charonme Posted October 28, 2012 Report Share Posted October 28, 2012 how effective is uTorrent at utilizing large amounts of RAM?(for example in order to minimize hdd usage and fragmentation)in other words is there any point in putting 16gigs of ram into a torrentbox? (64bit win7 or server2008r2) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DreadWingKnight Posted October 28, 2012 Report Share Posted October 28, 2012 It's not effective to even try.Reducing HDD usage like you want to would actually cause MORE damage to the drive rather than less.It would also reduce performance and increase data loss in case of system failure.Fragmentation is neutralized effectively simply by enabling preallocation. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ciaobaby Posted October 28, 2012 Report Share Posted October 28, 2012 Whilst not being one of the uTorrent developers, I do know that the uTorrent client is a 32bit application which limits the memory addressing capabilities to a 4G "virtual address space" (2^32). So the answer is probably a "No". Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
charonme Posted October 28, 2012 Author Report Share Posted October 28, 2012 ok thanks, although I don't see how a proper utilization of ram would damage the hdd or reduce performance. Maybe if only single file was being downloaded, but usually tens are being downloaded and hundreds seeded.Also, the system failure excuse seems to me pretty lame: first, downloading torrents is not a medical/military grade critical operation; second, I've experienced much more frequent hdd i/o errors due to hdd overuse than system (or power) failures. Third, one could always adjust the configuration if one wished Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DreadWingKnight Posted October 28, 2012 Report Share Posted October 28, 2012 My logic behind reduced damage of the hard drive by increased "use" is that with high-traffic operation on the hard drive, the platters are kept spinning at full speed all the time, reducing the wear on the platter's drive motor. The repeated spinning up and down of the disk causes more damage than constant read/write operations. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
charonme Posted October 29, 2012 Author Report Share Posted October 29, 2012 I agree, but you can configure that in windows too. I was more concerned about the head constantly seeking to write to (and read from) tens of locations simultaneously 24/7. NCQ and the tiny hdd internal cache could only help so much Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ciaobaby Posted October 29, 2012 Report Share Posted October 29, 2012 Actually the drive head movement is driven by electro-magnetic fields so there is very little (almost zero) mechanical force involved to cause any wear, and while the platters are spinning, the air cushion that keeps the heads "floating" exists. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.