I have seen many threads relating the performance of flightsims to disk fragmentation. This was particularly true a few years ago, still in the win98/fs95-fs2000 era, but the "super-fast" disks we have today have somehow reduced the impact of a fragmented disk/partition.Well, anyway, I do believe that FSX benefits from this even more than fs9 did - apparently it is more disk-intensive than it's predecessor - so, I have invested a few

Agreed. I have FSX running on a sole 30gig partition that I defrag regularly with UltimateDefrag and the difference in performance between that and when I ran FSX on a mixed partition is quite noticeable.Andrew

Personally, I love O&O Defrag. Copying it to another drive and back will give you an unfragmented file structure on the partition as long as you do wipe it before copying it back.... however there's one more thing that O&O does that nothing else seems to :)It intelligently groups files as per individual file usage... meaning that all the files that FSX uses most are grouped real close together on the drive, others are grouped based on just how often they are accessed :)I find that performance seems to be greatly enhanced if:- You dedicate one drive to the OS, one to FSX, and have your Windows page file on yet another drive that may also house other files if you like... as long as those files arn't needed by the OS or FSX.- Each drive should be on completely different busses. For example, I have two SATA drives and two IDE drives in this system, all are on primary channels of differing controllers.- O&O - Do a defrag by NAME of the XP and FSX drives, then once its done, perform a defrag by Access.Just some things I've been doing for a while to get the most out of gaming of all sorts.

I believe, the best performance you will get with FSX on an own HDD (not partition) - something fast like a Raptor with a O&O defrag by filename.Heiko