Fast Readyboost vs Slow Readyboost

[Ataraxia]

I mean real world difference? Would the fastest readyboost stick be noticeably faster in the system than the slow readyboost stick. Both are Readyboost capable..

 

[bsobel]

I honestly don't think you'll see much difference once you get past the minimums that RD requires.

 

[BD2003]

Originally posted by: Ataraxia
I mean real world difference? Would the fastest readyboost stick be noticeably faster in the system than the slow readyboost stick. Both are Readyboost capable..

You could certainly benchmark the difference, and it would show up, but whether or not it makes a difference depends on your usage scenario. If youre just throwing a stick in for the hell of it, I wouldnt worry about it, but yes, the faster flash does make a difference.

 

[Ataraxia]

I see. Well I would like to buy that Corsair Turboflash.. except it's only 1GB and dirt ugly. So now I'm looking for a fast 2GB or 4GB stick to use. I already have a Sandisk Cruzer Micro that works with Readyboost... but I'm not really sure how fast it is... this is what Event Viewer gives me:

Summary of ReadyBoot Performance:
Io Read Count: 17710
Io Read KB: 431468
Cache Hit Count: 12708
Cache Hit KB: 262266
Cache Hit Percentage: 71.7560700169396
Cache Fragmentation: 8.81435166765483
Compressed Data Size KB: 288414
Raw Data Size KB: 466004
Compression Ratio: 1.61574680840736
Cache Size KB: 296486
Boot Prefetch Time us: 36975582
Boot Prefetch Bytes Read: 356691968
Boot Timestamp (UTC): 4/14/2007 3:51:01 AM
Last Boot Plan Timestamp (UTC): 4/13/2007 10:13:47 PM
Last Boot Plan Timestamp (Local): Fri, Apr 13 07, 06:14:53 PM

How is that compare to the Turboflash?

 

[Ataraxia]

Anybody can decipher all that stuff above...

 

[bsobel]

Originally posted by: Ataraxia
Anybody can decipher all that stuff above...

Yes, however their is no information in that post that would allow anyone to compare that to another model of flash memory (no speed or timings to compare).

Please, see my original response earlier in the thread...

 

[BD2003]

Originally posted by: Ataraxia
Anybody can decipher all that stuff above...

The only thing that matters are the read/write times (see the stickied thread for the procedure). Turboflash is about 9mb random r/w, and I havent yet seen a drive as fast.

 

[Smilin]

Originally posted by: BD2003

Originally posted by: Ataraxia
Anybody can decipher all that stuff above...

The only thing that matters are the read/write times (see the stickied thread for the procedure). Turboflash is about 9mb random r/w, and I havent yet seen a drive as fast.

Seek times are where readyboost really gains performance. If it were just raw throughput hard drives would be much faster.

 

[BD2003]

Originally posted by: Smilin

Originally posted by: BD2003

Originally posted by: Ataraxia
Anybody can decipher all that stuff above...

The only thing that matters are the read/write times (see the stickied thread for the procedure). Turboflash is about 9mb random r/w, and I havent yet seen a drive as fast.

Seek times are where readyboost really gains performance. If it were just raw throughput hard drives would be much faster.

Random r/w speed is basically 100% dependent on seek times.

 

[Smilin]

Random r/w is heavily influenced by seek times (block size plays a role) but rarely is anything 100% random. If it were then the pagefile on disk would be of little use. You can grab a single page out of flash faster but pulling a paged out process that is many sequential pages may be faster from disk. Especially since the disk controller is likely to get cache hits in such circumstances.

Put a copy in each location (disk/flash) and they'll compliment each other well.