intel turbo memory--my review

I recently purchased sager 8662 laptop. I opted for 4 GB turbo memory. Here's my impression of it:

Turbo memory is dedicated to opening programs faster, NOT running them faster. The memory comes with an interface which is quite intuitive. It contains a list of all installed programs (ala add/remove programs list). The user is allowed to drag & drop whichever of these is desired to be "Accelerated" into the turbo-memory window.

The interface shows a summary of how much of this turbo-memory is dedicated to said programs & how much is still available for use. It seems to make opening programs near instantaneous. Firefox seems to open in the blink of an eye. Firefox is currently rated at using 90 MB of my 4 GB.

I'll provide further updates as I load more programs on this laptop in the coming weeks. I have a suspicion that certain FPS's will load EXPONENTIALLY faster with this turbo-memory than they would otherwise. I'll be sure to run "warm" (recently used) and "cold" brand new/unusued/fresh reboot) on ut3/ut2k4 and post my findings; both with and without turbo memory.

Thanks for your time!

 

Interesting, but I got rid of turbo memory since I have an SSD. I would only use Turbo Memory if I could load the page file on it so it doesn't write constantly to my SSD.

 

yes. i'm sure that having an SSD cuts down on the advantage that turbo-memory provides. it's still cheaper than an ssd though. 1TB drive + turbo memory > SSD (cost wise).

btw,

i LOVE the wuxga screen on this laptop. i have no freaking clue why people are so insistent on having lowly wsxga screens. this is WAY better.

 

I have the first generation, 1 GB version of this and it is worse than useless. Not only does it not do much, but after I accidentally upgraded the drivers for it (I was doing driver updates in order to be able to install Vista SP1), I now consistently get 0x8086 BSODs (which I looked up and found that are due to the Turbo Memory) when the computer wakes up from sleep. And it won't let me downgrade my drivers either.

It's probably gotten better with newer versions, but I will not be buying a laptop with this again unless I'm absolutely sure the problems have been resolved and it has a noticeable impact on performance.

 

It would be nice if you could time how much faster programs start.

 

It'd be better if you have solid data (stopwatch-timed) for the cold-start of applications with and without Turbo Memory - then we can see the true actual benefit it provides.

 

I second midnightsun. Subjective thoughts are great but observable hard data is better in helping people make decisions.

 

Because 1680*1050 on a 15.4" looks amazing and higher resolutions start looking too small. Also as far as gaming goes, I'd rather max out my games at 1680*1050 than havin to play at medium settings at 1920*1200. I can understand these resolutions for professional graphic designers etc. but for someone who wants the best performance and highest graphic settings, 1680*1050 is the way to go. Of course, I'm especially thinking about Crysis, because other good looking games such as COD4 will run flawlessly even at 1920*1200. And playing at lower than native res using scaling is a no-go for me.

 

FYI, found this interesting article the other day - although it's from back in 2007 I thought I'd share it with you all:

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

Regards

 

results for ut2k4.

my install is an Unreal Anthology pack. UT2k4 is loaded directly from the exe file (not the anthology loader screen). time is from the initialization of the program until the "Nvidia: the way it's meant to be played" splash screen appears. time is in seconds.

WITHOUT TURBO-MEMORY

initial start: 20
initial warm (program closed & immediately reopened): 8

restart (windows restarted, allowed to stabilize to ~0 CPU demand): 14
restart warm: 7


next, i added the ut2k4.exe file (only the exe file) to the turbo memory control.

WITH TURBO-MEMORY

restart (same as above): 10
restart warm: 6




my conclusion:

while this is only a single application test--it would appear that turbo-memory DOES in fact speed the initial program loading process. this appears to be most advantageous during initial program starts--where the program isn't already in recent cache. i also believe that the load times may have been a bit faster if other parts of the ut2k4 system file had been placed in turbo-memory (not just the exe file). i hope to test this theory as well.

i am also convinced that the larger the files involved (or the more complex the program) the greater and more advantageous turbo-memory will become. while i do not have access to a more "modern" FPS to test this theory--when i do, i will attempt to test this idea as well.


*edit*

i have placed all of the default ut2k4 system file in turbo-memory. the program now loads in 5.3 seconds (as opposed to 6.1). this indicates to me that my theory is correct about using more than just a program's ".exe" file. unfortunately, since this is a nearly 6 year old program--diminishing returns are beginning to set in. i have no doubt, however, that a program with a longer warm load time (say 20-25 sec) will undoubtedly benefit much greater from turbo-memory than my results here can adequately demonstrate.