Zend certified PHP/Magento developer

Would 16KB clusters be better than 4KB for 1TB NTFS partition on a very slow PC?

I’m running a desktop PC with legacy Windows XP. The operating system is on an SSD drive. Data is stored on a 3.5 inch 750GB internal hard drive.

The 750GB hard drive is making noises, so I will replace it. I have a spare 1TB drive and also a 2TB drive.

I want two equal partitions although I am not sure if I need to use both hard drives. Old guidelines say to format using 4K clusters (“allocation unit”).

However that was suggested in times when storage was more expensive. As the PC is slow, I figured a 16K cluster size might be lighter on the CPU for various disk operations. I reckon 16K wouldn’t waste a significant amount of space as files are larger these days.

MY QUESTIONS ARE; Is 16K a sensible way to go? Should both partitions go on the 1TB drive or the 2TB drive? Any other thoughts?


DATA REQUIREMENT:

I will use a 1TB partition to store mainly documents (approx 2MB) and books (usually 5MB to 50MB) and a few audio files (say 10 to 20MB).

Also I will have a separate 1TB “porn” partition (very large number of 0.25 to 3MB jpegs, plus some 50 to 300 MB vids)

WINDOWS XP PC:

A tower PC from 2004. Cpu is AMD Athlon 64 with 4GB DDR2 memory, and SATA drives. Running Windows XP Works well enough for my documents and web browsing.