FSX and FS9

[Pato]

Can I run both FSX and FS9 on the one HDD without getting any problem interactions between each.?
I am getting a 1TB HDD PC and wasn't going to get it partitioned. How much space should be allocated to each simulator programme if I need
to get it partitioned.? Please.

[dbcunnz]

QUOTE (Pato @ Sep 18 2010, 04:34 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Can I run both FSX and FS9 on the one HDD without getting any problem interactions between each.?
I am getting a 1TB HDD PC and wasn't going to get it partitioned. How much space should be allocated to each simulator programme if I need
to get it partitioned.? Please.

Best way is to partition the drive into three partitions Windows on one FSX on one and FS9 on the other that should work with no problems.

Doug

[Pato]

QUOTE (dbcunnz @ Sep 23 2010, 05:42 AM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Best way is to partition the drive into three partitions Windows on one FSX on one and FS9 on the other that should work with no problems.

Doug

I thought I might be able to run both without partitions. What size partitions do you think I should have.?

[creator2003]

Shorter answer Yes with no problems at all

[Pato]

QUOTE (creator2003 @ Sep 23 2010, 06:12 AM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Shorter answer Yes with no problems at all

Great. I thought there may be some interaction between them, but I guess if only running either FSX or FS9 at a time all will be well.
Thanks for confirming that. Cheers.

[deeknow]

I'm also running with both on the same partition, no probs so far. Be interested to hear from anyone who has had issues. You arent running them concurrently so cant see how it could be a problem really.

[IslandBoy77]

Be aware, however, that drive partitioning will cause a reasonable slow-down and you run the risk of losing the lot if one partition goes down. The only time I give serious thought to partitioning is on backup drives where the workload is light. There has been a misconception bandied about for some years about the usefulness of partitioning, but in the real world partitioning is just a great way to wear you hard drive out quickly, slow your system down, and increase the likelihood of problems.

While it is true that it's possible that a single partition killing itself will leave the other 2 intact, there is just as much chance of the drive wearing itself out jumping between the partitions and you losing the lot.

The only time that "splitting" Windows / FS9 / FSX up works well, is if you use 3 separate drives.

Your call - I wouldn't (7 years running my own computer tech business, 25 years in computing in general)

[Ian Warren]

Following the 'above' recommend , install a second HD , it caused all sorts of funny problems , bleeding though into each and the other .

[Pato]

QUOTE (deeknow @ Sep 23 2010, 07:06 AM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}>

I'm also running with both on the same partition, no probs so far. Be interested to hear from anyone who has had issues. You arent running them concurrently so cant see how it could be a problem really.

Thats what I thought. Good to get confirmation that it is working for you without problems.

QUOTE (IslandBoy77 @ Sep 23 2010, 07:07 AM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Be aware, however, that drive partitioning will cause a reasonable slow-down and you run the risk of losing the lot if one partition goes down. The only time I give serious thought to partitioning is on backup drives where the workload is light. There has been a misconception bandied about for some years about the usefulness of partitioning, but in the real world partitioning is just a great way to wear you hard drive out quickly, slow your system down, and increase the likelihood of problems.

While it is true that it's possible that a single partition killing itself will leave the other 2 intact, there is just as much chance of the drive wearing itself out jumping between the partitions and you losing the lot.

The only time that "splitting" Windows / FS9 / FSX up works well, is if you use 3 separate drives.

Your call - I wouldn't (7 years running my own computer tech business, 25 years in computing in general)

Appreciate your comments. That convinces me not to partition. cheers.

QUOTE (Ian Warren @ Sep 23 2010, 07:23 AM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Following the 'above' recommend , install a second HD , it caused all sorts of funny problems , bleeding though into each and the other .

Do I understand that you had bleeding from one HD to the other.? That surprises me. Very interesting.

[AlisterC]

I had some problems with FSX when it wasn't on "C" drive. But since I've put it on there now I'm not having any. Was so long ago I can't remember what my problem was though. I just remember having them

[Pato]

QUOTE (Albatross @ Sep 23 2010, 09:15 AM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}>

I had some problems with FSX when it wasn't on "C" drive. But since I've put it on there now I'm not having any. Was so long ago I can't remember what my problem was though. I just remember having them

I have never had FSX on "C" drive so don't know what that would have been. Strange things happen to FS programmes!!

[Ian Warren]

QUOTE (Pato @ Sep 18 2010, 08:18 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}>

you had bleeding from one HD to the other.? That surprises me. Very interesting.

Sorry , was to say had bleed until installed a second HD , one for each Flightsim .

[IslandBoy77]

Not sure exactly what sort of symptoms Ian had with bleeding (are you able to describe that for us Ian?) - but my experience has been that if a Windows install is setup well and maintained well, and if a person organises their system well (file-wise) and with forethought, 2nd & 3rd drives pose no problems. It could be that 2nd & 3rd drives are problematic on XP, but under Vista & 7 (32 & 64 bit) I've had zero problems with FSX at all. I know some people try to assign their doc folders to a drive other than C - I've seen that cause all sorts of problems, on XP, Vista & 7 (and I would be careful in re-assigning special folders - although 7 is far more "able" to cope with this than previous OSes). Keeping it simple is always a good idea, especially if you like tinkering.

