1GB Intel® Robson Turbo Memory

is the 1GB Intel® Robson Turbo Memory worth it? on the intel site, these are the "benefits"

* Reduce boot time. Faster access to boot-up files lets the system start up more quickly.
* Improve application responsiveness. Data coming from Intel Turbo memory instead of the hard drive increases access speed.
* Accelerate application loading. Fast access by the processor to information needed to launch applications cuts lag time.
* Enhance Windows Vista. Support for Windows Vista performance features like ReadyBoost*, ReadyDrive*, and Superfetch* helps you take better advantage of the operating system.
* Save energy. Pre-storing information reduces hard-disk spin time, which saves power.

 

Maybe, maybe not. The benchmarks on this have been mixed results, with BIOS upgrades showing significant improvements to using Robson.

FYI - My Robson card is coming in on Saturday, so I'll have some gaming tests and other benches to look at.

 

I'm not saying it does or doesn't work, but IF those benefits really do work I think it certainly would be worth it...I'm getting it anyways, it isn't all that expensive.

 

The only benefits seem to be on battery life when the system is idle. There was a good article on Anandtech but their site is under maintenance.

 

also, www.xoticpc.com has the option for 2gb ram + another option for the turbo memory(is this ram?), does this mean 3gb total memory/ram? or 1gb "memory" plus 2gb ram?

 

Robson IS NOT Ram so no worries about chosing how much ram you want Robson has a cozy slot of its own

 

Yep.

Has anyone seen 2GB of Robson, or is there just no point to that?

 

Theres a thread from Eddie that you might want to check out;

http://forum.notebookreview.com/showthread.php?t=129945&highlight=Robson+Turbo

Interesting reading

Cheers, Rava

 

That's basically the material I was quoting from before. You need the BIOS upgrade to see a diff.

 

Oops!

That will teach me to read posts properly! Sorry about that - but looking forward to reading your results.

Cheers, Rava

 

There's only 512MB and 1GB versions according to Intel:

I ordered my new notebook with Robson and if it ever gets shipped I will post impressions.

 

Cool, what notebook did you order?

 

As I understand it, I don't imagine more gigabytes of Robson would be any good.

Robson will be useful for caching only smaller files. It has a faster seek time, but less throughput compared to hard drives--- so while Robson can initiate sending files faster, it can't send as much data/second as a hard drive can once it gets spinning. I don't know the actually numbers, but I think 100kb would be a reasonable value.

So how many files do you access frequently that are less than 100kb *? For those cases, hopefully Vista is intelligent enough to have cached those files on the Robson flash memory--so that you can not only access the file faster, but you'll avoid spinning your hard drive and draining your battery. But for files larger than 100kb *? Your hard drive would be optimum for accessing these files.

So yeah, 1GB is probably plenty. There won't be terribly too many instances where you only need just one file that's less than 100kb *(or whatever) where it would be quicker to load off of Robson, but hopefully enough to save some battery life and maybe even increase performance.


* 100kb is just a number I pulled out of my ass that should be reasonable.. I am just trying to illustrate that there is a threshold file size, where file sizes exceeding this would be faster transferred from the HD, and files below that threshold would faster transfer from the Robson. Necessarily, both would transfer the file at the same speed at this threshold.

 

Thanks for asking. I got a Lenovo ThinkPad X61 tablet PC. It has a Core 2 Duo and a 12" SXGA+ screen. I'll post its full specifications in my signature as soon as it ships . . .