[Sandwich]

In preparation for installing a new OS onto my fastest drive, I'd like to move all the data from the first (and therefore fastest) 15GB or so of that drive to someplace further on. Basically like a defrag, but with empty space positioned at the beginning of the drive, not files.

Does anyone know of a utility that can do this?

[Fury]

If it is anywhere a modern HDD in question, speed difference is minimal at best regardless of where the data is physically stored. My suggestion; forget about it. Just partition your hard drive like usual according to your needs and it'll be fine.

If you want faster data access, you need another HDD.

[Spicious]

More important would be keeping it defragged and probably making sure the new OS all ends up in the same region, but that should take care of itself anyway.

[Sandwich]

If it is anywhere a modern HDD in question, speed difference is minimal at best regardless of where the data is physically stored.

Wrong.

[Sandwich]

And here's my actual drive, as of 1 minute ago.

[attachment deleted by admin]

[FUBAR-BDHR]

So you have 2 drives then.  Couldn't you just move the OS to the other drive, partition the drive the way you want it, install the new OS, then move the old OS to the partition you want?  If it's windows there is a repartition utility called diskpart that may already be on your system.  I think I have a Linux utility that will do it too I'll have to look around and see if I can find it. 

It's called Gparted.  Should be free.  http://sourceforge.net/project/showfiles.php?group_id=115843&package_id=173828

[Sandwich]

I do know what I'm doing in asking this... I appreciate the desire to help, although the partitioning-newbie level stuff is kinda wasted on me.

If i helps you understand why, however... I have 3 drives: a 250 (3Gb free), a 160 (2Gb free), and a 750 (390Gb free). Windows XP is installed on my 250, as are all my applications and games. My 160 is for TV shows, and the 750 has a mix of TV shows and movies.

I want to do a fresh install of Windows (perhaps Vista, but probably XP) at the beginning of my 750, which is occupied by hundreds of videos. So all I'm looking for is a partitioning program that can reallocate that data to further "down" that drive, leaving me with room to install Windows.

Comprende?

[FUBAR-BDHR]

OK so you don't want to partition the drive then just move the data.  From the first post I was thinking you wanted to put 2 OS on the same drive. 

Here's an idea use Gparted to create a second partition at the end of the drive.  Move all your data to there.  Install the OS on the first partition.  Then move the data back and resize the partition again.  If there is too much data to do all at once you could move some, resize both partitions, repeat as necessary.

[Sandwich]

Ahh, now you're talking.

[Davros]

Windows XP is installed on my 250, as are all my applications and games.

hang on you have windows and ALL your games stored on a 250gig drive, thats discracefull behaviour - shame on you


ps: paragon hard disk manager can do what you want

[Ghostavo]

Not everyone has 3 billion games installed like you do... 

Still, what is the reason for the speed loss when moving away from the beginning of the drive? Does the HDD needle have a standard position when idle or something?

[Sandwich]

It's a matter of the increasing size of the rings out from the center of the spindle. Let's say you have 1gb on a ring surrounding the center. That ring is a certain length, let's say X. On the outer rim, you can fit Y number of X-length strips into a single ring. Now, because the HDD is spinning, that central GB of data passes by the head 7200 times per minute. Meanwhile, the GB of data on the outer rim only passes by 7200/Y times per minute, meaning that it can be accessed less frequently than the inner ring, thereby causing that data to be read slower.

[Fury]

Sarnie, it's not going to work the way you have it imagined.

If you have one partition at the beginning of the drive and one partition at the end of the drive, you won't notice any speed difference whatsoever because drive heads will have to constantly travel from one end to the other to read and write data. Actually, it might even slow down your hard drive access times as opposed to where data are stored contiguously with minimal head travel time.

The more data a HDD has, the more important it is that the drive heads have to move less opposed to where the data is physically stored. The only way for you to notice any kind of speed difference is to move ALL data to the beginning of the drive and nothing else whatsoever elsewhere on the drive, this way the heads won't have to move to the other end of the drive at all. The Tom's Hardware performance graph you posted, it is from a synthetic test that hardly has any relevance to real usage. Any speed difference you might notice is just a placebo effect.

You get better performance by buying two latest generation HDD's and using one for the OS and the other for the data you want to access fast.

[Sandwich]

I will have all the data at the beginning of the drive, once everything's done. I won't leave things in multiple partitions permanently, just long enough to make sure that the OS data is first in line. Once it is, I'll resize things and copy the video data from the temporary partition to its final resting place - after the OS data. Then I delete the temp partition and defrag the drive.

[Davros]

I think you would be better doing nothing for a month then defragging according to last access time

[castor]

Meanwhile, the GB of data on the outer rim only passes by 7200/Y times per minute, meaning that it can be accessed less frequently than the inner ring

Its the other way round really. All the stuff on the outer rim must be passed as many 1/s as all the stuff on the inner rim (constant angular velocity). So the outer ring is faster (in terms of kb/s, due to higher linear velocity).

[Scooby_Doo]

Also don't forget interweaving.

[jr2]

Meanwhile, the GB of data on the outer rim only passes by 7200/Y times per minute, meaning that it can be accessed less frequently than the inner ring

Its the other way round really. All the stuff on the outer rim must be passed as many 1/s as all the stuff on the inner rim (constant angular velocity). So the outer ring is faster (in terms of kb/s, due to higher linear velocity).

Yup.