IDE Drives and UT2004

[legacy-chobb]

Is this off-topic? I don't know.

Anyway, I currently have IDE0 Master partitioned (C: and G: ). C: is obviously Windows and G: contains UT2004 (amongst other things).

1) If I added a new HDD (IDE0 Slave) and installed UT2004 on that, would I notice any speed increase because it is a separate drive or would the fact that it uses the same cable negate any advantage?

2) I also have a DVD-RW and a CD-RW on IDE1. Would I be better (playing UT2004-wise) having, a HDD and an optical drive on each IDE cable? Or would this cause other issues?

Cheers,

[legacy-TheGreatFoo]

Swings and roundabouts, I think.

Having a hard drive and a removable disc on the same cable can cause problems... especially when you remove and insert discs, and when games are authenticating their play discs...

likewise, having the 2 drives on the same cable will probably slow things down as well.

Since the game will be making use of both your hard drives + your cd drive, you can't have all 3 devices on seperate cables, so you're gonna have some slowdown no matter what you do. I think.

I would opt for:
Cable 1: Both hard drives
Cable 2: CD Drives

[legacy-chobb]

Yup. Thought so.

Cheers.

[legacy-0V3RC10CK3D]

OR!

IDE 1 = Hard Drive1, Optical Drive1
IDE 2 = Hard Drive2, Optical Drive2

And just use a no cd crack / patch.

[legacy-Chris_18]

I've read at numerous sites that its not a good idea to put optical drives and hard drives on the same cable. It might be okay if all the drives are new but I keep mine seperate.

[legacy-Guyver1]

IDE tech lesson 1.

IDE drives on the same cable as master and slave will ONLY run at the speed of the SLOWEST device.

in laymans terms that means:

putting a CD device ( ATA33) on the same cable as a l33t ATA133 HDD with mean your l33t ATA133 HDD will only run at ATA33.

ALWAYS put HDD's on seperate cables to CD devices.

that it all

[legacy-Freezrburn]

Originally posted by TheGreatFoo
Swings and roundabouts, I think.

Having a hard drive and a removable disc on the same cable can cause problems... especially when you remove and insert discs, and when games are authenticating their play discs...

likewise, having the 2 drives on the same cable will probably slow things down as well.

Since the game will be making use of both your hard drives + your cd drive, you can't have all 3 devices on seperate cables, so you're gonna have some slowdown no matter what you do. I think.

I would opt for:
Cable 1: Both hard drives
Cable 2: CD Drives

I disagree slightly. You do not absolutely have to have a major slowdown. You can put all 3 on separate IDE channels. I use an ATA 133 controller card that handles ATA 133/100/66/33. This takes a few extra seconds onto my boot time but has proven to me to be well worth it.

[legacy-Danny_Diplo]

Originally posted by Chris_18
I've read at numerous sites that its not a good idea to put optical drives and hard drives on the same cable.

That advice keeps getting perpetuated, but is no longer true for modern motherboards (read: any mobo you've bought in the last 3 or 4 years). At one time the maximum IDE speed was determined by the slowest channel, but all modern motherboards have independent device timing (so that the speed of one channel isn't dependant on that of the other).

The ability of an IDE/ATA channel to operate a master and slave device using different transfer modes is called independent device timing. The hard disk controllers integrated on modern chipsets all pretty much support independent timing, as do modern add-in controllers, but this was not always the case. Independent timing can be an issue if, for example, you upgrade an older PC and get a new, high-speed drive, but want to continue to be able to use the older one on the same channel with the new one.

- http://www.pcguide.com/ref/hdd/if/ide/conf_Timing.htm

Another forum myth bites the dust...

[legacy-buzzby]

right at last a use for my uni course. i will prob repeat a bit of what has already been said but stick with me. (not like that back up a bit)

Any way optical should always be on different cables to hard drives see above for why.

As with hard drives. The only benifit you have with partioning your hard drive like you have is that you can format C: with out it affecting your G: but you still have UT2004 and windows on the same drive so the drive cannot read a windows bit and a UT bit at the same time. (unless they are on different platters and can be read by 2 separte heads) If you added another HD to your IDE0 as a slave and installed UT on that in theory there is a speed advantage as the disks will read independant of each other although the information still has to be sent over the same cable.

The BEST BEST setup without RAID would be windows on IDE0 UT on IDE2 and an OPTICAL on IDE1 so that all the information can be sent over different cables.

In the real world in which we all unfortanaly live due to disk fragmentation and other speed issues there wouldn't be a huge ingame speed increase if any at all. You may notice a map loading time increase, but only of a few seconds.


