SD Card using ReadyBoost increases CPU to 100%

I have two IBM ThinkPads, X41 tablet and Z60m running Windows Vista
Business installed in exactly the same procedure. Both have SD card
slots so I bought 2 SanDisk Extreme III 2.0GB SD cards setup for full
use on ReadyBoost as I wouldn't use these card slots for anything
else.

The X41 with the SD card works perfectly. BUT when I enable ReadyBoost
in the Z60m, the CPU starts running at 100% and the HDD light starts
to flash and the whole system becomes laggy.

If I disable ReadyBoost, the CPU returns to normal. I have changed
cards around and its not the cards. I have formatted both cards, no
change. I have reinstalled latest driver for SD Card Reader from IBM
and no change.

The issue is purely a ReadyBoost one...anyone had the same problem or
might know where I could have gone wrong?

On Thu, 20 Sep 2007 03:25:53 -0700, rminnis82 wrote:
Yea, you're messing with stuff that's likely to give you little to no
added benefit...in a best case scenario.

You're better off just putting more RAM into your machine and calling it
a day.

--
Stephan
2003 Yamaha R6

������出�日�ん�����
����忘れ�������ら

Well thats not actually true. The X41 has 1.5Ghz Centrino with 1.5GB
RAM and when the SD card is added it makes a massive difference.

The Z60m has the maximum 2GB RAM combination possible, and any extra
help in a slot never to be used cant be bad.

Yea, you're messing with stuff that's likely to give you little to no
added benefit...in a best case scenario.

You're better off not posting and calling it a day.

On Thu, 20 Sep 2007 04:05:09 -0700, rminnis82 wrote:
Yea, I can see the massive difference it is making by your original post.
Your entire system becomes laggy, I admit, that's quite a massive
difference.
Actually yes it *can* be bad.

Flash memory is by magnitudes slower than RAM. Adding it to a system as a
substitute for RAM helps with systems around 512 megs of RAM or so that'd
otherwise be constantly writing to the HDD instead. And even there,
improvements can't really be guaranteed.

If you already have 1.5 gigs of RAM, you're looking at next to nothing to
gain by adding Flash memory.

Even on systems where ready boost has been reported to actually give some
improvements, any improvements started to disappear at the 1 gig mark on
any benchmarks I've seen so far.

--
Stephan
2003 Yamaha R6

������出�日�ん�����
����忘れ�������ら

Thanks for your more detailed reply, your first post seemed very
dismissive of the problem by just saying add more RAM as that isnt the
problem in case.

With the X41 (slower processor and less RAM than the Z60m), the SD
card makes a visible improvement.

The Z60m has massive spike in CPU when ReadyBoost is enabled on the SD
card...it has a 2Ghz processor, 2GB of RAM and a very good graphics
card (by laptop standards) so why should the CPU overload of 80-100%
when the SD card is added even f the system is capable of running
Vista without the SD card.

The validity of the SD card is debatable, I just want to know why
ReadyBoost would cause a CPU overload?

Thanks.

"Stephan Rose" <nospam.noway@xxxxxx> wrote in message
news:0oednbo29Mb39m_bnZ2dnUVZ8sninZ2d@xxxxxx Have you been taking lessons in reading from alias?
The OP said quite clearly that it works perfectly in the X41 but not in the
other.

* Stephan Rose: Stephan,

You are correct. I have three machines currently running Vista,
all three have 2GB of RAM, and the only time I have ever noticed a
*little* bit of help from ReadyBoost is when I am using a virtual machine.

ReadyBoost is one of the most over-hyped features of Vista, by far.


-Michael

On Thu, 20 Sep 2007 14:50:08 +0100, dennis@xxxxxx wrote:
Yes and I am responding in regards to the one that doesn't work.

Now, what exactly did you contribute with your post?


--
Stephan
2003 Yamaha R6

������出�日�ん�����
����忘れ�������ら

On Thu, 20 Sep 2007 06:11:44 -0700, rminnis82 wrote:
I'm not dismissive of the problem, I'm just dismissive of the incorrect
solution.
It shouldn't, I'll agree on that much. Probably a bug somewhere in
Vista's 50 million lines of code.

That said, any kind of paging is bad. Period. I don't care if it's paging
to a hard drive or to a flash drive. It's bad. Everytime a page miss
occurs, it triggers a page fault interrupt, then the correct page has to
be loaded into memory from whatever slow media it is stored on, and if
insufficient memory is available for that, another page not currently in
use has to be stored to whatever slow media is available.

All around, it's a bad thing to be happening.

Computers that are really far below spec for Vista can benefit a little
from paging to a flash drive instead of a hard drive, under the condition
that said flash drive actually has sufficient bandwidth. Not all are
created equally.

But even if such a computer sees benefits from the flash drive, the
benefits said computer would see from additional RAM are by magnitudes
greater. So no matter which way you slice it or dice it, RAM is always
better than flash.

That's why I roll my eyes at Readyboost and it's hype and dismiss it as
one of the most useless things to ever come out of Redmond. Ultimately,
the best suggestion I can make to you is to stop mucking around with the
ready boost, throw some more RAM into the machine and be happy with the
far greater benefits you'll get as a result.

--
Stephan
2003 Yamaha R6

������出�日�ん�����
����忘れ�������ら

"Stephan Rose" <nospam@xxxxxx> wrote in message
news:QP6dnVTYs9fHNm_bnZ2dnUVZ8rKdnZ2d@xxxxxx Well you appear to have got the idea that it has made his x41 slow and laggy
which it hasn't.
Its his other one of the two that has the problem.
So my post should have cleared that up for you.. but maybe it didn't.
Maybe you are just so keen to get in a bad word you didn't read it properly?