XP Pro and Hard Disc Size

[Alexi]

I intend to buy a new PC. Considering a 200GB HDD. Will
also buy XP Pro and install it myself. I need to format
the HDD as NTFS - presumably this can be done directly
from the XP CD-ROM. Questions : Can I create a single
~200GB partition (i.e. a big Drive C:) or do I have to
split the HDD into numerous smaller partitions (e.g.
C=20GB, D=50GB, E=100GB, etc. up to the HDD capacity) ? Is
there a limitation on partition size for NTFS (I know
there is for FAT32) ? Also, since 5 1/4" FDDs no longer
exist, is it possible to designate the CD/DVD drive as B: ?
Thanks !

[Kevin Marshall]

>Can I create a single 200GB partition (i.e. a big Drive C:) or do I >have
to split the HDD into numerous smaller partitions (e.g. >C=20GB, D=50GB,
E=100GB, etc. up to the HDD capacity) ?

You can create a single partition, but I strongly recommend that you split
it up into smaller partitions. This is much more efficient (smaller cluster
sizes) and organized. Imagine defragmenting a single 200GB partition for
example. I have a 10GB partition for XP, 30GB for program files and another
20GB for other things like photos, music, documents, etc.

>Is there a limitation on partition size for NTFS (I know there is >for
FAT32) ?

I believe it's in the range of Terabytes or even exabytes, can't remember
for sure but it's definately nothing to worry about.

>Also, since 5 1/4" FDDs no longer exist, is it possible to >designate the
CD/DVD drive as B: ?

Yes

[Mox 13]

Something to be aware of.

I recently formatted and installed using a Maxtor 160 gig HD. According to
the Maxtor Installation Guide, XP Pro and XP Home (among other OSs) have a
problem recognizing a boot drive that is larger than 137 gig. Maxtor offered
both a hardware (promise ATA 133 card) and software (SP1 and Registry Patch)
solution to this problem.

As to partitions. I am currently partitioned at 30/30/50/50, but after
reading Nylo's post "To Partition or Not" 7/28/2003, and the replies to that
post , I am reconsidering.

Mox


"Alexi" > wrote in message
...
> I intend to buy a new PC. Considering a 200GB HDD. Will
> also buy XP Pro and install it myself. I need to format
> the HDD as NTFS - presumably this can be done directly
> from the XP CD-ROM. Questions : Can I create a single
> ~200GB partition (i.e. a big Drive C:) or do I have to
> split the HDD into numerous smaller partitions (e.g.
> C=20GB, D=50GB, E=100GB, etc. up to the HDD capacity) ? Is
> there a limitation on partition size for NTFS (I know
> there is for FAT32) ? Also, since 5 1/4" FDDs no longer
> exist, is it possible to designate the CD/DVD drive as B: ?
> Thanks !

[Kevin Marshall]

I just read that post and I didn't see anything to indicate that having one
large partition was better than dividing the disk up, and I still firmly
believe that it is best to partition.

"Mox 13" > wrote in message
...
> Something to be aware of.
>
> I recently formatted and installed using a Maxtor 160 gig HD. According to
> the Maxtor Installation Guide, XP Pro and XP Home (among other OSs) have a
> problem recognizing a boot drive that is larger than 137 gig. Maxtor
offered
> both a hardware (promise ATA 133 card) and software (SP1 and Registry
Patch)
> solution to this problem.
>
> As to partitions. I am currently partitioned at 30/30/50/50, but after
> reading Nylo's post "To Partition or Not" 7/28/2003, and the replies to
that
> post , I am reconsidering.
>
> Mox
>
>
> "Alexi" > wrote in message
> ...
> > I intend to buy a new PC. Considering a 200GB HDD. Will
> > also buy XP Pro and install it myself. I need to format
> > the HDD as NTFS - presumably this can be done directly
> > from the XP CD-ROM. Questions : Can I create a single
> > ~200GB partition (i.e. a big Drive C:) or do I have to
> > split the HDD into numerous smaller partitions (e.g.
> > C=20GB, D=50GB, E=100GB, etc. up to the HDD capacity) ? Is
> > there a limitation on partition size for NTFS (I know
> > there is for FAT32) ? Also, since 5 1/4" FDDs no longer
> > exist, is it possible to designate the CD/DVD drive as B: ?
> > Thanks !
>
>

[Mox 13]

I am still new to XP so I don't firmly believe in anything. :-)

In the past I have always partitioned my drives, but in reviewing the
Microsoft links provided by Nicholas it seems that this may need a rethink.
Here's a couple of excerpts.

"The contiguous disk layout of these pages results in reduced disk seeks and
improved disk I/O, contributing to improved boot time and application launch
time. Windows XP does not perform these optimizations across volumes.
Therefore, for this optimization to be available to users, the hard disk
must be partitioned as a single volume."

"When performing a clean install, Microsoft recommends that NTFS be used and
that the system be installed in a single partition on each disk. Under
Windows XP, big partitions are better managed than in previous versions of
Windows. Forcing installed software into several partitions on the disk
necessitates longer seeks when running the system and software."

