Show us your hard drive performance

Here's an update of my results from here with a added a second page file. It gave a small performance increase. :)

New updated results here.




SATA SSD (v2):


SATA II HDD (32MB buffer) 7200 RPM:

I had it set to be system managed with it at 8GB on each drive. :)

With the drives here any second paging file from any installation would have to be sent to the storage drive! I don't think that would for several of those?! since more then one drive is the OS drive depending on which OS.

Respectively:
150G WD-VR RAID0 pair - systems
150G WD-VR RAID0 pair - swaps
1T WD-RE3 RAID1 pair - data
1.5T SG single drive - backups

whats a good page file size? i know its depending on how much ram you have, but isnt it better not to use a page file if you have enough ram? in my case i only have 4gb which is too low so what size page file shoould i be using? 8gb?

cheers for the insight,
Rick.

A good page file depands on the aplication and the kernel you are running. For 32bit gaming many elect to disable it entirely or assign it to a second partition or drive. With the 64bit the advantage seen there is less swapping out to the drive seeing more information loaded into and kept in the active ram.

In fact a good article on this is seen at A Closer Look at Windows Vista, Part III: 32-Bit vs. 64-Bit Windows - Developer Zone - National Instruments

Night Hawk said:

A good page file depands on the aplication and the kernel you are running. For 32bit gaming many elect to disable it entirely or assign it to a second partition or drive. With the 64bit the advantage seen there is less swapping out to the drive seeing more information loaded into and kept in the active ram.

In fact a good article on this is seen at A Closer Look at Windows Vista, Part III: 32-Bit vs. 64-Bit Windows - Developer Zone - National Instruments

cool thnx for that link i been reading through some of it. the thing i cant understand is why Microsoft made 4gb ram considered to be a "high" amount of system memory, thus having to result in an x64bit o/s. Personally 4gb should have been made the maximum limit for x86 (32bit) as it seems to be the most used and reasonable amout, if it is just basic office use and gaming end-users (which in the end would be the highest amount of buyers for Microsoft), and it would just leave others that want 4gb or more for rendering and video editing ect that really require the higher amounts of ram.

i know what it is like to have 4gb of ram, then i have 2gb video memory (98gx2's Q-SLI) that then becomes shared with system memory 4gb-2gb=r2gb, then an o/s that will consume just over 1gb with visual features and Dream Scene being used and typical background software (logitech setpoint, realtemp, sound panels, anit-virus ect) 2gb-1gb=r1gb
Then the high end gaming like the classis example Crysis, consuming excess of 800mb, with that all in mind they made x86 to recognise 3.75gb ram. 1g-800mb=r200mb 3.75gb-3.8gb= -50mb, but you will see the 'low on system resources' way before 3.75gb of usage.

So even in x64 i get 'low on memory', so should 1gb page file be all i would need? Also would the performance side of it be better to have the page file on a complete seperate drive, or if the boot drive is faster to just partition a section and make it dedicated for the page file?

sorry for going off-topic here i just need a quick answer.


Rick.