of space. Using "MFT ZOne" for data storage will cause fragmentation of MFT and eventually lead to marginally decreased performance. So it is recommended to keep at least 15 % disk space as free on all NTFS partitions, especially on the "C" drive.

If you install only a couple of programs like "Ms Office" , media players etc, 100 GB will be enough for "C". Rest of the disk space can be used for a dedicated data partition.
 

My Computer

Computer type
PC/Desktop
OS
Windows 7 Ultimate x64
So it's better to combine partition so it won't fall off under 15%
 

My Computer

Computer type
Laptop
Computer Manufacturer/Model Number
Asus
OS
windows 7 home premium 64 bit
CPU
intel cor i3-3110m
Motherboard
k55a
Memory
ram 4gb
Graphics Card(s)
intel hd graphics 4000
Hard Drives
500gb
Cooling
within laptop
Keyboard
built-in
Mouse
touchpad built in
Internet Speed
4mbs
Antivirus
trend micro titanium internet security 2012
Browser
google chrome
Solved
 

My Computer

Computer type
Laptop
Computer Manufacturer/Model Number
Asus
OS
windows 7 home premium 64 bit
CPU
intel cor i3-3110m
Motherboard
k55a
Memory
ram 4gb
Graphics Card(s)
intel hd graphics 4000
Hard Drives
500gb
Cooling
within laptop
Keyboard
built-in
Mouse
touchpad built in
Internet Speed
4mbs
Antivirus
trend micro titanium internet security 2012
Browser
google chrome
dividing you HDD into many partitions would affect your performance?
Yes, it would. Depending on the location of the partitions. Partitions located at the beginning of the drive (outer edge of platters) will have faster sequential read and write speed than partitions at the end of the drive (inner edge of platters). 512K random ops are marginally faster on the beginning of drive. 4K random ops are marginally faster on the inside of the drive.

Here are some pictures as an example.
Partition layout
NaZdjIN.png


R benchmarked
kuX7luy.png


P benchmarked
SVS2psw.png


I repeated these several times and they came around these numbers, give it or take 2 MB/s for sequential.

I've never tested it, but from what I hear there is little effect on performance.

The more important issue is that there typically isn't any advantage to using more than 2 or 3. I've seen people on this forum with a dozen or more partitions when they could have just used a folder structure on one partition. It just chops up the drive so that you run out of space on one or more partitions---usually sooner than you expected. It's not efficient in that way.
Its mostly for control, prevent constant extensive fragmentation and more controlled partition backups rather than file backups. Efficiency is up to the user, the partitions can be extended at any time.
Although "dozen" partitions sounds quite high. I usually have two or three, or one which doesn't occupy the entire drive, rather, I extend it as I need it. No need to have the heads roam around 2 terabytes of space, instead, they can roam around 500 gb. It allows you to arrange data by "usage". You can archive data at the end of the drive, but keep your usual stuff at the beginning. E.g: versioning at the end, your stuff at the beginning. Things you never use at the end, stuff you constantly use at the beginning. Confinement, limits and proper distribution. It's more efficient than having 2 terabytes all mixed up if done right.

When it comes to backing up/moving data, some people prefer that setup better. You can take a partition level backups of your usual stuff and leave your never-used stuff behind. It depends on the person, their usage and preference. I prefer partition level backups over file backups. You could also cross backup data among drives for redundancy. 2 drives, you can have two separate partitions A1,A2 and B1,B2 of two unrelated data. One for the actual data, other for the backup (archiving) of the other drive, i.e B1 is backed up to A2 and A1 is backed up to B2. Really, it depends on the person. It lets you have data versioning among different drives, whether its setup as raid or not.

Hard drives are too cheap, it makes it easy to buy terabytes of data without really needing all of it. Specially when the difference between 500gb and 1tb is a couple dollars, and the difference between 1tb and 2tb is also a no brainer.
 
Last edited:

My Computer

Computer type
PC/Desktop
OS
7&8
Back
Top