Oh.......HP says Intel Robson and ReadyBoost is Valueless.....

Useless product from Intel?.....According to HP Intel Robson (Intel Turbo Memory) and Vista Readyboost is Nothing Just waste of money(If you use the both same time).....

"HP's decision was also based on the fact that ReadyBoost can only use one memory source at a time, which means that having Turbo Memory--which comes at a maximum size of 1GB--integrated into a notebook stops the customer from using, for example, a 2GB USB stick to boost the computer's memory."

"We added 1GB of RAM and saw a much higher improvement in performance compared to using any of the ReadyBoost or Robson technology."

More here.......

http://news.com.com/HP+says+no+to+Intels+Turbo+Memory/2100-1004_3-6188531.html?tag=nefd.top

 

It sounds like HP did a good job testing their new notebooks before releasing them. Hopefully they will get them out soon. the DX10 ones

 

Yes!HP did some nice work

 

I really like how Intel defended the product....

"Intel defended the Turbo Memory technology, telling ZDNet UK that the technology's 1GB cap was based on "engineering choices" and it was up to manufacturers as to whether they wanted to use it."

Or, to rephrase, "It is what it is, if you don't want it, then don't use it."

 

I'm glad they came out with this, because it's something I've been wondering about. The idea of Readyboost sounds cool, but it just doesn't make sense right now. Flash RAM is really slow, and especially when you're using USB, the bus would be even slower. Most tests show flash RAM is just as slow as a hard disk, and my experience shows it's even slower. Seek times are potentially faster, but you still need to transfer the data.

Maybe in the future when Flash gets much faster it will be worth it. Otherwise, money is better spent on real RAM.

 

The point of ReadyBoost is the fast access times. MS was well aware of the slow transfer rates, but by combining it with traditional caching mechanisms, you can get the best of both worlds, fast access times, and (somewhat) fast transfer times.

In my direct experience, ReadyBoost speeds up boot up and application launch times by a small amount. I'm sure the amount depends a lot on the speed of the drive used. I've got a Sandisk Ultra II SD card in my dv9207us's SD card slot, which is a decent but not super fast card.

Also, if you read what HP is saying, it's not that ReadyBoost is not worthwhile, it's that having a built-in ReadyBoost cache with Robson is not worth it, because it precludes the consumer being able to add their own bigger flash drive for ReadyBoost.

 

it is in fact useless... i have 4 gb ram am my nx9420 and vista 64 shows very little to NO improvement...

but using only 2 gb of ram AND readyboost is in fact faster...

hp says that because by this time next year 4 g ram will be standard... so implementing this tech will render it useless by the time it's out.

 

Readyboost is effective but only after one or two weeks of use when the computer has implimented your more frequent used software, pictures and applications into the readyboost memory. it doesn't give effect instantly.

Further more I have to point out that Readyboost isn't meant to replace RAM but is more of a temporary och extra source for memory.

 

readyboost is suppose to be a cache for the paging file only. its not suppose to act similarly to the caching that superfetch uses for ram. well, at least out of all the articles that i've ready on it (apart from the article on wikipedia).

has any one read an article that says otherwise?

edit: readyboost faq : http://blogs.msdn.com/tomarcher/archive/2006/06/02/615199.aspx

 

I think the real benefits of this tech will be realized in a few years, but the groundwork has been laid down now. Once everyone is running Vista, some of the "older" machines (yes, I'm talking about that shiny new notebook you just got!) will be able to benefit when the really fast flash RAM is available.

Like a lot of MS technology, it will take some time for systems to mature enough to be able to use it fully.

 

Not a big loss IMO.... most people have a spare USB drive sitting around or can buy one for under $20 US to use with readyboost anyway, so having turbocache built-in isn't that special