My config is thus:
1) Main Drive: Windows 7 64-bit with assorted utils, games & progs
2) 2nd Drive: Win virtual mem file / Nero & Photoshop temp file repository ONLY
3) 3rd Drive: FSX & SDK + all FSX sceneries etc ONLY

The way I have it setup, the 3 drives compartmentalise things nicely & cleanly, with no issues. Win 7 puts a Program File (x86) folder on the 3rd drive, and it causes no issues with the folder of the same name on #1 drive.

What I'd really be interested in is confirmation of another post on NZFF about SSD performance. I see that there is now a wide spread of read / write speed drives available (so if anyone reading this is thinking about it, watch for that), so it's possible that an SSD that can hold a sustained read or 100MB/sec or better could outperform everything but a Raptor-class HDD. I'm toying with the idea of 1 or 2 SSDs in the future, but their size / speed / cost ratio is just too high at the moment.

A thought: has anyone got an SATA3 motherboard / hard drive configuration up and running? I read that the SATA3 drives still won't deliver full theoretical speed (in the same way the the 2's generally only got 60-70% max of their best theoretical speed), but even if they only get half their top rate, a 3 should eat most SSDs for breakfast, and at a much more attractive $/MB ratio (not to mention much bigger drives).

[Bazza]

Works ok for me...

[s0cks]

QUOTE (IslandBoy77 @ Sep 18 2010, 08:46 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}>

A thought: has anyone got an SATA3 motherboard / hard drive configuration up and running? I read that the SATA3 drives still won't deliver full theoretical speed (in the same way the the 2's generally only got 60-70% max of their best theoretical speed), but even if they only get half their top rate, a 3 should eat most SSDs for breakfast, and at a much more attractive $/MB ratio (not to mention much bigger drives).

My New WD 1TB Black Edition has a r/w speed of roughly 120mb/s when testing with HD Tune. SATA3.

[Snowman]

Ive had FSX and FS9, and all the related FSX and FS9 scenery building tools, and both FSX and FS9 SDKs co-existing on the same HDD for 6 months, without a single problem of any kind in either sim.

Lawrie.

[dart15]

QUOTE (Pato @ Sep 18 2010, 05:34 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Can I run both FSX and FS9 on the one HDD without getting any problem interactions between each.?

Slightly off topic but I DID have problems when having FSX SP2 on one partition and FSX Acceleration on another partition. I assume that was because they both wanted to share the same .cfg which defaults to the C drive?

I would like to reinstall Acceleration to take advantage of carrier ops and the only thing that stops me is the amount of FW I have (some excellent) designed for FS9 but which happily runs under FSX but not under Acceleration. Very frustrating. I find that I am gathering a nice collectioin of naval aircraft and I like the look of the developments at http://www.flyingstations.com/ - their FW offerings so far are excellent and I am looking forward to getting the carriers. If you share an interest in naval aviation - particularly British naval aviation, have a look!

Dart out

[IslandBoy77]

QUOTE (dart15 @ Oct 12 2010, 02:35 PM) <{POST_SNAPBACK}>

Slightly off topic but I DID have problems when having FSX SP2 on one partition and FSX Acceleration on another partition. I assume that was because they both wanted to share the same .cfg which defaults to the C drive?

I would like to reinstall Acceleration to take advantage of carrier ops and the only thing that stops me is the amount of FW I have (some excellent) designed for FS9 but which happily runs under FSX but not under Acceleration. Very frustrating. I find that I am gathering a nice collectioin of naval aircraft and I like the look of the developments at http://www.flyingstations.com/ - their FW offerings so far are excellent and I am looking forward to getting the carriers. If you share an interest in naval aviation - particularly British naval aviation, have a look!

Dart out

Yep, that would be right. Acceleration is basically a part of FSX, not a standalone program. It's always your best bet to keep all the FSX stuff together, which is why I use a whole sep hard drive. If you've got add-ons that don't like Acceleration, you'll either need to leave it uninstalled (as I believe FSX is aware of Acceleration even if it's installed on another drive / partition / directory), or have a dual-boot system where one installation as FSX SP2 / Acceleration & one that doesn't. Why developers are so short-sighted as to not enable their stuff to work with Acceleration is beyond me - perhaps a rush to get stuff to market & then laziness to not update it?

If you need to re-install Acceleration, you should be able to uninstall it, reboot, then reinstall using your FSX default directory as it's install directory and it should be all good. Having said all that, I know that FSX can be a bit of a pig when one starts fiddling with things - due partly to its activation process - so be prepared for a total reinstall of FSX / Acceleration. You might also end up with a reactivation problem, so be prepared for that and calling Microsoft to have FSX manually reactivated.

[Ian Warren]

Had a few problem installing of late since i deleted entire FSX from the PC - it was duplicating , don,t push buttons after being a little brain damaged