worth to invest in 16GB DDR3 for Ramdisk?

[Borealis7]

Hi,
I'm planning my next build (based on a Haswell 4770K) and I was wondering if instead of getting an SSD, i could get 16GB of RAM and install games I play on a RAMDisk. Since I never play more than 1 game at a time and considering there are ways to persist the ram disk over reboots with an imaging tool, i could potentially improve load times and run-time texture loading, right?

i'm also developing Java applications with IBM's Eclipse IDE and i think the RAMDisk could improve Eclipse responsiveness and build speed.

what do you guys think?

 

[Cerb]

If you intend to get 16GB of RAM and use part of it for a RAM disk, don't. Get 16GB of RAM and let the OS and your programs use it. All your RAM disk will be doing is screwing Windows.

If you intend to get 32GB and allow a RAM disk to use up to 16GB of it, that's far into the territory of not being worth it.

 

[bononos]

I assume that he's not going to use a large portion for ramdisk - say maybe half so I don't see how windows is going to be screwed.

Its hardly cost efficient considering loading times from an ssd but thats really beside the point isn't it.

 

[KingFatty]

I good question might be, would using a RAMdisk be any better than simply allowing Windows' automated caching to do its thing? I would imagine, that if you simply use a Windows computer and run the same game without switching between a bunch of games, that Windows would naturally cache the game for you and give you the benefit of all your ram, without needing to specifically set up a ram disk or do funky things when installing games.

 

[Cerb]

I assume that he's not going to use a large portion for ramdisk - say maybe half so I don't see how windows is going to be screwed.

How many games are not going to use half?

So, with 16GB of RAM, and a RAM disk, let's say the OP wanted to go backwards a few years, and play The Witcher (I'm replaying it, since bug fix mods and the expansion weren't out last time, so have it right here, and mods are <10MB). That would leave all of 2.5-3GB for everything else. That's not enough room for Windows, a 32-bit game, and a single browser window.

TBH, I can only find highly-consolized games that fit in under 10GB, or really old games. That means screwing Windows, because Windows can and will use that RAM to store recently-opened files.

I good question might be, would using a RAMdisk be any better than simply allowing Windows' automated caching to do its thing? I would imagine, that if you simply use a Windows computer and run the same game without switching between a bunch of games, that Windows would naturally cache the game for you and give you the benefit of all your ram, without needing to specifically set up a ram disk or do funky things when installing games.

:thumbsup:

 

[Borealis7]

ok, scratch that idea.
a recent article i read on TweakTown made me think, because he ran AS-SSD on the ramdisk and got redonkulous speeds.

http://www.tweaktown.com/reviews/5487/superspeed-ramdisk-plus-11-software-review/index6.html

 

[FelixDeCat]

ok, scratch that idea.
a recent article i read on TweakTown made me think, because he ran AS-SSD on the ramdisk and got redonkulous speeds.

http://www.tweaktown.com/reviews/5487/superspeed-ramdisk-plus-11-software-review/index6.html

Ive been using RAM disks for years now and install them on all machines I come into contact with. They are beneficial to me by reducing wear on SSDs, providing a secure container that leaves no trace when powered off and to help prolong the life of spindle based drives.

I use 16gb and allocate 8gb for the drive on my machine. User temp files are redirected using set temp=r \. Windows temp files remain in c: \windows\temp for software installation purposes. The biggest benefit comes from using this drive for browser caches and video editing / capture files.

Since upgrading to an 7.5GB drive, I've yet to run out of memory or drive space.

Some people suggest disabling virtual memory, but Windows will constantly nag you for it if you do. One thing I have noticed however is that when allocating virtual mem to the ram drive, it is best to set it at something like 128mb to the full 7.5GB.

I like to watch Youtube videos while playing online poker and running other progams. All this flash intensive work in multiple browers takes a lot of memory and because flash is such a crappy piece of software causes dumps to virtual memory regardless of how much ram you have. In the past this would cause BSODs, until I started using 8gb with the entire amount set to VM as the LIMIT (not the minimum..most times this is all it uses).

I use Dataram as its the fastest and most reliable drive. I always use Drive R:, which wont set properly on Vista so you have to use Gavotte.

Here are some benches from my laptop using a 2gb ddr2 drive:

Desktop using DDR3 1866

 

[Cerb]

Nitpick: you can't turn virtual memory off, and everything that's not in the OS kernel is writing to virtual memory.