Currently I am not totally satisfied with my seek times, especially in
games. I am considering getting a smaller drive (40-80 gig.) for the
operating system and using my 160 gig. for data. Each drive would have 1
partition.

Mox


"Kevin Marshall" > wrote in message
...
> I just read that post and I didn't see anything to indicate that having
one
> large partition was better than dividing the disk up, and I still firmly
> believe that it is best to partition.
>
> "Mox 13" > wrote in message
> ...
> > Something to be aware of.
> >
> > I recently formatted and installed using a Maxtor 160 gig HD. According
to
> > the Maxtor Installation Guide, XP Pro and XP Home (among other OSs) have
a
> > problem recognizing a boot drive that is larger than 137 gig. Maxtor
> offered
> > both a hardware (promise ATA 133 card) and software (SP1 and Registry
> Patch)
> > solution to this problem.
> >
> > As to partitions. I am currently partitioned at 30/30/50/50, but after
> > reading Nylo's post "To Partition or Not" 7/28/2003, and the replies to
> that
> > post , I am reconsidering.
> >
> > Mox
> >
> >
> > "Alexi" > wrote in message
> > ...
> > > I intend to buy a new PC. Considering a 200GB HDD. Will
> > > also buy XP Pro and install it myself. I need to format
> > > the HDD as NTFS - presumably this can be done directly
> > > from the XP CD-ROM. Questions : Can I create a single
> > > ~200GB partition (i.e. a big Drive C:) or do I have to
> > > split the HDD into numerous smaller partitions (e.g.
> > > C=20GB, D=50GB, E=100GB, etc. up to the HDD capacity) ? Is
> > > there a limitation on partition size for NTFS (I know
> > > there is for FAT32) ? Also, since 5 1/4" FDDs no longer
> > > exist, is it possible to designate the CD/DVD drive as B: ?
> > > Thanks !
> >
> >
>
>

[Kevin Marshall]

That's interesting, I may try it out the next time I do a clean install. I
am satisified with the performance of my drive though and that's not really
the reason I partition. It's mostly because it makes it easier to keep
everything organized and separate, cuts down on the time it takes to
deframent each partition, and if I need to format a partition I can keep my
data safely on one of the others without having to worry about what to do
with it. Another reason to partition is of course for dual booting with
other operating systems; a while back I had Mandrake Linux installed along
with XP. I guess it mainly comes down to personal preference, and I never
liked having one huge partition myself. :)

"Mox 13" > wrote in message
...
> I am still new to XP so I don't firmly believe in anything. :-)
>
> In the past I have always partitioned my drives, but in reviewing the
> Microsoft links provided by Nicholas it seems that this may need a
rethink.
> Here's a couple of excerpts.
>
> "The contiguous disk layout of these pages results in reduced disk seeks
and
> improved disk I/O, contributing to improved boot time and application
launch
> time. Windows XP does not perform these optimizations across volumes.
> Therefore, for this optimization to be available to users, the hard disk
> must be partitioned as a single volume."
>
> "When performing a clean install, Microsoft recommends that NTFS be used
and
> that the system be installed in a single partition on each disk. Under
> Windows XP, big partitions are better managed than in previous versions of
> Windows. Forcing installed software into several partitions on the disk
> necessitates longer seeks when running the system and software."
>
> Currently I am not totally satisfied with my seek times, especially in
> games. I am considering getting a smaller drive (40-80 gig.) for the
> operating system and using my 160 gig. for data. Each drive would have 1
> partition.
>
> Mox
>
>
> "Kevin Marshall" > wrote in message
> ...
> > I just read that post and I didn't see anything to indicate that having
> one
> > large partition was better than dividing the disk up, and I still firmly
> > believe that it is best to partition.
> >
> > "Mox 13" > wrote in message
> > ...
> > > Something to be aware of.
> > >
> > > I recently formatted and installed using a Maxtor 160 gig HD.
According
> to
> > > the Maxtor Installation Guide, XP Pro and XP Home (among other OSs)
have
> a
> > > problem recognizing a boot drive that is larger than 137 gig. Maxtor
> > offered
> > > both a hardware (promise ATA 133 card) and software (SP1 and Registry
> > Patch)
> > > solution to this problem.
> > >
> > > As to partitions. I am currently partitioned at 30/30/50/50, but after
> > > reading Nylo's post "To Partition or Not" 7/28/2003, and the replies
to
> > that
> > > post , I am reconsidering.
> > >
> > > Mox
> > >
> > >
> > > "Alexi" > wrote in message
> > > ...
> > > > I intend to buy a new PC. Considering a 200GB HDD. Will
> > > > also buy XP Pro and install it myself. I need to format
> > > > the HDD as NTFS - presumably this can be done directly
> > > > from the XP CD-ROM. Questions : Can I create a single
> > > > ~200GB partition (i.e. a big Drive C:) or do I have to
> > > > split the HDD into numerous smaller partitions (e.g.
> > > > C=20GB, D=50GB, E=100GB, etc. up to the HDD capacity) ? Is
> > > > there a limitation on partition size for NTFS (I know
> > > > there is for FAT32) ? Also, since 5 1/4" FDDs no longer
> > > > exist, is it possible to designate the CD/DVD drive as B: ?
> > > > Thanks !
> > >
> > >
> >
> >
>
>

[Brian Tillman]

>You can create a single partition, but I strongly recommend that you split
>it up into smaller partitions. This is much more efficient (smaller cluster
>sizes) and organized.

