Preferred Install of Vista x64 Ultimate

sqlsamson · External Since: Apr 29, 2009 Posts: 2

Hello all,

I purchased a new laptop that comes with Vista Home Premium x64;
however, I purchased and want to install Vista x64 Ultimate. My
question is for the optimal performance or "preferred" install should I
partition my hard drive accordingly:

- 1 6GB Par for page file
- 1 30GB for the OS
- 1 284GB for my data

Any thoughts about the hibernation file, perhaps a separate partition
for that as well or am I sounding too partition happy?

or is there a better configuration? Essentially I have an AMD TUX2 64
(2.1GHz) CPU and 4GB RAM. Any suggestions are greatly appreciated!

--
sqlsamson

Manny Weisbord · External Since: Feb 23, 2009 Posts: 31

sqlsamson <guest.RemoveThis@unknown-email.com> wrote:

>
>Hmm...that is a good point! With cloning my concern is the activation.
>I am not sure how to deal with that, I heard it is a pain to deal with
>Microsoft when it comes to re-activating.

Cloning to a new drive than putting that drive into the computer will
not affect your activation.

Even if it did, often the activation can be performed automatically
online. If not, then a brief, free telephone call will get it done.

Patrick Keenan · External Since: Jan 14, 2009 Posts: 56

"sqlsamson" <guest.TakeThisOut@unknown-email.com> wrote in message
news:a357b7d9e3950d8fd204aef84b0c1194@nntp-gateway.com...
>
> Hello all,
>
> I purchased a new laptop that comes with Vista Home Premium x64;
> however, I purchased and want to install Vista x64 Ultimate. My
> question is for the optimal performance or "preferred" install should I
> partition my hard drive accordingly:
>
>
> - 1 6GB Par for page file
> - 1 30GB for the OS
> - 1 284GB for my data
>
> Any thoughts about the hibernation file, perhaps a separate partition
> for that as well or am I sounding too partition happy?
>
> or is there a better configuration? Essentially I have an AMD TUX2 64
> (2.1GHz) CPU and 4GB RAM. Any suggestions are greatly appreciated!
>
>
> --
> sqlsamson

If you read through past posts, you'll find a number of instances where
people have set a separate partition for the OS, and eventually discovered
that it's too small.

I personally make one partition, the full size of the disk. If you find
that you outgrow the disk, you can simply clone to a larger one. Data-only
backups aren't hard to do, and if you make an image of the base install, you
can be up and running pretty quickly.

HTH
-pk

Dave Warren · External Since: Jan 14, 2009 Posts: 13

In message <ORsWJRQyJHA.1432.RemoveThis@TK2MSFTNGP02.phx.gbl> "Patrick Keenan"
<test.RemoveThis@dev.null> was claimed to have wrote:

>If you read through past posts, you'll find a number of instances where
>people have set a separate partition for the OS, and eventually discovered
>that it's too small.
>
>I personally make one partition, the full size of the disk. If you find
>that you outgrow the disk, you can simply clone to a larger one. Data-only
>backups aren't hard to do, and if you make an image of the base install, you
>can be up and running pretty quickly.

Also keep in mind that writing to nearly-full partitions causes fairly
significant performance drops. 30GB is too small since it doesn't
really leave enough slack space on the drive.

Rick Rogers · External Since: Aug 19, 2006 Posts: 3178

Hi,

To add to the others, I would never recommend a separate partition for the
page file when it is on the same drive as the operating system. If paging is
heavy (and it shouldn't be with 4GB of memory), you could see a severe
performance drop or even damage due to excessive seek times by the drive
head jumping back and forth between volumes.

