User was complaining about C: Partition size and refused to reduce his personal content on the drive. At the time he had a SSD and we only had spare HDD of larger size. All parties agreed to replace the SSD with the larder HDD.

Clonezilla was used to completely clone the drive. The clone was successful and while in Windows we extended the partition to use the full 500GB.

However shortly after this was done the user starting complaining about periods of freezing and hung states. The HDD was new and event log does not show anything of merit other than critical events associated the the bonjour service. Yes, I know that SSD outperforms HDD but this is not explained by the expected slow performance. The issues are frequent and can last for several minutes.

While I was typing this question I found this unanswered post that seemed related in concept. The interesting comment was from sawdust:

Copying the whole drive byte-for-byte is only valid if the drives are identical. Otherwise you are copying incorrect drive parameters in the MBR. If you still have the original data on the SSD, then you should redo the copy. Use Gparted to to create a new partition table on the HDD, and create primary partitions on the HDD the same size as the ones on the SDD. Then copy partition for partition.

I had already suspected something along those lines might be the issue. I have cloned many drives before but from images to drive. I would usually never entertain the idea of defrag with NTFS but I checked and the wizard didnt see a reason to perform the defrag.

Am I screwed and have to reimage this computer from scratch (I hate reinstalling all that engineering software)? What can I do now to try and rectify this situation. I am sure the clone completed as designed but there is now incorrect information that needs to be refreshed. I don't think this is solved in the OS but I am not sure.

Pertinent details

Computer: HP ProBook 6560b

OS: Windows 7 x64 SP1


New HDD: Seagate 500GB 7200 RPM SATA 6.0Gb/s

  • but you know that SSD performance is better than SATA HDD? – emirjonb Jul 13 '15 at 13:42
  • @emirjonb Yes. I know. Will update the post to account for those responses. I personally would never want to go back to sata after having ssd but I am not the user in question. – Matt Jul 13 '15 at 13:43
  • Did you completely defragment the new HDD? SSDs are designed to don't care about fragmentation (defragmentation is actually bad for SSDs) but HDDs perform better after optimizing them with the help of a proper defragmentation tool. – GiantTree Jul 13 '15 at 14:47
  • @GiantTree I didn't bother since the OS reported <1% defragged. I could anyway though – Matt Jul 13 '15 at 14:52
  • @Matt - Facing a similar issue and look at some approaches to Solutions that be run parallely or in batch before getting to using the HDD - superuser.com/questions/991444/… - Do share your thoughts. – Alex S Oct 25 '15 at 5:43

Your Answer

By clicking "Post Your Answer", you agree to our terms of service, privacy policy and cookie policy

Browse other questions tagged or ask your own question.