Also:

Some people suggest disabling virtual memory, but Windows will constantly nag you for it if you do

No, it won't. If you RAM amount is equal or greater than what your peak commit would be with a dynamic PF, you will be fine. If not, you really need to have a page file. If it's nagging you, you either need to enable the PF again, get more RAM, or both.

 

[tweakboy]

Be future proof,, Just grab a 16GB kit and later on go to 32GB .. thx gl

 

[pcunite]

I've considered doing this and storing my VM disks there. However, you'll need 32GB really unless your VM disk is very small.

 

[KingFatty]

Ive been using RAM disks for years now and install them on all machines I come into contact with. They are beneficial to me by reducing wear on SSDs, providing a secure container that leaves no trace when powered off and to help prolong the life of spindle based drives.

I use 16gb and allocate 8gb for the drive on my machine. User temp files are redirected using set temp=r \. Windows temp files remain in c: \windows\temp for software installation purposes. The biggest benefit comes from using this drive for browser caches and video editing / capture files.

Since upgrading to an 7.5GB drive, I've yet to run out of memory or drive space.

Some people suggest disabling virtual memory, but Windows will constantly nag you for it if you do. One thing I have noticed however is that when allocating virtual mem to the ram drive, it is best to set it at something like 128mb to the full 7.5GB.

I like to watch Youtube videos while playing online poker and running other progams. All this flash intensive work in multiple browers takes a lot of memory and because flash is such a crappy piece of software causes dumps to virtual memory regardless of how much ram you have. In the past this would cause BSODs, until I started using 8gb with the entire amount set to VM as the LIMIT (not the minimum..most times this is all it uses).

I use Dataram as its the fastest and most reliable drive. I always use Drive R:, which wont set properly on Vista so you have to use Gavotte.

Here are some benches from my laptop using a 2gb ddr2 drive:

Desktop using DDR3 1866

I'm skeptical of the claim that using a RAM disk will provide tangible benefits in longevity/wear for hard drives and SSDs, because in the end it would be not noticeable?

Also, how do you overlook the fact that setting up a RAM disk is taking away memory that windows could use for caching things intelligently? I mean, that RAM disk is stealing your RAM from otherwise being set to good use.

All the 'negatives' you point to are not actually helped by the RAM disk, and the only benefit I could see was having a "disposable" container that is destroyed on power down. But, even that benefit is erased by the annoyance of having to set it up again when you boot up, and all the downsides of stealing RAM away from the computer being able to use it constructively to cache programs you are using.

It just makes me think it's like going into your house's living room, and building a tent in the middle of your room. Yay you now have a tent and can put stuff in that tent, but it's just annoying overall and takes away from use of your living room for other nice things. Similarly the RAM disk is depriving windows of RAM that it could be using to make your usability improved overall.

 

[Cerb]

I've considered doing this and storing my VM disks there. However, you'll need 32GB really unless your VM disk is very small.

Your next upgrade should be a Precision from the Dell outlet, amiright? 128+GB is just a CC charge away.

 

[pcunite]

Your next upgrade should be a Precision from the Dell outlet, amiright? 128+GB is just a CC charge away.

lol ... maybe in the next five years. I'm cool with my system now. It maxes at 32GB and I have 16GB installed. Running several VM's are actually pretty fast on a Crucial 256 Sata III drive. Still, I wanna see what would happen if I ran them from a 16GB Ram disk ... I'll order some more RAM next year I test maybe.

 

[FelixDeCat]

I'm skeptical of the claim that using a RAM disk will provide tangible benefits in longevity/wear for hard drives and SSDs, because in the end it would be not noticeable?

Also, how do you overlook the fact that setting up a RAM disk is taking away memory that windows could use for caching things intelligently? I mean, that RAM disk is stealing your RAM from otherwise being set to good use.

All the 'negatives' you point to are not actually helped by the RAM disk, and the only benefit I could see was having a "disposable" container that is destroyed on power down. But, even that benefit is erased by the annoyance of having to set it up again when you boot up, and all the downsides of stealing RAM away from the computer being able to use it constructively to cache programs you are using.

It just makes me think it's like going into your house's living room, and building a tent in the middle of your room. Yay you now have a tent and can put stuff in that tent, but it's just annoying overall and takes away from use of your living room for other nice things. Similarly the RAM disk is depriving windows of RAM that it could be using to make your usability improved overall.