--
Best of Luck,

Rick Rogers, aka "Nutcase" - Microsoft MVP
http://mvp.support.microsoft.com/
Windows help - www.rickrogers.org
My thoughts http://rick-mvp.blogspot.com

"sqlsamson" <guest.TakeThisOut@unknown-email.com> wrote in message
news:a357b7d9e3950d8fd204aef84b0c1194@nntp-gateway.com...
>
> Hello all,
>
> I purchased a new laptop that comes with Vista Home Premium x64;
> however, I purchased and want to install Vista x64 Ultimate. My
> question is for the optimal performance or "preferred" install should I
> partition my hard drive accordingly:
>
>
> - 1 6GB Par for page file
> - 1 30GB for the OS
> - 1 284GB for my data
>
> Any thoughts about the hibernation file, perhaps a separate partition
> for that as well or am I sounding too partition happy?
>
> or is there a better configuration? Essentially I have an AMD TUX2 64
> (2.1GHz) CPU and 4GB RAM. Any suggestions are greatly appreciated!
>
>
> --
> sqlsamson

pupick · External Since: Mar 26, 2009 Posts: 6

Unless you have a multi-boot configuration a laptop hard drive should be
configured as one large volume.
If laptop manufacturers thought it would make their units perform faster
laptops would come preconfigured with two partitions.
There is no performance advantage, whether in a desktop or a laptop, to
placing the page file in a separate partition on the same hard drive.
In a laptop overall performance will slow due to the slower spindle speeds
and slower read/write times of most laptop hard drives.
Except for an eSATA drive an external hard drive cannot be used for the swap
file. An eSATA drive can perform identically to internal SATA drives but USB
and firewire (does anyone still use firewire?) drives go across those slow
secondary buses.

Mike Hall - MVP · External Since: May 29, 2007 Posts: 326

"pupick" <fac_187.TakeThisOut@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:u5T7FXpyJHA.1372@TK2MSFTNGP05.phx.gbl...
> Unless you have a multi-boot configuration a laptop hard drive should be
> configured as one large volume.
> If laptop manufacturers thought it would make their units perform faster
> laptops would come preconfigured with two partitions.
> There is no performance advantage, whether in a desktop or a laptop, to
> placing the page file in a separate partition on the same hard drive.
> In a laptop overall performance will slow due to the slower spindle speeds
> and slower read/write times of most laptop hard drives.
> Except for an eSATA drive an external hard drive cannot be used for the
> swap file. An eSATA drive can perform identically to internal SATA drives
> but USB and firewire (does anyone still use firewire?) drives go across
> those slow secondary buses.
>
>

Some laptops do come with a drive partitioned into two parts, and not always
because the second partition is a recovery partition..

--

Mike Hall - MVP Windows Experience
http://msmvps.com/blogs/mikehall/

Mike Hall - MVP · External Since: May 29, 2007 Posts: 326

"sqlsamson" <guest.DeleteThis@unknown-email.com> wrote in message
news:a357b7d9e3950d8fd204aef84b0c1194@nntp-gateway.com...
>
> Hello all,
>
> I purchased a new laptop that comes with Vista Home Premium x64;
> however, I purchased and want to install Vista x64 Ultimate. My
> question is for the optimal performance or "preferred" install should I
> partition my hard drive accordingly:
>
>
> - 1 6GB Par for page file
> - 1 30GB for the OS
> - 1 284GB for my data
>
> Any thoughts about the hibernation file, perhaps a separate partition
> for that as well or am I sounding too partition happy?
>
> or is there a better configuration? Essentially I have an AMD TUX2 64
> (2.1GHz) CPU and 4GB RAM. Any suggestions are greatly appreciated!
>
>
> --
> sqlsamson

The page file should stay on the primary partition UNLESS there is a second
hard drive present, in which case it could be placed on the second drive..

Moving the page file to a separate partition on the primary drive puts way
too much strain on the drive heads..

30gb is not enough for a primary partition. Depending upon what you have to
install and might install in the future, allow between 60 and 80gb for the
primary partition.

What you do with the rest is up to you. Personally, i would have at least 3
partitions on a 300gb drive.

