Photoshop CS2 scratch disk partition size

I am buying a new PhotoShop dedicated PC.
Am not too sure about what size disk partition to allocate to Photoshop CS2.
I think I am going with 2 x 320GB hard drives (hhmm, barracuda or caviar).

How big of a partition should I set aside for the scratch disk in Drive D?
Or should I buy a third very small disk and dedicate it solely to PS CS2 scratch?

a 36gb 10k rpm raptor would be your best bet.

coreypolis wrote in post #2736807
a 26gb 10k rpm raptor would be your best bet.

As a disk drive SOLELY dedicated to Photoshop scratch? and in addition to the 2 320 GB drives?
The Raptors are darned expensive - do you suggest I forgo one of the 320gb drives?

Thanks for your reply!! I wonder what improvement I'd get? I know what the cost is....

an extra $146 for one of those drives. An interesting proposition..... What kind of performance improvement would I get to Photoshop CS2 with that?

well I'm assuming you were using 1 HD for the OS and 1 for storage of the photos, having the photos used in photoshop and the scrach disk on the same drive doesn't help all that much, so in theory if you have a good, small, fast HD dedicated only for a scratch disk you can fly with your photoshop editing. Assuming you have a good CPU, RAM etc.

You can get them for less if you search around.

coreypolis wrote in post #2736967
well I'm assuming you were using 1 HD for the OS and 1 for storage of the photos, having the photos used in photoshop and the scrach disk on the same drive doesn't help all that much, so in theory if you have a good, small, fast HD dedicated only for a scratch disk you can fly with your photoshop editing. Assuming you have a good CPU, RAM etc.

You can get them for less if you search around.

But what gains would I have on a system with 4 GB RAM and a E6600 Intel core duo 2.4 Ghz procesor?

Bringing up this old thread, sorry.

I am planning to redo my system configuration when I get my external HDD for backup. Currently I have the following:

WD 160GB SATAII
C: drive, 50GB for OS and Apps
D: drive, 50GB for Data
E: drive, 50GB for C Backup

WD 40GB ATA 100 (maybe 133)
F: drive, Data backup

Seagate 200GB
G: drive, Photos

When I get the external I plan to change the system to look like this:

WD 160GB SATAII
C: drive, 50GB for OS and Apps
D: drive, 100GB for Data

WD 40GB ATA 100 (maybe 133)
F: drive, Scratch Disk

Seagate 200GB
G: drive, Photos

External 500GB Drive
E: drive, Backup for entire system.

Am I wasting my time by using the 40GB drive as a scratch disk? Do you see a better way to configure it?

I think that is the best way to use it. I have my old pc that I will take the 30gig drive out to use for that. I also have 15gig, but I don't know what I will do with that.

Re; Raptor for scratch disk.

I have a 73GB Raptor that when I am booted into XP64 it is used ONLY for a PSCS scratch disk.

This set up (faster than a 36GB Raptor) offers very little speed advantage over using a partition on one of my normal data drives (400GB RAID1 and 500GB RAID1)

I have tested, (it's in the workstation speed test thread linked in the PP FAQ)

Theoretically adding a separate scratch drive should offer better boost.. but in my own tests the difference is negligible.

As to the OP's first question a 10GB partition should be enough, but you may want to go 20GB just top be safe.

In2Photos wrote in post #3069859
When I get the external I plan to change the system to look like this:

WD 160GB SATAII
C: drive, 50GB for OS and Apps
D: drive, 100GB for Data

WD 40GB ATA 100 (maybe 133)
F: drive, Scratch Disk

Seagate 200GB
G: drive, Photos

External 500GB Drive
E: drive, Backup for entire system.

Am I wasting my time by using the 40GB drive as a scratch disk? Do you see a better way to configure it?

I don't think you are wasting time with that 40GB drive as scratch disk... but I'm not sure it's the best choice.

It's the slowest drive you have,. by far...
But on the other hand,. where else would you put the scratch disk. The external is a no go, that leaves either the OS disk, or your photo/data drive?

Don't make a separate partition for the scratch on your 200GB photo drive, but once you get this all installed, try moving the primary scratch to the 40Gb and the 200GB and test each. See if it makes any difference.

CyberDyneSystems wrote in post #3070195
I don't think you are wasting time with that 40GB drive as scratch disk... but I'm not sure it's the best choice.

It's the slowest drive you have,. by far...
But on the other hand,. where else would you put the scratch disk. The external is a no go, that leaves either the OS disk, or your photo/data drive?

Don't make a separate partition for the scratch on your 200GB photo drive, but once you get this all installed, try moving the primary scratch to the 40Gb and the 200GB and test each. See if it makes any difference.

Thanks CDS. I will give it a go and see what kind of results I get. One day I might be able to swap the drive for a Raptor.

coreypolis wrote in post #2736807
a 36gb 10k rpm raptor would be your best bet.

Actually, this would be your most expencive and best bet. This is also what I am using (4 GB Ram Disk)

http://www.ncix.com …DISK&manufactur​e=Gigabyte

Im a big ran of ram drives and would be my #1 pick
Raptor would come in as #2, but is also a VERY good drive. I still have a 36 and 74 gig raptor install in my system as a system drive, which used to be my scratch disk until I came across the ram disk and just got tempted to try it out.

In2Photos wrote in post #3069859
Bringing up this old thread, sorry.

I am planning to redo my system configuration when I get my external HDD for backup. Currently I have the following:

WD 160GB SATAII
C: drive, 50GB for OS and Apps
D: drive, 50GB for Data
E: drive, 50GB for C Backup

WD 40GB ATA 100 (maybe 133)
F: drive, Data backup

Seagate 200GB
G: drive, Photos

When I get the external I plan to change the system to look like this:

WD 160GB SATAII
C: drive, 50GB for OS and Apps
D: drive, 100GB for Data

WD 40GB ATA 100 (maybe 133)
F: drive, Scratch Disk

Seagate 200GB
G: drive, Photos

External 500GB Drive
E: drive, Backup for entire system.

Am I wasting my time by using the 40GB drive as a scratch disk? Do you see a better way to configure it?

I also dont see the point of having soo many JOBD drives. All these seperate drives for backup. I would just get a nice hardware raid card and make a fat RAID 5 array or RAID 10. Its good, fast, peice of mind. I also use a NAS system to backup my raid array, since I just HATE doing manual backups to JOBD arrays.

JOBD = just a bunch of drives.

StealthLude wrote in post #3070266
Actually, this would be your most expencive and best bet. This is also what I am using (4 GB Ram Disk)

http://www.ncix.com …DISK&manufactur​e=Gigabyte

Im a big ran of ram drives and would be my #1 pick
Raptor would come in as #2, but is also a VERY good drive. I still have a 36 and 74 gig raptor install in my system as a system drive, which used to be my scratch disk until I came across the ram disk and just got tempted to try it out.

So then on top of that board you have to buy the RAM? Sounds muy expensivo, no?

In2Photos wrote in post #3070284
So then on top of that board you have to buy the RAM? Sounds muy expensivo, no?

It is expencive, its the most expencive scratch disk ive seen to date lol. You can throw a max of 4 x 1gig ram sticks on it to make a total of a 4GB ram drive.

Its the most expencive option, but its also the fastest. The write speeds are unreal and really take advantage of my Raid 5 setup.

Only reason I bought this setup is because I picked it up used, and wanted to try it out to see for myself. Now that ive tried it, id buy one new if I had to.

Raptor would also be the next best pick, its a freakin fast drive. Fastest you are getting w/o going to a 15,000 RPM SCSI which will cost you just as much as that ram drive to deploy.