Turbo Memory & Hard Drive Info

I've no doubt this has been covered somewhere here. If so & there's a good link please post it.

But what exactly is Turbo Memory? How is it used ? Can it be added to (increased) ? What's it advantage , if any , over regular ram ? I have 4g of ram installed (only 3 is used but that's normal I guess for the 32bit OS) & as far as I know my notebook does not use it (turbo mem). I'm just wondering what it's used for.

Also with this notebook (f8sn) I've been introduced to Vista. I've not run into any of the horror stories re drivers & whatnot so I'm good.

But I have noticed one thing using Vista. It seems like on boot up my hdd sure runs for a long time before it finally stops loading software or whatever it's doing. Is this to be expected ? I've got rid of all the bloatware I could find & the startup memory usage is well below 1g after all is said & done. If I boot the notebook & do not do anything after Vista loads & the hdd stops we are talking going on two minutes.

Is this long hdd running *normal* for Vista ?

 

I had to much faith in the forum. Sorry.

But , if you want to speed up your hard drive in Vista you HAVE to do this...

http://www.howtogeek.com/howto/windows-vista/speed-up-sata-hard-drives-in-windows-vista/

This is really neat !

My fault about TM question. Should have went to Intel's site first.

Ah...live & learn.

 

Yeah any google, wikipedia, intel search gives you a lot of info on the TurboMemory. It seems it's pretty useless, probably it'll die out on its own in a while.

As to write caching, be aware you can lose data on things like BSODs etc.

As to the F8, yeah I haven't seen any problems popping up. Which given that it's a popular model, means it's quite reliable.

Huh? That was only 2 hours or so after your first post. This is a forum, not instant messaging.

 

here is a good source of info http://btoforums.com/showthread.php?t=1032
also the first source to find the thruth behind robson. at the moment the only benefit from the chip seems to be with linear ops. it does not help random read at all.

 

That is odd huh ? Can't remember to tell you the truth.

Oh yeah thanks for the info. But it seems like even Vista had that warning re being careful about caching. I mean is it that different than say the way XP cached stuff ? I can't remember having any trpuble with XP. What's the difference if any ?

 

I don't think there is any significant difference? But I don't really know this write caching business.

I suppose given your computer is stable there is no trouble at all using write caching.

Does it offer a significant boost in perf,that you can really feel?

 

Nope. I was just really surprised , after finding that link , that I had to turn it on (caching). I thought it would have been on by default. I can't really say its helped or not. But my last notebook was/is a P3 so this one seems like a jet.

My main point in posting , although even I think it was a rather odd 2nd post , was actually the length of time my hdd runs on boot-up (post vista loading). Obviously caching would have no effect on that though would it ?

 

Write caching, no. I suspect bootup times are mostly related to read files from the HDD...

 

That is interesting what the tester came up with. With the advent of faster & faster C/G PU's it seems caching plays a lesser role. Maybe with hdd's getting so large & being more & more available (re costs) caching will play a much more specialized role. But unlike the old days it's very hard to tell when it's working & when not.