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?

In article <1182186279.602712.110770@a26g2000pre.googlegroups.com>, umo
says...
> 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?
>
>
Stick your money in your pocket. Vista runs fine with 2GB.

--
Conor

Light travels faster than sound. This is why some people appear bright
until you hear them speak.........

"umo" <shoreke@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:1182186279.602712.110770@a26g2000pre.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?
>
I have 2 gigs of ram in my desktop computer and for a while I dedicated a 1
gig flash drive to Readyboost. I noticed no performance improvement. In
fact, I believe using ReadyBoost actually slowed the computer initially
because Vista has to copy the contents of the page file to the flash drive.
But why not try it for yourself (1 gig flash drives can be had for around
$10)? By the way, does your laptop have a memory card reader? If so you
could try using a fast SD Card which won't stick out and be vulnerable to
breaking off.

"Victek" <Victek@xyz.com> wrote
>
> "umo" <shoreke@yahoo.com> wrote
>> 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?
>>
> I have 2 gigs of ram in my desktop computer and for a while I dedicated a
> 1 gig flash drive to Readyboost. I noticed no performance improvement.
> In fact, I believe using ReadyBoost actually slowed the computer initially
> because Vista has to copy the contents of the page file to the flash
> drive. But why not try it for yourself (1 gig flash drives can be had for
> around $10)? By the way, does your laptop have a memory card reader? If
> so you could try using a fast SD Card which won't stick out and be
> vulnerable to breaking off.


FYI, the page file is not copied to the flash drive used for ReadyBoost.
ReadyBoost is for prefetching.

--
Rock [MS-MVP User/Shell]

"umo" <shoreke@yahoo.com> wrote
> 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?

You won't see much benefit from ReadyBoost with 2GB RAM. Up to the 1GB
area, yes. You can certainly test it to find out.

--
Rock [MS-MVP User/Shell]

I've read a lot of conflicting articles on this... One mentioned that the
difference between the pagefile and ReadyBoost is that the ReadyBoost is
encrypted. Both are active simutanously (sp), so that if the flash drive is
removed, it goes back to the HD. I will have to search to reference that.

But, I've also been under the impression that is was part of the prefetch (a
form of SuperFetch) that runs together on the HD and the flash drive.

It would be logical both ways, as a boost when RAM is > 1.5GB or so it has
less of an impact. The pagefile is a lot less active with more RAM. And it's
a lot faster than the HD.

Not disputing your answer, just have heard different things from different
sources.

--
Dustin Harper
dharper@vistarip.com
http://www.vistarip.com

--
"Rock" <Rock@nospam.net> wrote in message
news:OvQbgYisHHA.4600@TK2MSFTNGP03.phx.gbl...
> "Victek" <Victek@xyz.com> wrote
>>
>> "umo" <shoreke@yahoo.com> wrote
>>> 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?
>>>
>> I have 2 gigs of ram in my desktop computer and for a while I dedicated a
>> 1 gig flash drive to Readyboost. I noticed no performance improvement.
>> In fact, I believe using ReadyBoost actually slowed the computer
>> initially because Vista has to copy the contents of the page file to the
>> flash drive. But why not try it for yourself (1 gig flash drives can be
>> had for around $10)? By the way, does your laptop have a memory card
>> reader? If so you could try using a fast SD Card which won't stick out
>> and be vulnerable to breaking off.
>
>
> FYI, the page file is not copied to the flash drive used for ReadyBoost.
> ReadyBoost is for prefetching.
>
> --
> Rock [MS-MVP User/Shell]

In message <6E209B9B-6763-4693-A98F-413533AC0BA8@microsoft.com> "Dustin
Harper" <dharper@vistarip.com> wrote:

>I've read a lot of conflicting articles on this... One mentioned that the
>difference between the pagefile and ReadyBoost is that the ReadyBoost is
>encrypted. Both are active simutanously (sp), so that if the flash drive is
>removed, it goes back to the HD. I will have to search to reference that.
>
>But, I've also been under the impression that is was part of the prefetch (a
>form of SuperFetch) that runs together on the HD and the flash drive.
>
>It would be logical both ways, as a boost when RAM is > 1.5GB or so it has
>less of an impact. The pagefile is a lot less active with more RAM. And it's
>a lot faster than the HD.
>
>Not disputing your answer, just have heard different things from different
>sources.

http://www.microsoft.com/windows/pro...eadyboost.mspx

"The flash memory device serves as an additional memory cache—that is,
memory that the computer can access much more quickly than it can access
data on the hard drive. Windows ReadyBoost relies on the intelligent
memory management of Windows SuperFetch and can significantly improve
system responsiveness."

Even the marketing properly represents ReadyBoost -- It's cache, not
swap space.

--
If quitters never win, and winners never quit,
what fool came up with, "Quit while you're ahead"?

"Dustin Harper" wrote
> I've read a lot of conflicting articles on this... One mentioned that the
> difference between the pagefile and ReadyBoost is that the ReadyBoost is
> encrypted. Both are active simutanously (sp), so that if the flash drive
> is removed, it goes back to the HD. I will have to search to reference
> that.
>
> But, I've also been under the impression that is was part of the prefetch
> (a form of SuperFetch) that runs together on the HD and the flash drive.
>
> It would be logical both ways, as a boost when RAM is > 1.5GB or so it has
> less of an impact. The pagefile is a lot less active with more RAM. And
> it's a lot faster than the HD.
>
> Not disputing your answer, just have heard different things from different
> sources.

> "Rock" <Rock@nospam.net> wrote
>> "Victek" <Victek@xyz.com> wrote
>>>
>>> "umo" <shoreke@yahoo.com> wrote
>>>> 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?
>>>>
>>> I have 2 gigs of ram in my desktop computer and for a while I dedicated
>>> a 1 gig flash drive to Readyboost. I noticed no performance
>>> improvement. In fact, I believe using ReadyBoost actually slowed the
>>> computer initially because Vista has to copy the contents of the page
>>> file to the flash drive. But why not try it for yourself (1 gig flash
>>> drives can be had for around $10)? By the way, does your laptop have a
>>> memory card reader? If so you could try using a fast SD Card which
>>> won't stick out and be vulnerable to breaking off.
>>
>>
>> FYI, the page file is not copied to the flash drive used for ReadyBoost.
>> ReadyBoost is for prefetching.

Dustin, if you haven't seen it, here's a good article on TechNet that
discusses ReadyBoost by Mark Russinovich.
Inside the Windows Vista Kernel: Part 2
http://www.microsoft.com/technet/tec...3/VistaKernel/

--
Rock [MS-MVP User/Shell]

Cool. Thanks for the link. Answers some questions I was having.

Thanks again!

--
Dustin Harper
dharper@vistarip.com
http://www.vistarip.com

--
"Rock" <Rock@nospam.net> wrote in message
news:uR5LBgssHHA.4916@TK2MSFTNGP04.phx.gbl...
> "Dustin Harper" wrote
>> I've read a lot of conflicting articles on this... One mentioned that the
>> difference between the pagefile and ReadyBoost is that the ReadyBoost is
>> encrypted. Both are active simutanously (sp), so that if the flash drive
>> is removed, it goes back to the HD. I will have to search to reference
>> that.
>>
>> But, I've also been under the impression that is was part of the prefetch
>> (a form of SuperFetch) that runs together on the HD and the flash drive.
>>
>> It would be logical both ways, as a boost when RAM is > 1.5GB or so it
>> has less of an impact. The pagefile is a lot less active with more RAM.
>> And it's a lot faster than the HD.
>>
>> Not disputing your answer, just have heard different things from
>> different sources.
>
>> "Rock" <Rock@nospam.net> wrote
>>> "Victek" <Victek@xyz.com> wrote
>>>>
>>>> "umo" <shoreke@yahoo.com> wrote
>>>>> 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?
>>>>>
>>>> I have 2 gigs of ram in my desktop computer and for a while I dedicated
>>>> a 1 gig flash drive to Readyboost. I noticed no performance
>>>> improvement. In fact, I believe using ReadyBoost actually slowed the
>>>> computer initially because Vista has to copy the contents of the page
>>>> file to the flash drive. But why not try it for yourself (1 gig flash
>>>> drives can be had for around $10)? By the way, does your laptop have a
>>>> memory card reader? If so you could try using a fast SD Card which
>>>> won't stick out and be vulnerable to breaking off.
>>>
>>>
>>> FYI, the page file is not copied to the flash drive used for ReadyBoost.
>>> ReadyBoost is for prefetching.
>
> Dustin, if you haven't seen it, here's a good article on TechNet that
> discusses ReadyBoost by Mark Russinovich.
> Inside the Windows Vista Kernel: Part 2
> http://www.microsoft.com/technet/tec...3/VistaKernel/
>
> --
> Rock [MS-MVP User/Shell]

"Dustin Harper" wrote
> Cool. Thanks for the link. Answers some questions I was having.
>
> Thanks again!


<snip>

You're welcome.

--
Rock [MS-MVP User/Shell]