These forums have been archived and are now read-only.

The new forums are live and can be found at https://forums.eveonline.com/

EVE General Discussion

 
  • Topic is locked indefinitely.
 

Eve performance hit if installed on non-OS parition?

Author
Ademaro Imre
Deep Core Mining Inc.
Caldari State
#1 - 2012-08-06 13:50:04 UTC  |  Edited by: Ademaro Imre
I do not have games installed on my C drive, so I don't know if the Eve install of 11.6 gigs is normal. But - its a big chuck of time every time I do my OS partition backup which I do more frequently than my other drives and partitions.

Is there a performance hit if I choose the installion to be on a non-OS partition? I did that before, but that was on a different operating system. Of course, I know there will be some space on the C drive, but I am trying to move as much of the 11.6 gigs off the C drive to keep backups and space more efficient.

I do not suspect there will be a performance hit, but I am not as knowledgable about these sorts of things as other people.

If there is a penalty, are there any suggestions to reduce the penalty? I could insert a partition right after the OS partition so its as close to the disc edge as possible and put the install there.

Thanks for any replies.
Hammer Borne
Doomheim
#2 - 2012-08-06 13:51:22 UTC
If anything, installing on a non-os partition would increase performance (but not a noticeable amount, unless it is also a separate physical drive)
Cymru2000
Pandemic Horde Inc.
Pandemic Horde
#3 - 2012-08-06 13:58:46 UTC
I have EVE installed on a seperate (external USB) drive, and have noticed very little difference compared to when it was installed on my OS partition. Only login is slightly slower, but I put this down to the drive being External rather than because of the partition EVE is installed to.
Omega Sunset
Black.Omega
#4 - 2012-08-06 15:14:03 UTC  |  Edited by: Omega Sunset
Probably depends on the format. Where, it doesn't matter, but for instance you'll get faster performance accessing it off a FAT32, overall. With whatever format, you will have increased access if it's on a second physical drive than on your OS drive. It does matter on the physical disc though, where as the inner rings of the platters are faster that the outer edges, but that holds more true for older drives where they have less platters stacked. With today's drives it's hard to place data in any particular faster access spots on the drives as they are so stacked, so placing the OS partition before or after won't do much if anything.

Oh and partitions on the same physical drive does nothing one way or the other, other than make it easier to keep track of your data junk, for you not the OS. Only physical partitions increase performance (separate physical drive) since you are splitting up read/write access, physically. If your OS is reading something for the OS, your drive is tied up until finished or splits the allocation time, yet on a second drive it can read/write independently (as far as hardware is concerned).

—Ω—

Denidil
The Scope
Gallente Federation
#5 - 2012-08-06 15:19:50 UTC
Omega Sunset wrote:
\you'll get faster performance accessing it off a FAT32, overall.\

[CITATION NEEDED]

Tedium and difficulty are not the same thing, if you don't realize this then STFU about game design.

Omega Sunset
Black.Omega
#6 - 2012-08-06 15:50:26 UTC
Denidil wrote:
Omega Sunset wrote:
\you'll get faster performance accessing it off a FAT32, overall.\

[CITATION NEEDED]

College text book. Was a big hoopla years ago when when they started to phase out FAT32 based OS's in favor for NT. The downside is it's less secure, but tends to read/write more contiguously. NTFS tends to often be more fragmented, slowing down access speeds. Less of an issue with faster drives now, often why the NTFS was installed on a workstation rather than your typical consumer grade system.

—Ω—

Wingmate
Perkone
Caldari State
#7 - 2012-08-06 15:52:17 UTC
Hammer Borne wrote:
If anything, installing on a non-os partition would increase performance (but not a noticeable amount, unless it is also a separate physical drive)


this. moving it off your main drive - where the OS is already utilizing part of your HDD's bandwidth - can only increase performance, as long as it's an equivalent drive.

i make spreadsheets for pretty cheap. contact me for more info.

https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&t=197433

Omega Sunset
Black.Omega
#8 - 2012-08-06 16:07:49 UTC  |  Edited by: Omega Sunset
Wingmate wrote:


this. moving it off your main drive - where the OS is already utilizing part of your HDD's bandwidth - can only increase performance, as long as it's an equivalent drive.
Equivalent or better? yeah. Physical drive either slaved or on HD2/HD2-slave. Depending how much more performance you want out of it, I wouldn't worry so much about size but rather RPM speeds for a second drive. Also make sure you have plenty of system memory, you don't want to slow down performance overall doing VM swaps. Now if you were going for server performance (luvs srvrs), RAM drive? :D hehe j/k too much trouble for a desktop toy.

Oh yeah, let me clarify. Equivalent if RAID 0. I'm not suggesting a RAID setting though, just independent drives. Since you are just putting the APPs on a second drive, and not trying to speed up your first drive with the OS (not needed), I see no benefit on RAID 0... at least as long as you have plenty of system memory. Now if you are running multiple apps, a database, OS, compiling, video editing, yeah sure RAID 0.