Best way to improve UT performance would be to up your RAM to 1GB if you dont have already and to get a faster graphics

EDIT: just read Danny_Diplo post. I would still never have optical and HD on the same channel as there is still a speed loss due to the switching speed for each drive

[legacy-StiGMaT]

Re: IDE Drives and UT2004

Originally posted by chobb
Is this off-topic? I don't know.

Anyway, I currently have IDE0 Master partitioned (C: and G: ). C: is obviously Windows and G: contains UT2004 (amongst other things).

1) If I added a new HDD (IDE0 Slave) and installed UT2004 on that, would I notice any speed increase because it is a separate drive or would the fact that it uses the same cable negate any advantage?

2) I also have a DVD-RW and a CD-RW on IDE1. Would I be better (playing UT2004-wise) having, a HDD and an optical drive on each IDE cable? Or would this cause other issues?

Cheers,

i have 2 hard driver both western digitals a 60did master an a 40 gig slave they both are split in 2, (in half 30/30 and 20/20) my windosz in on my c wich is a 30gig and my ut is on a 20 gig on my slave i tryied a ton of thing installing it in my C in my D in all drives doesnt chnage anything in speed

all my drives are 7200RMP maybe it would do a diffrece to you if your matser is a 5200RMP and your slave a 7200RMP

besides that nada

[jefe]

Get a SATA drive and forget about it


Anyway, best thing to do is have both HDDs on the same IDE cable if you have to.

[legacy-chobb]

Thanks for all the advice.

I think I'll keep both HDDs on the one cable but put UT2004 on the second drive. Can't hurt.

[legacy-breadbaker]

IMHO best way to go without any additional hardware.

[legacy-ChinksAhoy]

Re: IDE Drives and UT2004

Originally posted by chobb
Is this off-topic? I don't know.

Anyway, I currently have IDE0 Master partitioned (C: and G: ). C: is obviously Windows and G: contains UT2004 (amongst other things).

1) If I added a new HDD (IDE0 Slave) and installed UT2004 on that, would I notice any speed increase because it is a separate drive or would the fact that it uses the same cable negate any advantage?

2) I also have a DVD-RW and a CD-RW on IDE1. Would I be better (playing UT2004-wise) having, a HDD and an optical drive on each IDE cable? Or would this cause other issues?

Cheers,

i'm surprised no one caught this...

the simple fact that IDE0 is PARTITIONED, means he's already got a performance loss. Partition C will always be in use (it's the system drive), the partition that contains the pagefile will always be in use... as long as the pagefile and system is on the same partition, it's not too big of an issue... but because UT2k4 is on the other partition, whenever the game has to access files, it's taking longer than it should because it has to share the time with accessing the pagefile on the OTHER partition. single device doing two tasks... and since this single device is the slowest bottleneck in a system... well, you think of it.

so my "rule" when it comes to partitions is one partition per drive, no more.

as for the new drive, even if you did make it slave to the other hard drive, you'll see a perfomance increase in load times... but your best bet is to make it master of the secondary channel... and make the optical drives slave.

when it comes to multiple drives, i've worked with a simple rule: make hard drives master whenever possible.

this stuff about the inability to mix hard drives with optical drives has not affected me in the past. I learned that the channel is based upon the speed of the master drive, and it slows down only when the slower drive is ACTIVE.

if you want to increase performance slightly more, put the pagefile on a seperate drive (and seperate channel) from both the system files, and UT2k4. meaning three drives, each on one of three channels.

edit: VG1 (below) is right, spreading the pagefile across your drives is better.

btw, UT2k4-wise... it only accesses the CD to do the copy protection check... so it doesn't matter where the CD-rom is (in relation to the other drives)

[legacy-VG1]

Here's my setup

2 IDE controllers

1st ide
channel 1 c:
Channel 2 DVD, CD burner

2nd IDE
channel 1 D:
channel 2 E:

I've played around with putting the pagefiles here and there but I've found that the best way is to spread the pagefile across all the drives. It does make a noticable speed difference. If you are looking for real speed you'd have to step up to a RAID controller with 2 seperate identical drives. I think some IDE RAID controllers will run 4 drives independant of each other. Then you have SCSI wich supports 6, but we don't really need that kind of expense. I really do suggest getting another IDE controller and putting the second/third hard drive on it. They aren't real expensive. I think mine was $50 at the time (ata100)

The basic thing about IDE is with 2 devices on one channel it will only read/write to one device at a time. Having 2 drives on one cable is a little more efficient than one drive, but nothing drastic. By putting the drives on seperate channels you are allowing the ability to read and write simultaneously to each drive. RAID0 does this same thing while making 2+ drives look like one wich is the best, but you have to have the controller to do that and they have to be identical (or you waste space and efficency).