Vista - ReadyBoost

I'm just a helpless layman who owns a home computer and I just want it
to perform at its best. Once again, I'm caught in the crossfire
between dueling experts. I have Vista Ultimate on a laptop with 2GB
RAM. If I add ReadyBoost compatible flash memory, will it
significantly increase my computer's performance? Some experts claim
the more system memory - the less benefit from ReadyBoost. I don't
know if 2 gigs of system memory is the threshold at which flash
memory, as cache memory, becomes a waste of time.

Other experts preach the doctrine of flash memory and ReadyBoost. They
insist that even though the read/write speed of a USB flash drive is
slower that a hard drive, the speed at which flash memory sticks
deliver random data kicks the crap out of hard drives because hard
speeds are optimized only for the transfer of sequential data.

I don't know who the hell to believe. Maybe I better just keep my
money in my pocket until the smoke clears. What say you?

2.0 Gigabytes of RAM - I'd pass on ReadyBoost. Based on my
testing it doesn't deliver a measurable gain when the PC has access
to that level of RAM. I've tested with various sizes of Flash thumb
drives and differing Access/Throughput timings. One thing you will
notice is a almost constant access to the Thumb drive while it is set
to be a ReadyBoost device.

There are many other customizations and measures you can take
to optimize performance on a notebook running Vista.

"umo" <shoreke@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:1182186194.467235.141140@d30g2000prg.googlegroups.com...
> I'm just a helpless layman who owns a home computer and I just want it
> to perform at its best. Once again, I'm caught in the crossfire
> between dueling experts. I have Vista Ultimate on a laptop with 2GB
> RAM. If I add ReadyBoost compatible flash memory, will it
> significantly increase my computer's performance? Some experts claim
> the more system memory - the less benefit from ReadyBoost. I don't
> know if 2 gigs of system memory is the threshold at which flash
> memory, as cache memory, becomes a waste of time.
>
> Other experts preach the doctrine of flash memory and ReadyBoost. They
> insist that even though the read/write speed of a USB flash drive is
> slower that a hard drive, the speed at which flash memory sticks
> deliver random data kicks the crap out of hard drives because hard
> speeds are optimized only for the transfer of sequential data.
>
> I don't know who the hell to believe. Maybe I better just keep my
> money in my pocket until the smoke clears. What say you?
>

"R. McCarty" <PcEngWork-NoSpam_@mindspring.com> wrote in message
news:OOzr9xcsHHA.4548@TK2MSFTNGP04.phx.gbl...
> 2.0 Gigabytes of RAM - I'd pass on ReadyBoost. Based on my
> testing it doesn't deliver a measurable gain when the PC has access
> to that level of RAM. I've tested with various sizes of Flash thumb
> drives and differing Access/Throughput timings. One thing you will
> notice is a almost constant access to the Thumb drive while it is set
> to be a ReadyBoost device.
>
> There are many other customizations and measures you can take
> to optimize performance on a notebook running Vista.

I would try it out anyway. What do you have to lose? Time? Memory is not
the only factor. Drive speed is another factor. The reason ReadyBoost is
targeted at at laptops is because of their poor average drive performance.
Odds are your HDD is 5400 RPM and lacking general performance speeds when
compared to desktops.

Give it a shot and let us know how it works for you.

ReadyBoost is not a substitute for inadequate physical memory, and only
slightly alleviates the issues involved with getting into the pagefile
(swapfile, if you prefer that term) because you don't have enough physical
memory. If you doubt you have enough memory, don't agonize over
ReadyBoost - add more memory.

Depending on what you will be doing with your PC, two megabytes of physical
memory may be plenty - or may be anemic.

--
Richard G. Harper [MVP Shell/User] rgharper@gmail.com
* NEW! Catch my blog ... http://msmvps.com/blogs/rgharper/
* PLEASE post all messages and replies in the newsgroups
* The Website - http://rgharper.mvps.org/
* HELP us help YOU ... http://www.dts-l.org/goodpost.htm


"umo" <shoreke@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:1182186194.467235.141140@d30g2000prg.googlegroups.com...
> I'm just a helpless layman who owns a home computer and I just want it
> to perform at its best. Once again, I'm caught in the crossfire
> between dueling experts. I have Vista Ultimate on a laptop with 2GB
> RAM. If I add ReadyBoost compatible flash memory, will it
> significantly increase my computer's performance? Some experts claim
> the more system memory - the less benefit from ReadyBoost. I don't
> know if 2 gigs of system memory is the threshold at which flash
> memory, as cache memory, becomes a waste of time.
>
> Other experts preach the doctrine of flash memory and ReadyBoost. They
> insist that even though the read/write speed of a USB flash drive is
> slower that a hard drive, the speed at which flash memory sticks
> deliver random data kicks the crap out of hard drives because hard
> speeds are optimized only for the transfer of sequential data.
>
> I don't know who the hell to believe. Maybe I better just keep my
> money in my pocket until the smoke clears. What say you?
>

With 2 gigs of memory the hard drive speed is inconsequential
because more likely that not, the paging file isn't even being used.
Therefore ReadyBoost won't make any difference.