--

Mike Hall - MVP Windows Experience
http://msmvps.com/blogs/mikehall/

sqlsamson · External Since: Apr 29, 2009 Posts: 2

Thank you all for the input. I appreciate it greatly, especially being
the vista noobie that I am. Overall I figured it might be best to
partition the drive strictly for performance purposes, but as it turns
out I was wrong. I still might segment the drive into two partitions,
possibly as most of you suggested allocating more space to the C:\
possible 80 - 100 GB.

Mike, I am curious though to know what would you have in store for the
three partitions as you stated in your post?

--
sqlsamson

Noel Paton · External Since: Mar 16, 2009 Posts: 7

On Fri, 1 May 2009 16:32:00 -0400, "Mike Hall - MVP"
<mikehall.RemoveThis@mvps.org> wrote:

>"pupick" <fac_187.RemoveThis@hotmail.com> wrote in message
>news:u5T7FXpyJHA.1372@TK2MSFTNGP05.phx.gbl...
>> Unless you have a multi-boot configuration a laptop hard drive should be
>> configured as one large volume.
>> If laptop manufacturers thought it would make their units perform faster
>> laptops would come preconfigured with two partitions.
>> There is no performance advantage, whether in a desktop or a laptop, to
>> placing the page file in a separate partition on the same hard drive.
>> In a laptop overall performance will slow due to the slower spindle speeds
>> and slower read/write times of most laptop hard drives.
>> Except for an eSATA drive an external hard drive cannot be used for the
>> swap file. An eSATA drive can perform identically to internal SATA drives
>> but USB and firewire (does anyone still use firewire?) drives go across
>> those slow secondary buses.
>>
>>
>
>
>Some laptops do come with a drive partitioned into two parts, and not always
>because the second partition is a recovery partition..

....as witness my Acer 8930 - which is actually partitioned into 4!!
2 are visible (C: and D Smile

2 are hidden EISA partitions - one for recovery (and I have no idea
what the other one is - yet, unless it's a bootstrap drive for the
first)
First thing I did when I got it home was install a second HD - which
now has Win7 on it
--
Noel Paton
www.crashfixpc.co.uk

Nil Carborundum Illegitemi

R. C. White · External Since: May 19, 2006 Posts: 237

Hi, Noel.

I'm resurrecting this thread because this issue came up in a new post today.
You said:

> ...as witness my Acer 8930 - which is actually partitioned into 4!!
> 2 are visible (C: and D Smile

> 2 are hidden EISA partitions - one for recovery (and I have no idea
> what the other one is - yet, unless it's a bootstrap drive for the
> first)

See the thread in this NG, Subject: Unable to create new "visible"
partition, started by Milleniumaire yesterday, 7/27/09.

Milleniumaire says that his Acer Aspire 8935g laptop has 2 EISA
configuration partitions and it will not let him shrink his Drive C:. His
closing comment:

> I contacted Acer who tell me they don't support the creation of
> partitons on the main O/S drive as this will affect their recovery
> software! They went on to say that if I do change the way the recovery
> software works it would void the warranty!!!!
>
> I'm absoluteley amazed. I have a state of the art laptop with 2 x 500gb
> disk drives. I can partition one of them, but not the one with the O/S
> as this will void the warranty.

Does this match what Acer told you?

RC
--
R. C. White, CPA
San Marcos, TX
rc.DeleteThis@grandecom.net
Microsoft Windows MVP
Windows Live Mail 2009 (14.0.8064.0206) in Win7 Ultimate x64 RC 7100