—Ω—

Betrinna Cantis
#9 - 2012-08-06 16:11:28 UTC
I have 3 installations of EvE for 3 accounts. 1 on C drive, 1 on D drive,(partition from main drive NTFS) and 1 on F drive,( a PATA drive slaved off the DVD with a copy of the "D" partition.) F drive copy is a copy of the original download 2 years ago. I can run all 3 toons very well with a 4 year old machine. Seperate drives is faster for me,( and I have a PATA drive!) but I ran off the main with C & D drives sharing the same physical drive. I have had no issuse other than as cache builds up, load times are a little slower.

Alts have been changed to protect the Innocent. You may have mistaken me for someone who cares.....

Gogela
The Conference Elite
CODE.
#10 - 2012-08-06 16:18:26 UTC
Cymru2000 wrote:
I have EVE installed on a seperate (external USB) drive, and have noticed very little difference compared to when it was installed on my OS partition. Only login is slightly slower, but I put this down to the drive being External rather than because of the partition EVE is installed to.

Yah but you are adding the USB to the bus path though. There's an interface for what are typically 3GB/sec SATA on one side of the USB cord and on the other the USB on-board bus.... so you are going through a second bus at (I'm guessing) max USB2.0 speed using what is probably a 5400RPM HDD and the SATA bus which is probably the cheapest one the external drive vendor could find. That's obviously not going to be very fast because there's bad latency in part because of the second bus and in part because most external drives are crappy and have relatively low transfer rates due to low quality harddrive and multiple buses. Eve is faster if you install it on another drive, but I would look into like a stripped RAID array or something because the external drive option is a real non-starter in the speed department. Just my 2 isk...

Signatures should be used responsibly...

Chokichi Ozuwara
Perkone
Caldari State
#11 - 2012-08-06 16:51:06 UTC
I run Eve on my second drive. Seems to run pretty good.

Tears will be shed and pants will need to be changed all round.

Wingmate
Perkone
Caldari State
#12 - 2012-08-06 19:42:32 UTC
Omega Sunset wrote:
Equivalent or better? yeah.


to clarify, i meant that moving it from a 7200rpm drive to a 5400rpm drive wouldn't be better, but 7200rpm to 7200rpm would be better.

i make spreadsheets for pretty cheap. contact me for more info.

https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&t=197433

Denidil
The Scope
Gallente Federation
#13 - 2012-08-06 19:49:34 UTC
Omega Sunset wrote:
Denidil wrote:
Omega Sunset wrote:
\you'll get faster performance accessing it off a FAT32, overall.\

[CITATION NEEDED]

College text book. Was a big hoopla years ago when when they started to phase out FAT32 based OS's in favor for NT. The downside is it's less secure, but tends to read/write more contiguously. NTFS tends to often be more fragmented, slowing down access speeds. Less of an issue with faster drives now, often why the NTFS was installed on a workstation rather than your typical consumer grade system.


what was accurate years ago, may not be accurate now. it's called optimization. happens as something matures.

Tedium and difficulty are not the same thing, if you don't realize this then STFU about game design.

Xiang Jing
State War Academy
Caldari State
#14 - 2012-08-06 19:50:53 UTC  |  Edited by: Xiang Jing
You'll be fine.

Years ago I was worried about transfer speeds causing delays in games I installed on external drives, but I've been doing it with all kinds of games now without any problems. Pretty much any new MMO I might not continue goes on an external, works fine.

Heck, one of my PCs has a partition just for the OS and everything else is a non OS partition, and that works well too. I know a lot of people who choose that route.
Omega Sunset
Black.Omega
#15 - 2012-08-06 20:05:54 UTC  |  Edited by: Omega Sunset
Denidil wrote:
Omega Sunset wrote:
Denidil wrote:
Omega Sunset wrote:
\you'll get faster performance accessing it off a FAT32, overall.\

[CITATION NEEDED]

College text book. Was a big hoopla years ago when when they started to phase out FAT32 based OS's in favor for NT. The downside is it's less secure, but tends to read/write more contiguously. NTFS tends to often be more fragmented, slowing down access speeds. Less of an issue with faster drives now, often why the NTFS was installed on a workstation rather than your typical consumer grade system.


what was accurate years ago, may not be accurate now. it's called optimization. happens as something matures.

Hmm? NTFS has hardly changed that much. Personally I prefer ext4, but Billy just had this thing for the old NTFS that still dominates the consumer market today.


Xiang Jing wrote:
You'll be fine.
Gogela was correct. Not that it isn't viable for certain reasons, but not in the case of performance. ....and for some people too, as my last little external drive fell into the garbage disposal lol.

—Ω—

Riyal
invidious Squid
#16 - 2012-08-06 21:00:15 UTC
Another plus is that installing on a different drive keeps your boot.ini safe.

In hindsight my post should have had more psssshhhh

Johan Civire
Caldari Provisions
Caldari State
#17 - 2012-08-06 22:35:08 UTC  |  Edited by: Johan Civire
I use eve on a ssd :) thats speed up but still have the loading bar for undock and warping.... Nah its because the server need to load it for you and send the data to you and jump between server(s) to bad i was hoping that this fixs the grid lag i guess not...
Ademaro Imre
Deep Core Mining Inc.
Caldari State
#18 - 2012-08-07 02:08:23 UTC
Riyal wrote:
Another plus is that installing on a different drive keeps your boot.ini safe.


That right there.

Thanks guys and gals for the discussion.