--

Steve Easton




"Justin" <None@None.com> wrote in message news:eqC6IBdsHHA.4612@TK2MSFTNGP04.phx.gbl...
> "R. McCarty" <PcEngWork-NoSpam_@mindspring.com> wrote in message
> news:OOzr9xcsHHA.4548@TK2MSFTNGP04.phx.gbl...
>> 2.0 Gigabytes of RAM - I'd pass on ReadyBoost. Based on my
>> testing it doesn't deliver a measurable gain when the PC has access
>> to that level of RAM. I've tested with various sizes of Flash thumb
>> drives and differing Access/Throughput timings. One thing you will
>> notice is a almost constant access to the Thumb drive while it is set
>> to be a ReadyBoost device.
>>
>> There are many other customizations and measures you can take
>> to optimize performance on a notebook running Vista.
>
> I would try it out anyway. What do you have to lose? Time? Memory is not the only
> factor. Drive speed is another factor. The reason ReadyBoost is targeted at at laptops
> is because of their poor average drive performance. Odds are your HDD is 5400 RPM and
> lacking general performance speeds when compared to desktops.
>
> Give it a shot and let us know how it works for you.

"Steve Easton" <admin@95isalive.com> wrote in message
news:O43#MJdsHHA.3468@TK2MSFTNGP05.phx.gbl...
> With 2 gigs of memory the hard drive speed is inconsequential
> because more likely that not, the paging file isn't even being used.
> Therefore ReadyBoost won't make any difference.

That's not true at all. I have servers with 16GB of memory and the page
file sees plenty of usage. As well as plenty of 2GB and 4GB machines and
they all see page file usage.

There are tons of apps that specifically use the page file whether there is
free memory or not.


>
>
> --
>
> Steve Easton
>
>
>
>
> "Justin" <None@None.com> wrote in message
> news:eqC6IBdsHHA.4612@TK2MSFTNGP04.phx.gbl...
>> "R. McCarty" <PcEngWork-NoSpam_@mindspring.com> wrote in message
>> news:OOzr9xcsHHA.4548@TK2MSFTNGP04.phx.gbl...
>>> 2.0 Gigabytes of RAM - I'd pass on ReadyBoost. Based on my
>>> testing it doesn't deliver a measurable gain when the PC has access
>>> to that level of RAM. I've tested with various sizes of Flash thumb
>>> drives and differing Access/Throughput timings. One thing you will
>>> notice is a almost constant access to the Thumb drive while it is set
>>> to be a ReadyBoost device.
>>>
>>> There are many other customizations and measures you can take
>>> to optimize performance on a notebook running Vista.
>>
>> I would try it out anyway. What do you have to lose? Time? Memory is
>> not the only factor. Drive speed is another factor. The reason
>> ReadyBoost is targeted at at laptops is because of their poor average
>> drive performance. Odds are your HDD is 5400 RPM and lacking general
>> performance speeds when compared to desktops.
>>
>> Give it a shot and let us know how it works for you.
>
>

"umo" <shoreke@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:1182186194.467235.141140@d30g2000prg.googlegroups.com...
> I'm just a helpless layman who owns a home computer and I just want it
> to perform at its best. Once again, I'm caught in the crossfire
> between dueling experts. I have Vista Ultimate on a laptop with 2GB
> RAM. If I add ReadyBoost compatible flash memory, will it
> significantly increase my computer's performance? Some experts claim
> the more system memory - the less benefit from ReadyBoost. I don't
> know if 2 gigs of system memory is the threshold at which flash
> memory, as cache memory, becomes a waste of time.
>
> Other experts preach the doctrine of flash memory and ReadyBoost. They
> insist that even though the read/write speed of a USB flash drive is
> slower that a hard drive, the speed at which flash memory sticks
> deliver random data kicks the crap out of hard drives because hard
> speeds are optimized only for the transfer of sequential data.
>
> I don't know who the hell to believe. Maybe I better just keep my
> money in my pocket until the smoke clears. What say you?
>


Check out this link:
http://blogs.msdn.com/tomarcher/arch...boost-q-a.aspx

Lang

The idea of using ReadyBoost on a laptop with 2GB of physical RAM
seems enticing despite the disclaimers. If ReadyBoost works as
advertised I should be able to simultaneously open Forte Agent and
download Usenet porn, play Flight Simulator, view foreign cities with
Google Earth, and run FireFox with a half dozen open tabs.. Even if I
max out the main memory, my computer will not slow down because
ReadyBoost maintains smooth operations in the background. It's time to
test that theory.

ReadyBoost is particular good on laptops which are operating in standard
performance and maximum
battery light mode. These usually have slow harddrives too. Keep in mind
that many Thumb/Flash
Drives only have 128K of FAST memory and the rest is a lot slower. These do
not perform well
and some will pass the ReadyBoost check test. Get a drive with 2 or 4 gig
and enjoy.

"umo" <shoreke@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:1182295346.979222.326780@q19g2000prn.googlegroups.com...
> The idea of using ReadyBoost on a laptop with 2GB of physical RAM
> seems enticing despite the disclaimers. If ReadyBoost works as
> advertised I should be able to simultaneously open Forte Agent and
> download Usenet porn, play Flight Simulator, view foreign cities with
> Google Earth, and run FireFox with a half dozen open tabs.. Even if I
> max out the main memory, my computer will not slow down because
> ReadyBoost maintains smooth operations in the background. It's time to
> test that theory.
>
>
>
>

If some Flash Drive manufacturers only provide 128K of FAST memory
they will always fool the consumer because there is absolutely no way
we tell the difference before we buy the product. They are no detailed
specs listed on the package and there is not even a website that
provides in depth analysis and comparisons of flash drives. The buyer
has no choice but to roll the dice and hope for the best.