Readyboost with SD Card

hi was just wondering if anyone has tried using an SD card with readyboost and what kind of results you got?

 

It "works" with any type of flash memory. However if you have 2+ GB of RAM, there will be no increase in system performance.

 

Though no speed increase, you will notice far less HD activity.... so for those 25$ it's still usefull

 

No, you will notice little or no reduction in HD activity if you have 2GB or more and aren't running ten programs at a time or something like that.

Raphie is again confusing an SD card with Turbo Memory, as he has in other threads. That's why he has decided that it costs $25 (in fact the prices of SD cards vary with size and manufacturer).

Readyboost is not a disk cache; it's merely a place to page RAM to. It's a transitional technology to allow older computers with little RAM (say 512M, which was fine for XP) to run Vista. Readydrive IS a disk cache, but you can't do Readydrive with an SD card.

 

You can definitely achieve an increase in battery time by using a SD card. While I don't have graphs or anything to prove this statement, I saw an increase by using a SD card and setting the hard drive to turn of after 3 minutes.
To my knowledge this occurs because Readyboost allows for reduced hard disk access letting it spin down, thus conserving power.
Chuckles, I think you have your facts wrong. ReadyBoost is not all about performance, which I agree, there is no increase if you have enough memory. But for battery life it can certainly make a difference: "When ReadyBoost sees random reads that can be satisfied from the cache, it services them from there" ( http://www.microsoft.com/technet/technetmag/issues/2007/03/VistaKernel/default.aspx)
It can then be assumed that letting the drive spin down, instead servicing files from the cache on the SD card would improve battery life. I believe I can see a difference, but like I said I have no measures of it other than ordinary usage.

 

Chuckels, please don't ridicule my posts. I've played with both 1gb Turbo Memory in my WWAN slot (only 29 euro) and a 2GB Sandisk Extreme III SDcard in my cardslot (only 35,00 euro). I have 2GB of DDR2 and yet both solutions make my HD and FAN spin less than without.
For me BOTH solutions provide a more responsive user experience. Whether that is captured by benchmarks does not matter, as a 3hour PC surf/chat/download and play with media is not easily captured in a benchmark in the first place.

If you don't believe that Readyboost/Readydrive works for you, that's fine with me. But just appreciate that there are other users with other usage patterns out there that DO benefit from this technology.

 

I am sorry but I totally disagree with you here. I am a developer on Vostro 1700 T7500 and have 4GB ram base mem plus 4Gb ReadyBoost (8GB USB key) and it makes a very significant difference. I run Virtual Machines where it can be used. I would agree with your point if the user is only running basic apps that don't require xtra RAM.

 

Let me try explaining this. Yes, when Readyboost can read from the cache, it does, thereby avoiding disk access. The question is, WHAT does it read from the cache? You have concluded that it is "servicing files" from the cache. This is INCORRECT. Readyboost is NOT a disk cache.

What Readyboost does is this. Suppose you have filled up RAM and still need to load a program or data into RAM. Without Readyboost, Windows (both previous versions and Vista) would write selected parts of RAM temporarily to a pagefile on the disk. It would then bring those pieces back to RAM as needed, paging other pieces out to disk. So the disk is serving as an extension of RAM, which of course is terribly slow compared to real RAM. With Readyboost, flash memory holds a copy of the pagefile, so flash memory is used to 'extend' RAM. That is all; there is no file buffering.

If you have enough RAM so that paging is not necessary, then the pagefile on disk is not used, and so with Readyboost the pagefile on flash memory is not used. There is no performance gain and no disk usage reduction because there is no paging at all.

If you don't have enough RAM for what you are doing then Readyboost IS beneficial, and then there is BOTH a performance increase (because flash is faster for random access of small pieces of data/code) and a disk usage decrease. With 1GB, yes Readyboost will help. Even with 4GB you might benefit from Readyboost if you are running Flight Simulator and AutoCADD and a video editing program at the same time. (Of course your CPU may not be happy about that.)

Readyboost doesn't give you a general benefit; it gives a benefit in particular cases.

For "servicing files" you need Readydrive.

 

Then explain to me why Vista still creates a 2gb swapfile on your HD besides Readyboost? (you're also bypassing Readydrive which is basically 512mb HD Cache rather than the 8/16mb on most harddrives....)

 

Readyboost uses a "write-through" pagefile in flash memory. It writes to both the pagefile in flash and the pagefile on disk. (This is for obvious reasons...If it didn't do this, pulling out the USB or SD device would cause the computer to crash. ) However, whenever possible, it reads only from the copy in flash.

I am not sure what you mean by "bypassing Readydrive".

The original post asked about about an SD card. Vista WILL NOT do Readydrive on an SD card or any removable flash device. (For obvious reasons...these are easily removed, and removal will corrupt the files on the drive.)

Vista will do Readydrive on Turbo Memory, but that is not the topic. Turbo Memory (nonremovable) and SD (removable) are different things.

This is not a matter of what I 'believe'; it's not religion. If it can't be measured, it doesn't exist.

 

ok i completely understand the difference between turbo memory and readyboost. all i was wondering was if anyone had noticed a performance increase when using an sd card for readyboost? and wither you need a specific card or card reader?

i read somewhere it only worked with certain cards/readers with certain speeds.

 

Yes, Vista will test it and use it only if reading/writing is fast enough. Many cheap usb keys are not fast enough for Vista.

You are asking if anyone has noticed a performance increase. In other words you are asking for anecdotal evidence. People who spend time and/or money on something are usually motivated to feel that it was worth it, so they will say "Oh yeah, it seems more responsive, and it feels like the hard drive is being used less". These reports of feelings and beliefs mean nothing. Plus, as already discussed, it depends on how much RAM there is and how the system is being used.

Readyboost was designed by Microsoft not to improve speed across the board nor to reduce disk access across the board, but to allow old computers with say 512K RAM to work with Vista. If this is your situation, yes, you should use a flash device to get Readyboost. According to your sig, this is not your situation, so instead of asking other people, you have to ask yourself how much paging is going on in your system under your usage.