XP64 Cluster Size Fix?

[congo]

I'd like to know if there is a fix for customising the cluster size on a RAID-0 partition for XP64bit/Vista

I currently use a fix for XP pro that includes the replacement of several files in the I386 folder on the XP install disk...

AUTOCHK.EXE
AUTOCONV.EX_
AUTOFMT.EXE
DMADMIN.EX_
SETUPDD.SY_
SPCMDCON.SYS
UNTFS.DL_

I'm assuming that XP64 and vista won't install to large formatted clusters and wondered if there is a similar fix for these OS's.

[NickN]

Not possible on X64, or Vista, especially with x64 SP2 because the HAL is completely rebuilt. Even before SP2 the NTFS system files were already restricted but if some hotshot had sat down and reworked the files it may have been possible. SP2 completely replacied the HAL and it is no longer possible, so don

[congo]

Thanks heaps for that NickN.

Now I feel inferior because I thought FSX was running ok on my raid under XP x86, but there are some stutters, didn't concern me a whole lot as it runs pretty good in general. (A lot of apprehensions about FSX for nothing )

[NickN]

At 128K its 6 of one, half dozen of the other... yes on the right hard drives and correctly optimized by defrag, and, keeping the sliders in range of the hardware, RAID will help but it will also hinder under high loads so at 128K you are really pulling more CPU resources than are worth the loss. FSX is massively CPU bound and a 2-4+% loss of CPU to motherboard based RAID and the CPU cycles for each drive being accessed, 2+ drives may not be worth the CPU/bus deficit to FSX.

FS9 has an average file size of 128-256, FSX is 4+ times that so the STRIPE/cluster needs to increase to compensate.

The RAID card relieves the CPU cycles and the one I posted will do a 256K STRIPE. Usually you need to go to a 500+ dollar solution to get 512 and 1024 STRIPE ability.

128K STRIPE will work for 2 drives but as you increase the sliders and start demanding more be loaded, that

[congo]

Thanks again NickN for replying.

I should start a new thread perhaps, but this one's here so.....

I'm getting all the updates prepared and about to slipstream. ( I love doing this for some reason

[NickN]

its late and I need to get some rest. I do have some comments about what you posted but they will have to wait. I will post more tomorrow.

One thing I do recommend is to not slipstream anything into the OS other than SP2 and IE7. I do recall there were problems with x64SP2 and the use of nlite and other slipstream applications which were causing file corruption issues. I do not know if those were ever resolved.

I use the MS command line method to slipstream in order to make sure nothing gets corrupted. I never import any drivers or other 3rd party items, only original MS software, then install drivers/software as usuall.

Once I have a tested OS/software/driver install and I know for a fact it is all stable, defraged, has all my tweeks and custom settings in it, I perform a ASR backup of the entire installation, including my installed software which has all been configured and is ready to use with my personal setups for each program. From that point on I keep that ASR backup and use it to start fresh when ever I may wish to try something new or just dump the OS for a clean start. That means everything is restored including my software and settings in under 45 minutes.


Yes the IDE/RAID drivers will have a direct bearing on how efficient the RAID system runs. Some years back I used a combination of drivers for my NF2 rig which resolved poor NV raid issues. I remember I would use the NF4 IDE driver in combination with NV Raid on a NF2 motherboard if memory serves me correctly. Sometimes its a matter of doing some research and seeing what others are using to obtain results.

9% is way too high. That should be more like 3-4

[NickN]

I did not forget about you... I have not had very much time this weekend and on my way out again. I will post back as soon as I can.


In a nutshell, older AMD has nothing on modern Intel for gaming. The newer AMD products due out in Q1/Q2 of next year may break that cycle

Setting up a AMD or modern Intel dual core system requires you make sure you have the dual core patches installed into the OS for XP and in Vista, make sure the SP1 performance updates are installed, and, the video drivers set up correctly. Also, with FSX there are tweaks in affinity timning through the config file which help, and, the SP updates need to be installed correctly. DirectX must be updated on a regular basis now too


As for the CPU being slower GHz wise, its not about GHz, its about the CPU inners that deal with the memory controller and how efficient that area is. A 1.8gig Core2 is more efficient and faster than a AMD X2 4800+


As for upgrading to Phenom, that would depend on the motherboard. Even though a BIOS update may add support that does not mean the electronics on the board will allow the CPU to unleash its ability. The CPU must be correctly matched to a motherboard which fully supports it electronically, not just in a BIOS update.

[congo]

One thing I do recommend is to not slipstream anything into the OS other than SP2 and IE7. I do recall there were problems with x64SP2 and the use of nlite and other slipstream applications which were causing file corruption issues. I do not know if those were ever resolved.

Thanks for the replies NickN,

Well, I've been running the nilte slipstream since I last posted with no issues as far as I can tell, everything seems to be working properly except my old sidewinder joystick.

I integrated SP2, IE7 and all the critical updates for XPx64 into that install disk, then I ran a vulnerability scan and the system came up with a green light, all patched and secure

Not sure if I'll bother installing another RAID-0 with XPx64, running it on a 320gb drive now.

I've only just returned home, sorry about the late reply.

[congo]

Ok,

I'm happy to report that I achieved my original goal of installing a 64bit Windows OS to a HDD formatted with 64k cluster size.

I pondered about the matter for a couple of weeks and the answer hit me like a bolt from the blue.

This meant that I needed to experiment with disk cloning software, which I only tried 2 or 3 times over a decade ago, and I abandoned the practice because it was so slow and I didn't do it properly anyway then.

Ok, so, I broke up my RAID array and formatted one of the 320gb Hdd's with 64k clusters, let's call that drive "64x64".

I used the other ex-array drive to install a temporary XP system that I could use the cloning software from, as that software was windows based (Ghost).

I booted from the temp windows drive and cloned my XPx64 install straight onto the 64x64 Hdd with it's 64k clusters. This operation took nearly three minutes. (My 64bit XP install was only 7gb)

I then shutdown, disconnected all but the 64x64 Hdd and booted from that, and Voila! I now have XPx64bit running on 64k clusters

[NickN]

Question

is this XP x64 or XP x64 SP2 install?

and have you verified the current cluster format for the disk is indeed 64K by using a 3rd party disk software to see the low level properties?

[congo]

It's XPx64 SP2, and I did confirm it with a HDD bench utility as well as windows defrag report, but I'm having some trouble reproducing this now, so I'll report back in a day or so, I'm out of town for a day now.

[NickN]

Let me know what you find out. It does not make sense the x64 OS would run on 64K, and if by some fluke it did, I would also have to question for how long before data corruption may appear because the base NTFS files are designed to refuse to write on anything other than 4k.

[congo]

Let me know what you find out. It does not make sense the x64 OS would run on 64K, and if by some fluke it did, I would also have to question for how long before data corruption may appear because the base NTFS files are designed to refuse to write on anything other than 4k.

I cannot seem to reproduce my previous finding, despite it seemingly working on two different drives, so I'm nearly convinced I had an error in software reading the clusters as 64k

[NickN]

Ahhhhh Man....