Kali Persistence offers a streamlined version while Full Install provides a complete setup experience.
Kali Persistence offers a streamlined version while Full Install provides a complete setup experience.
I've set up a new PC with a GTX 1080 and an i7 7700, 16GB RAM, SSD storage, and a 60GB SATA laptop HDD. I'm planning to run Kali Linux for learning purposes and have three options: 1) Install persistence on a 32GB pen drive, 2) Install entirely on the 32GB pen drive, or 3) Install on the 60GB laptop HDD. Which option gives the best performance? (The HDD is around 8-10 years old, so it may be slower, but could be faster than the pen drive.) What do you think would work best?
The device is quite old, yet it performs better than a pen drive when using SATA instead of IDE.
They both come with advantages and disadvantages. Live CDs on pen drives can have some odd behaviors that might cause issues, but using one can help protect your drive’s longevity by limiting writes and ensuring compression is active while disabling swap. Installing on a pen drive feels similar to installing on a traditional hard drive, though it will significantly reduce the drive’s lifespan. Make sure to turn off swap during installation. Booting from a hard drive will be slightly slower overall—random access will lag more, but sequential performance will improve—and it can last much longer if you use a swap partition or file. I recommend choosing the hard drive method unless speed is essential for your needs. In that case, an inexpensive SSD would likely be a better choice than another flash drive.