Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

Toys_R_Us

FSX - Install to C: or D: Drive ?

Recommended Posts

I'm finally ready to take the FSX plunge with a brand new machine containing a E8500 chip. It's up, running, and ready to go. This machine will be dedicated to FSX for the most part.I partitioned the 500 gig drive to C: drive at 250 gigs, leaving about 230 gigs, set up as the D: drive.My question is... Is there any reason to not install FSX to the D: drive and have that drive totally dedicated to FSX ? It sure would make for a nice clean and easy defrag.Bob (Las Cruces, NM)Asus P5N-DIntel E85004 Gigs Corsair DDR2 XMS2 6400/800Nvidia 8800 GT/512Windows XP Home SP2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Help AVSIM continue to serve you!
Please donate today!

The only reason would be if you were looking to eek out the absolute 100% most speed from the system... as it relates to FSX/FS2004 LOADING TIMES ONLY. Placing the sim on the C: drive will place it closer to the outer edge of the drive, which is faster. This will lead to fractionally faster flight loading times... and have zero bearing on in-flight performance. I would actually not recommend this in your situation, just because. Placing the sim on the D: drive will keep it nice and segregated. Along with a decent defrag tool, you can keep the D: drive nice and orderly and clean... all sim, all the time. Loading times will be *ever so slightly* impacted, but probably not even enough to make you notice it. (FSX as you know takes longer to load than FS2004 no matter what). Again, no in-game performance differences.So which sounds better to you? Fractionally faster loading times, or exceptionally organized flight sim location? Put 'er out on the D: drive - no real debate needed! :)-Greg(Sidenote: I run FSX on a dedicated 250GB drive, and it has more than enough storage space to handle things)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

On the other hand, why complicate the issue for no benefit? There is no organizational benefit for a D drive install. A defrag "clean-up" will clean-up it up, whatever "it" is. Single or partitioned is not a factor. With a C install, a modern defragger will also be able to position a FS directory to the outer edge in the process. Even the most modern defragers cannot move a D drive directory to the outer edge of the drive (where max performance is available). It it's on a partition, the defragger can't do dat. So, the organizational benefit is nil, an unnecessary complication is created and the performance benefit is "at least a bit." Don't partition the drive at all. Just let FS install to its default directory and degrag with a modern tool.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Thanks all for the replys.But I guess my logic gets to be... If I install FSX to the D: drive, wouldn't there be significantly less chance of any drive fragmentation in the first place, and after only a very long period of time. Wouldn't this essentially take the pressure off of having to defrag all the time, or even at all once you reach a point of your own level of add-on saturation ?Bob (Las Cruces, NM)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Modern defraggers allow the option to be the default defrag program. The C drive has to be done anyway. Schedule a once a week run and that's done. I use Ultimate. If I haven't added anything, it's done in 5 minuites. Looks like everything stayed put, even on a Very actively used C. For instance I loaded Crysis. It didn't touch my hi performance FS file placement. And (BTW) load times are noticeably improved with a C drive install. If you fly a lot, that will be noticed, and appreciated. I really don't see the point of the added complication, other than being clever to speak of.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

With vigilance, the C: drive install can perform quite nicely - however, partitioning a drive and installing MSFS to the separate logical drive is really not a very complicated action.In fact, depending on your definition of complicated, it might actually be LESS complicated to install to a separate drive (logical or physical) simply because you know all your flightsim stuff will be in this one bucket. Bob, you are correct that a separate drive install will not fragment anywhere near as much as a commingled drive, however Sam is also correct in stating that many modern defrag tools are quite capable of keeping things separate and clean. I guess in the end, it comes down to personal preferences - I don't think there is enough of a performance difference to compel you to go with the all-on-C: install, but the sim-on-D: approach does involve a little bit of work to kick off. There are some fringe benefits to the sim-on-D: method if you are a tinkerer or frequent reinstaller of OS's, but that gets into more complicated subjects. Good luck on your choice!-Greg

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites