Windows 7: Readyboost

[darkassain]

Maybe it is I, who is misinformed...I reformatted my 8GB Cruzer thumb drive to NTFS and dedicated all free memory (7.47GB) to ReadyBoost. Of the three file systems (FAT, FAT32, and NTFS), I thought NTFS would be the more efficient since it is the native file system.

you are right although there have been made improvements....
but generally you want NTFS when you need reliability, secuirity and you see general performance if you are handling larger files (>4gb which fat cannot handle anyways)

if you are handling small files then it will cause overhead
the reason why Fat is faster?
because its simpler
if you really want to get the Max Performance and you are not handling files larger than 4gb then Fat32 is the best choice...
if its less than 256mb then regular old Fat (fat16) is better in terms of performance as you wont handling large files (such as iso's and videos to name a few) but small files (documents, notes, small pictures) which is where fat does perform well....

 

[Jon55]

maybe they figure it really does not make much difference?

I have been testing it with and without and so far have not really noticed any increase in speed.

maybe for those systems that have 512mb of ram might see something...

Using a 1GB external flash drive, I noticed it when playing Age of Conan with 2GB of RAM. Then I maxed out my notebook to 4GB of RAM and stopped noticing any difference with the flash drive. The extra RAM boost is by FAR more worth it.

it depends on how much memory you have...
if you have enough then you should by all means disable the page file...
this will not only force the system to put all of its files on memory(and make it faster to access windows) but also free up a bunch of space...
like i said at this point if you have enough ram and you are using readyboost (if you disabled the page file of course) the bottleneck will now be at the usb interface and will slow you down....

Disabling page file altogether is a terrible idea. Doesn't matter how much RAM you have, some applications specifically look for the page file, and if it isn't there, they will either not run or run and crash. Hell, if your machine for some random reason suddenly looks for the page file it could also BSOD. Besides, this USED to be an issue with say XP, but Vista/Windows 7 are much smarter with memory management. Leave it alone is the best bet.

Now moving your page file to a different/faster drive could be a good idea.

 

[warren dub]

ready boost in windows 7 be aware

I Have installed windows 7 on my dell 2.0 Ghz 2 GB ram laptop and it works very well.Used my nearly new patriot XT boost 200 X 16 GB flash drive for ready boost and wow.This is what computers should be like.Really really fast.IE opens on google home page instantly (unlike vista)I used a full allocation of the drive for performance.After 24 hrs the drive died.It is recognised but not accessable after I rebooted. It is the same in Vista also .Dead dead dead. It had been working for the last month on vista (4GB limit) without problems.It came with a lifetime warranty but is only certified for 4GB like all other drives onthe market.Be very carefull with expensive high speed drives ,as if you use all available memory for cache ,32 GB or even bigger these drives are not meant for this kind of use and could end up like mine.

 

[Charbroil57]

8 GB RAM - No ReadyBoost

After research and testing, I have drawn the conclusion that with 8 GB of RAM installed, ReadyBoost was not that beneficial. I am using my 7.67 GB Cruzer for file storage off the hard drive.

 

[Win7User512]

After research and testing, I have drawn the conclusion that with 8 GB of RAM installed, ReadyBoost was not that beneficial. I am using my 7.67 GB Cruzer for file storage off the hard drive.

I don't know what the current recommendation from MS is, but it used to be that to have a significant benefit from Readyboost, you use a flash device that is double the amount of your system RAM. MS called that the optimal arrangement. Could be different now.

 

[xJason]

Hmm, What exactly does Readyboost do?

 

[holo88]

I don't know what the current recommendation from MS is, but it used to be that to have a significant benefit from Readyboost, you use a flash device that is double the amount of your system RAM. MS called that the optimal arrangement. Could be different now.

M$ says it's good to have a 1:1 ratio in conjunction with your ram. And shouldn't exceed a 2.5 : 1 ratio, otherwise it will just crap out.
and is really only useful for pc's with less than 2 gigs of ram.

lets say you have 2 GB of ram, so 2 GB of ready boost is recommended, it can be more, ~4 gigs i suppose.

just think, a week ago i didn't even know what ready boost was

 

[Win7User512]

M$ says it's good to have a 1:1 ratio in conjunction with your ram. And shouldn't exceed a 2.5 : 1 ratio, otherwise it will just crap out.
and is really only useful for pc's with less than 2 gigs of ram.

lets say you have 2 GB of ram, so 2 GB of ready boost is recommended, it can be more, ~4 gigs i suppose.

just think, a week ago i didn't even know what ready boost was

Microsoft recommends the amount of flash memory for ReadyBoost acceleration be one to three times the amount of random access memory (RAM) in your computer.

I remember having an XP machine with 512MB RAM and using a 1.0GB flash device.

 

[Charbroil57]

I remember having an XP machine with 512MB RAM and using a 1.0GB flash device.

OK I just dedicated my 7.67 GB Cruzer to ReadyBoost again...
This is roughly a 1:1 ratio with RAM. I'll check it out for a while and see if the performance spikes somewhat!

 

[holo88]

I remember having an XP machine with 512MB RAM and using a 1.0GB flash device.

XP had readyboost?!? or was it some sort of mod type thing?

 

[nate42nd]

I'm not an XP - Xpert but no it didn't have readyboost as it is in Vista and Windows 7 has changed it further.

 

[darkassain]

XP had readyboost?!? or was it some sort of mod type thing?

i think he's reffering to putting his pagefile in the flash disk...
a really good way to kill a disk if you ask me...:sarc:
although i can be wrong of course...

 

[Captain Zero]

Correct me if I'm wrong but.. isn't this idea a little pointless? Ram sticks are cheaper and vastly more effective. Why bother with a slow USB when you can have actual RAM..?

 

[Shak 10]

i dont use it personally but i think its a quality solution for older systems to run there os more effectivily.

 

[Win7User512]

XP had readyboost?!? or was it some sort of mod type thing?

I'm not an XP - Xpert but no it didn't have readyboost as it is in Vista and Windows 7 has changed it further.

Oops, my mistake. I meant Vista [Business].

 

[NoN]

Correct me if I'm wrong but.. isn't this idea a little pointless? Ram sticks are cheaper and vastly more effective. Why bother with a slow USB when you can have actual RAM..?

Maybe because some laptop/notebook can't go further 2Gb Ram (as mine do with 3072mb swap, max). So readyboost is pretty handy for that example.
I'm using it 'cause the Gimp needs 1024mb backyard.

It says that up more 4gb ram installed, it is pointless having readyboost.

 

[Espair]

Can someone enlighten me as to what the difference between readyboost and the pagefile is?

 

[holo88]

I've learned to love ready boost. probably because of my ancient pc... the manufacture date is 2004-ish (thats ancient for tech).

 

[mxosder16]

hey guys i was just wondering something and maybe it has been answered but if you could point me in the right direction it would be much appreciated.
my vostro 1000 is only capable of 2gigs of max RAM cry i have recently purchased a 8 gig sandisk cruzer and made it boostable.
here is a screen before the boost:

and after:


i swear that some apps run much quicker.
for example live mail receives messages wicked quick. it used to tie up my system but now it runs quietly in the background.
my question is if my computer can only take 2 gigs of max RAM, is readyboost making a difference or is it just a placebo effect?
thanks

 

[darkassain]

Oops, my mistake. I meant Vista [Business].

easy mistake to make...

Maybe because some laptop/notebook can't go further 2Gb Ram (as mine do with 3072mb swap, max). So readyboost is pretty handy for that example.
I'm using it 'cause the Gimp needs 1024mb backyard.

It says that up more 4gb ram installed, it is pointless having readyboost.

darn it im the middle (my lappy can take 4gb not 8gb...)
yeah only if you are ram limited (or using DDR ram...) then readyboost is useful for you...

Can someone enlighten me as to what the difference between readyboost and the pagefile is?

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.

for a video on this explaining it...
The Advancement of Windows: Michael Fortin - Windows Vista SuperFetch | Going Deep | Channel 9

hey guys i was just wondering something and maybe it has been answered but if you could point me in the right direction it would be much appreciated.
my vostro 1000 is only capable of 2gigs of max RAM cry i have recently purchased a 8 gig sandisk cruzer and made it boostable.
here is a screen before the boost:
View attachment 11286
and after:
View attachment 11287

i swear that some apps run much quicker.
for example live mail receives messages wicked quick. it used to tie up my system but now it runs quietly in the background.
my question is if my computer can only take 2 gigs of max RAM, is readyboost making a difference or is it just a placebo effect?
thanks

no it is possible that under certain conditions you can actually see a performance gains by using readyboost..