"Noel Paton" <noeldp/spamless/@crashfixpc.co.uk> wrote in message
news:6iapv4lekg1hoisdo9udkd188bg0f0aghe@4ax.com...
> On Fri, 1 May 2009 16:32:00 -0400, "Mike Hall - MVP"
> <mikehall.DeleteThis@mvps.org> wrote:
>
>>"pupick" <fac_187.DeleteThis@hotmail.com> wrote in message
>>news:u5T7FXpyJHA.1372@TK2MSFTNGP05.phx.gbl...
>>> Unless you have a multi-boot configuration a laptop hard drive should be
>>> configured as one large volume.
>>> If laptop manufacturers thought it would make their units perform faster
>>> laptops would come preconfigured with two partitions.
>>> There is no performance advantage, whether in a desktop or a laptop, to
>>> placing the page file in a separate partition on the same hard drive.
>>> In a laptop overall performance will slow due to the slower spindle
>>> speeds
>>> and slower read/write times of most laptop hard drives.
>>> Except for an eSATA drive an external hard drive cannot be used for the
>>> swap file. An eSATA drive can perform identically to internal SATA
>>> drives
>>> but USB and firewire (does anyone still use firewire?) drives go across
>>> those slow secondary buses.
>>>
>>>
>>
>>
>>Some laptops do come with a drive partitioned into two parts, and not
>>always
>>because the second partition is a recovery partition..
>
> ...as witness my Acer 8930 - which is actually partitioned into 4!!
> 2 are visible (C: and D Smile

> 2 are hidden EISA partitions - one for recovery (and I have no idea
> what the other one is - yet, unless it's a bootstrap drive for the
> first)
> First thing I did when I got it home was install a second HD - which
> now has Win7 on it
> --
> Noel Paton
> www.crashfixpc.co.uk
>
> Nil Carborundum Illegitemi

ShrinkMD · External Since: Sep 28, 2009 Posts: 1

Is it really a bad idea to put the page file on a separate partition if
you only have one hard drive? It makes such a nice performance boost,
but I would hate to rot out my hd.

--
ShrinkMD
Posted via http://www.vistaheads.com

R. C. White · External Since: May 19, 2006 Posts: 237

Hi, ShrinkMD.

Think about it.

A single HD has a single set of read/write heads, all "ganged" together.
When one moves, they all move. So if your application is working on track
200 and your page file starts on track 1000, then the whole gang of heads
has to travel across 800 tracks each time the page file is accessed - and
then 800 tracks back to continue. That's true whether the page file is in
the same partition or 3 partitions away on the same disk. It's the track
spacing, not the number of partitions, that matters.

If you have two HDDs, then you have two spindles and two gangs of read/write
heads. While your application is working on track 200 on Disk 0, the heads
on Disk 1 can read from track 1000 on that disk - then just wait patiently
over track 1000 while the operating system sends the data to/from the disk
and to/from the operating system.

That's greatly simplified, of course, but I think it makes the point:
Multiple spindles/multiple R/W heads allow simultaneous reads/writes to
multiple disks - and the heads might not have to move before the next data
transfer. A single spindle/single gang of R/W heads means that only a
single read/write operation can happen at a time - and the heads must be
moved before the next R/W can happen.

But you MIGHT be right: If there is only a single spindle, then the
location of the page file on that single HDD might matter. It's best if it
is near the tracks where other R/W operations are happening. But if the OS
is on C:, the app is on D: and is reading data from E: and storing it on
F: - I don't know where the page file should be. And even if Drive C:
covers the entire disk, how do I know if the OS, application and data files
are on track 200 or track 1000? Or where - on which tracks within Drive
C: - is the page file?

My approach - back when it seemed to matter - was to make sure the page file
was on a different spindle from the OS. Since Vista (or was it WinXP?),
I've simply chosen to let Windows manage the page file, and that has worked
well for me.

RC
--
R. C. White, CPA
San Marcos, TX
rc RemoveThis @grandecom.net
Microsoft Windows MVP
Windows Live Mail 2009 (14.0.8089.0726) in Win7 Ultimate x64

"ShrinkMD" <ShrinkMD.3z8j0e RemoveThis @no-mx.forums.vistaheads.com> wrote in message
news:ShrinkMD.3z8j0e@no-mx.forums.vistaheads.com...
>
> Is it really a bad idea to put the page file on a separate partition if
> you only have one hard drive? It makes such a nice performance boost,
> but I would hate to rot out my hd.
>
>
> --
> ShrinkMD