About to install only OS , DAW , & Sample library for a

Discussion in 'Computing' started by SeniorFedup, Jun 13, 2008.

  1. SeniorFedup

    SeniorFedup Guest

    greetings!

    So as l stated in my subject l have a new machine w/ three hard drive in my quad core 3gig RAM machine. But l don't know what software should go where? after talking to a few people l got a couple of different answers on what would be more efficient and what would help my programs run faster and safer.

    computer tech gamer friend that builds pc's says

    1 ide 20 gig install XP os in it

    1 ide 80 gig install komplete (50 gigs + cubase 4)

    1 sata 320 gig for recording audio




    this seems to me to be a reasonable setup but to me appears there MIGHT be some latency issues.



    however , after talking to a digital recording savy guy, (but uses mac)he stated i should install my programs like this

    mac user , MIDI and music biz proffesor states ...

    20 gig ide just a spare drive

    80 gig ide audio files

    320 gig sata XP o.s Komplete4 and Cubase 4 and do editing on my sata drive.
    totally different from the gamers idea.

    both setup ideas come from experienced users.But l would like to know how some of you guys in the PC recording field take advantage of todays advanced cpu processing and how you arrange your programs when having 2 or more drives. thanks guys .
    ps my audio midi interface is a tascam fw-1804
     
  2. anonymous

    anonymous Guests

    HI,

    OS and ALL programs on the small drive 20G is too small perhaps...

    320G for audio only

    the 80 g for All samples only you do not install programs on any drive but the OS...
     
  3. SeniorFedup

    SeniorFedup Guest

    hey,
    i agree . 20 gigs for os AND all os programs is to small. i dont plan on ever doing that, what i do consider is only putting my os on it.
    whats your opinion.
     
  4. hueseph

    hueseph Well-Known Member

    Smaller drives are slower since they have to cover more rotations to access the data. A larger drive is better even for your OS. Anyway Hard Drives are dirt cheap. I remember paying hundreds of dollars for a 64MB Hard drive that was the size of four paperbacks stacked on top of each other. Now you can get thousands of times that for 50 bucks. Generally a 160GB SATA drive goes for about $50.
     
  5. SeniorFedup

    SeniorFedup Guest

    Heuseph, thats odd you say that . my gamer/builder friend suggests i putmy os on its own, small hardrive (20 gigs isn't really small any way) im not sure the reason why. either way it goes against the grain here. but i will definatly look into it.
     
  6. hueseph

    hueseph Well-Known Member

    Think about it. A 20gig hard drive at 7200 rpm will have to spin a lot more than a 160gig at 7200 to read the same amount of data. It's just logic and very simple physics. Why? simply because the 20gig hard drive uses up more physical space than a 160 gig hard drive to read/write the same amount of data. Sure, use a separate drive but use a bigger hard drive than 20 GB. Also if you're OS after updates and security patches is 5GB, that's 1/4 of your drive!

    I have my OS and software on one 80 Gig Hard Drive My samples on a secondary 120GB drive and another 120GB drive(which I plan to upgrade) for audio. I still think the 80GB is too small and too slow for my OS/Software.
     
  7. Codemonkey

    Codemonkey Well-Known Member

    Location:
    Scotland, UK
    TLA: SSD.
    64GB SSD will set you back a lot, but if you can find something faster, I salute you.
     
  8. anonymous

    anonymous Guests

    faster reads horrid write speed
     
  9. Codemonkey

    Codemonkey Well-Known Member

    Location:
    Scotland, UK
    ...ideal for an OS.

    No?
     
  10. hueseph

    hueseph Well-Known Member

    At $800 for a 64gig drive, it's just not worth it. There are plenty fast enough standard drives. For $800 you could get a couple of Terrabyte drives and some high speed memory.
     
  11. Kapt.Krunch

    Kapt.Krunch Well-Known Member

    That has some validity, but you may also consider partitioning a larger, faster drive to a smaller partition for the OS, with the rest as storage/temp. Why?
    The platters are still the same physical diameter. And, you don't NEED 300GB for OS and programs. If you partition it so the OS and programs use a smaller area, and the fastest partition, then the heads move over much less area (less-wide swings), and the data is more concentrated to a smaller physical area for faster read/write.

    Make sense?

    And, don't forget to experiment with with your audio drive to find a good balance of settings when you format that.

    Kapt.Krunch
     
  12. Space

    Space Distinguished Member

    back in the late 70's I could almost tell the difference in a few milliseconds... but isn't 7200rpm still 7200rpm and an average seektime of, say, 8 ms still an average seektime of 8ms?
     
  13. SeniorFedup

    SeniorFedup Guest

    so is space saying 8ms for either a gig drive or 80 gig drive?
     
  14. Codemonkey

    Codemonkey Well-Known Member

    Location:
    Scotland, UK
    I know SSDs are not cost effective, but still. How often do you do massive amounts of time-critical writing to your OS drive?
     
  15. hueseph

    hueseph Well-Known Member

    Seek time is exactly that. Seek time. The amount of time it takes for the drive to "find" the info you're loading. Throughput is something else altogether and is variable depending on the size of the drive and where on the drive the data is written.
     
  16. Space

    Space Distinguished Member

    Where do we find throughput data as it applies to different drives? Can that be benchmarked at home?
     
  17. hueseph

    hueseph Well-Known Member

    sisoft sandra
     
  18. SeniorFedup

    SeniorFedup Guest

    thanks for the replies i will keep you updated with my setup and how it all turns out.. what im soley after is zero latency for my Komplete 5 samples which can be some what of a cpu hog.
    normaly i work inside the yamaha motif sequencer. honestly i don't really need to move up to soft synths since the motif works at a pro level. but you never know what you might discover using a cpu
     
  19. GeckoMusic

    GeckoMusic Guest

    I'm with ADK audio on this one.

    1. Use the drive with the highest data rate for recording and playing tracks only.
    2. The OS and program drive should be separate from all of your digital audio, and doesn't need to be that fast, especially with 3 Gigs of memory.
    3. A drive for samples sounds like a good idea, but I haven't tried it.

    I use a 10k rpm 80 Gig SATA drive for projects I am working on, and a slower 120 Gig drives for projects that are on the back burner and my OS and programs. When I want to work on something from the back burner I move it back to my fast drive.

    Partitioning never made sense to me if you have multiple drives.
     
  20. Space

    Space Distinguished Member

    Partitioning used to make sense, really!

    Did I ever tell about the time in the late 80's or early 90's I had a 20 meg brick of a hard drive rebuilt for 250.00(usd) simply because a new one would have been more or was unavailable(I don't remember really), iirc?

    What about "stacker"? That was a great tool!The MS version that came later was called DoubleSpace". But who needs data compression these days?

    We have all the space we need right?


    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Disk_partitioning

    You rich people with all yer fangly new gizmos... Vista has a "inbuilt" partitioning program for the creation, deletion and movement of partitions!!!

    Wtf?

    It's a world gone mad and you can see it all in High Def!!!
     

Share This Page