Intel turbo memory installed and working I think...

I installed my turbo memory last night, installed the drivers fine and it asked me to reboot. I did and it loaded back up no probs. In the manual it says let the computer idle until it recognises the device and then it will reboot for a 2nd time. But after 30 mins of waiting I got bored. I rebooted it myself just to be on the safe side and it does show as Enabled (ReadyDrive and Readyboost enabled) in the program Intel have shipped with the memory. Does this mean everything is ok???

I am using Vista Ultimate x64 and have noticed no real performance difference except application loading time (e.g. for Outlook) is quicker (in fact near instant!).

One other thing, I have a Readyboost capable USB Flash drive (2GB), can I also use this at the same time as the turbo memory or is that completely pointless?

Cheers, Chris.

 

This has been covered a number of times and depends on your base memory. If you are running at 2Gb or more of ram, the USB flash and readyboost is pretty much pointless.

There is also a hotbed of discussion as to whether the remaining 512Mb (considering your turbo is 1Gb) serves any purpose at all as well.

There is one consensus amongst all. If you think its faster, then it is and your happy.

 

So to summize there really is no point putting the USB Flash drive on my laptop given I have 1GB Turbo Memory (I have 2GB RAM).

Also out of interest, what is the difference between "Intel Turbo Memory" and a USB Flash Drive that does readyboost?

Thanks, Chris.

 

Get the newest driver from intel web site 1.1 because I had 1.0 on intel cd.

 

You cannot have more than one ReadyBoost device in a computer. In any case there is no point to having even the first ReadyBoost device (Turbo Memory), let alone two even if you could do it.

Intel Turbo Memory is 50% ReadyBoost and 50% ReadyDrive. Please do a web search to learn what ReadyDrive is.

 

I downloaded the Intel Turbo Memory driver from the Dell website, but never had Turbo Memory before that. How does that work?

 

Unless you have the card installed on your machine then installing the drivers will do nothing. It sounds like you have installed pointless drivers as you don't have the card.....or do you

 

FYI... there are several test that concludes Intel's turbo memory is worthless

 

Here we go again:

http://www.tomshardware.co.uk/windows-vista-superfetch-and-readyboostanalyzed-uk,review-2069-5.html

Just 1 (a lot more comprehensive than the anandtech as well) perfectly explaining why it makes sense in all scenario's even up to 4Gb.

The amount of hearsay on this forum regarding this topic is unbelievable.
Get your facts straight or don't post....

 

Not useless, but close to. I wouldn't really trust TH all the time.

 

what test? I have yet to see a test that proves it is worthless

 

http://www.pcstats.com/articleview.cfm?articleid=2160&page=5

 

All the stats on links are about ready boost when the reason I got it was because of the readydrive.

I think it was worth it on my end to spend 40 bucks to play around, and see the difference in boot times, that may be just me though.

 

http://www.anandtech.com/cpuchipsets/intel/showdoc.aspx?i=3009

SUMMARY:

"In our Santa Rosa preview we found that Turbo Memory did very little in fact. Performance didn't improve (in some cases it got worse), we couldn't find any measurable reduction in power consumption and in the end we found absolutely no use for the technology. Notebook makers echoed our sentiments, with both HP and Sony declining to use Intel's Turbo Memory in their Santa Rosa lineups, but Intel insisted that there was an upside to the technology.

We met with Intel engineers to understand a bit more about Turbo Memory and why we weren't able to see any positive results out of it. "


Do not confuse turbo memory w/ ready boost..

 

Without links word of mouth statements provide no use. I've only seen ONE posted so far which was from back in April at Anandtech and their tests were pretty inconclusive of anything.

I wouldn't really trust Anandtech all the time either. They've been wrong a number of times in the past and their tests for the review on Turbo Memory was poorly done.

Their extensive "testing" included nothing more than running a synthetic benchmark, namely PCMark05. They didn't even bother to test actual real world boot times on Vista. They didn't load any applications in real time to compare load times. And from reading the article I got the impression that they hardly even knew whether the Turbo Memory was enabled or not. Keep in mind that performance might not be exactly the same on every laptop and that Intel has also released a newer driver for Intel Turbo Memory since the article. Until I see real world tests done by more than one person/site then that Anandtech article is nothing more than FUD on the front page.

Also to note, the real reason as to why HP and Sony declined to use Turbo Memory in their laptops likely has nothing to do with the performance. It has more to do with them having to design their laptop to accommodate an extra mini pci slot and Sony's engineers even admitted to this posing a problem for their current design.

Turbo Memory applies the same function as a USB flash drive for ReadyBoost. There are two chips on the 1GB Turbo Memory. One 512MB chip is dedicated for ReadyBoost and the other 512MB chip is used for ReadyDrive. A 1GB Turbo Memory card can be had for around $25 shipped. Even if the performance increase is small it's still a very cheap upgrade.

 

Concur 100% Well said!