I have studied this for years and have come to the conclusion all computers with more than 2gb benefit from a ramdrive.

Before I explain why let me tell you that you are free to reply if you choose - but I will not reply to any rebuttals - because I know it is right for my own needs. I DO NOT CARE if people disagree. I will NEVER run any computer in my control without a RAMDRIVE, ever.

Ever.

The biggest benefit is privacy and that need is satisfied. As far as "setting it up" being a hassle .... there is no 'hassle' at all. None.

The RAMDRIVE loads up empty at startup with the same drive letter R: \. I do not load an image or anything else. So there is no hassle or additional wait time whatsoever.

As far as saving wear on physical drives of ANY kind, its obvious it also satisfies this need. If I carried you versus you walking on your own, you would get to your destination without exerting yourself. The majority of people use their computers as internet browsing devices. Therefore the most frequently written files are stored (along with all system TEMP files) in Ramdrive and deleted at shutdown. NO IMAGE is saved as it would defeat the purpose.

As far as 'setting up a tent in my home' to explain peoples 'stealing memory' theory...that too is incorrect...FOR ME. Perhaps there are individuals that use all 16GB installed on a system like mine, but I rarely need the entire 8.5 GB remaining I use to operate the OS and all programs.

In order to provide a more perfect use of ALL SYSTEM MEMORY, I utilize a RAMDRIVE for 1/2 of the available memory. On systems with less memory, I use a tiny drive of 384mb that also loads as fast as Windows can allocate the memory for browser caching.

Feel free to have the last word.

 

[pcunite]

I have studied this for years and have come to the conclusion all computers with more than 2gb benefit from a ramdrive.

The biggest benefit is privacy and that need is satisfied. As far as "setting it up" being a hassle .... there is no 'hassle' at all. None.

The RAMDRIVE loads up empty at startup with the same drive letter R: \. I do not load an image or anything else. So there is no hassle or additional wait time whatsoever.

That is a good use for a RAM drive. Something that would be cool in addition to what you're doing is ... loading the entire OS, when you first boot from a micro OS that loads a VM disk into RAM. So the whole thing is volatile. You save your work out to mapped drives. There has been some progress in this area although I don't remember where.

The cool thing about this is that you can just replace the VM file if you feel the machine has been "infected" or whatever.

 

[KingFatty]

Actually, that is really neat. There is an attractiveness to having certain things in a temporary RAM drive, so you are fully certain that cutting power will leave no traces.

For example, my computer is in one room (den), but my house's circuit breaker is in a completely different room (bedroom). So, if something went wrong, maybe getting raided by police etc., I could just go to my bedroom and toggle the circuit breaker.

Even though I'm doing nothing wrong so wouldn't worry, there is a very powerful ability in using a RAM drive like that. It's pretty neat that you have it set up to automatically prepare the RAM drive upon startup, maybe one day you could post a "how-to" and share your particular techniques.

Note: perhaps you can imagine this scenario differently, where you substitute "wife or girlfriend" for police above.

 

[BFG10K]

RAM disks can be useful for some fringe scenarios (e.g. Rage, which seems to have an uncacheable workload and constantly streams from the disk regardless of how much RAM you have).

But if you have to ask, the answer&#8217;s probably &#8220;you don&#8217;t need one&#8221;.

 

[tweakboy]

What are you going to do with it.

How do you use your comp ?

If you run 20 VmWare apps and play 2 games at the same time tasking.

gl

 

[Tarvaln]

I'm getting 16 GB of Crucial Ballistix Tactical in tomorrow. I got these because they were on sale and for some silly ass reason I wanted to max out my motherboard. I don't know what to do with that much RAM. I really just use my PC for games and porn. Mostly that second thing. I don't shut off my PC very often.

I have a couple of silly questions.

I already have an SSD and all of my temp files/folders linked to my HDD. Will linking them to a ramdisk improve performance? I mean like something I would notice.

The only game I have that takes forever to load is Total War: Shogun 2. That sits on my HDD at 32Gb so I can't throw it into the ramdisk. Is there something I can do to improve it's loading times with a ramdisk? Maybe for other games? Link to my steam if you're bored enough to browse it. http://steamcommunity.com/profiles/76561198009392906/

What else could I do with that extra RAM?

Just looking for ideas.