While it may help in organization to partition large disks, NTFS does not, I
believe, change the cluster size for different size partitions. I could be
wrong, but I'd like a reference proving it.
--
Brian Tillman Internet: Brian.Tillman at smiths-aerospace dot com
Smiths Aerospace Addresses modified to prevent SPAM.
3290 Patterson Ave. SE, MS 1B3 Replace "at" with "@", "dot" with "."
Grand Rapids, MI 49512-1991
This opinion doesn't represent that of my company

[Sharon F]

On Wed, 30 Jul 2003 12:45:51 -0400, "Brian Tillman"
> wrote:

>>You can create a single partition, but I strongly recommend that you split
>>it up into smaller partitions. This is much more efficient (smaller cluster
>>sizes) and organized.
>
>While it may help in organization to partition large disks, NTFS does not, I
>believe, change the cluster size for different size partitions. I could be
>wrong, but I'd like a reference proving it.

The Default Cluster Size for the NTFS and FAT File Systems
http://support.microsoft.com/default.aspx?scid=kb;en-us;314878

Sharon F
MS MVP
[Windows XP - Shell/User]

[toddkozi]

But, from same page:
"For example, comparing performance under Windows 2000 for a 75 GB hard =

disk partitioned with multiple smaller volumes versus a single volume=20=

shows that disk performance drops by about five to ten percent for the=20=

single large volume."
Notice the part about "....performance drops...."
Also:
"However, when comparing disk performance for the same small versus=20
single large volume configuration under Windows XP, performance drops by=
=20
only one to two percent for the single large volume."
Now, it "drops", but not much.
-
Todd

>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Original Message <<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<

On 7/29/2003, 2:39:49 PM, "Mox 13" > wrote regarding =
Re:=20
XP Pro and Hard Disc Size:


> I am still new to XP so I don't firmly believe in anything. :-)

> In the past I have always partitioned my drives, but in reviewing the=

> Microsoft links provided by Nicholas it seems that this may need a=20=

rethink.
> Here's a couple of excerpts.

> "The contiguous disk layout of these pages results in reduced disk see=
ks=20
and
> improved disk I/O, contributing to improved boot time and application =

launch
> time. Windows XP does not perform these optimizations across volumes.=

> Therefore, for this optimization to be available to users, the hard di=
sk
> must be partitioned as a single volume."

> "When performing a clean install, Microsoft recommends that NTFS be us=
ed=20
and
> that the system be installed in a single partition on each disk. Under=

> Windows XP, big partitions are better managed than in previous version=
s=20
of
> Windows. Forcing installed software into several partitions on the dis=
k
> necessitates longer seeks when running the system and software."

> Currently I am not totally satisfied with my seek times, especially in=

> games. I am considering getting a smaller drive (40-80 gig.) for the
> operating system and using my 160 gig. for data. Each drive would have=
1
> partition.

> Mox


> "Kevin Marshall" > wrote in message
> ...
> > I just read that post and I didn't see anything to indicate that hav=
ing
> one
> > large partition was better than dividing the disk up, and I still fi=
rmly
> > believe that it is best to partition.
> >
> > "Mox 13" > wrote in message
> > ...
> > > Something to be aware of.
> > >
> > > I recently formatted and installed using a Maxtor 160 gig HD. Acco=
rding
> to
> > > the Maxtor Installation Guide, XP Pro and XP Home (among other OSs=
) have
> a
> > > problem recognizing a boot drive that is larger than 137 gig. Maxt=
or
> > offered
> > > both a hardware (promise ATA 133 card) and software (SP1 and Regis=
try
> > Patch)
> > > solution to this problem.
> > >
> > > As to partitions. I am currently partitioned at 30/30/50/50, but a=
fter
> > > reading Nylo's post "To Partition or Not" 7/28/2003, and the repli=
es to
> > that
> > > post , I am reconsidering.
> > >
> > > Mox
> > >
> > >
> > > "Alexi" > wrote in message
> > > ...
> > > > I intend to buy a new PC. Considering a 200GB HDD. Will
> > > > also buy XP Pro and install it myself. I need to format
> > > > the HDD as NTFS - presumably this can be done directly
> > > > from the XP CD-ROM. Questions : Can I create a single
> > > > ~200GB partition (i.e. a big Drive C:) or do I have to
> > > > split the HDD into numerous smaller partitions (e.g.
> > > > C=3D20GB, D=3D50GB, E=3D100GB, etc. up to the HDD capacity) ? Is=

> > > > there a limitation on partition size for NTFS (I know
> > > > there is for FAT32) ? Also, since 5 1/4" FDDs no longer
> > > > exist, is it possible to designate the CD/DVD drive as B: ?
> > > > Thanks !
> > >
> > >
> >
> >