Thanks for reading!

 

[sxr7171]

How many games are not going to use half?

So, with 16GB of RAM, and a RAM disk, let's say the OP wanted to go backwards a few years, and play The Witcher (I'm replaying it, since bug fix mods and the expansion weren't out last time, so have it right here, and mods are <10MB). That would leave all of 2.5-3GB for everything else. That's not enough room for Windows, a 32-bit game, and a single browser window.

TBH, I can only find highly-consolized games that fit in under 10GB, or really old games. That means screwing Windows, because Windows can and will use that RAM to store recently-opened files.

:thumbsup:

I'm pretty sure Windows can somehow manage to run itself in the 6GB he would expose to it.

 

[sxr7171]

lol ... maybe in the next five years. I'm cool with my system now. It maxes at 32GB and I have 16GB installed. Running several VM's are actually pretty fast on a Crucial 256 Sata III drive. Still, I wanna see what would happen if I ran them from a 16GB Ram disk ... I'll order some more RAM next year I test maybe.

I'd like to hear if it improves game load times.

 

[Cerb]

I'm pretty sure Windows can somehow manage to run itself in the 6GB he would expose to it.

Somehow, yes. Somehow, it could run in much less, like just 2GB. But, not nearly as well as with more. Right now I'm using 3.5GB with just Chrome running, after a Windows Update reboot. Throw in a typical game, and there goes another 1-1.5GB, leaving not much for cache. Throw in 1 VM and it gets noticeably slower (with lots of paging out to nowhere, last time I checked).

Chrome, FI, would be doing lots of GC, with less RAM. It can still handle plenty of tabs, but will go re-load and re-render much more often, when forced to work in less RAM. Firefox will do the same thing, but usually in a more in-your-face way (you can watch it shrink and grow in Task manager, and it stutters ). While it varies by game, quite a few will also use what's available, just working slower with less RAM.

 

[Concillian]

The biggest benefit is privacy and that need is satisfied. As far as "setting it up" being a hassle .... there is no 'hassle' at all. None.

The RAMDRIVE loads up empty at startup with the same drive letter R: \. I do not load an image or anything else. So there is no hassle or additional wait time whatsoever.

So what are you putting on the ramdrive? Only browser temp files? Also Windows temp files? Just curious how you're setting it up and what all you're pointing there.

 

[FelixDeCat]

So what are you putting on the ramdrive? Only browser temp files? Also Windows temp files? Just curious how you're setting it up and what all you're pointing there.

Firefox temp files, add to "about:config"

browser.cache.disk.parent_directory and set value to r: \

Set to private browsing mode or delete all cookies / files at browser close if you are using a small drive. I do it by rote on all computers.

Config IE by redirecting to r: \

I also delete all history and cookies at exit to free up space.

System, Advanced config :

set temp = r: \
set tmp = r: \

I leave the Windows temp directory at default c: \windows\temp since some file installations require a large temp directory and files to be there at reboot to complete an installation.

If you leave the windows file explorer open to drive r: \ , you can see the user temp files being written and deleted by the computer.

Despite what other ramdrive users suggest, I set the virtual memory to the 7200rpm 1tb raid drive to avoid occasional blue screens if I dont. Windows will not operate properly for me without VM, despite the fact that is really not used in daily operation.

I usg 16gb dd3, default XMP memory profile 1866, i7 2700k @ 4.5.

I use Dataram Ramdrive and do not load up an image at startup for faster boots (not to mention, saving / loading an image would defeat the privacy aspect).

 

[sxr7171]

Somehow, yes. Somehow, it could run in much less, like just 2GB. But, not nearly as well as with more. Right now I'm using 3.5GB with just Chrome running, after a Windows Update reboot. Throw in a typical game, and there goes another 1-1.5GB, leaving not much for cache. Throw in 1 VM and it gets noticeably slower (with lots of paging out to nowhere, last time I checked).

Chrome, FI, would be doing lots of GC, with less RAM. It can still handle plenty of tabs, but will go re-load and re-render much more often, when forced to work in less RAM. Firefox will do the same thing, but usually in a more in-your-face way (you can watch it shrink and grow in Task manager, and it stutters ). While it varies by game, quite a few will also use what's available, just working slower with less RAM.

If I limited my RAM to 6GB I would close my browser and not run a VM while playing a game. I think its workable as long as you don't try to run too many things at once.