Is readyboost only useful for slow or low-memory systems?

[+allan MVC]

True and not true .. It is true that all applications use virtual memory however this is mainly to garrantee all apps get enough RAM as the system may not have enough RAM to run everything at the same time. You can quickly test your own theory by turning off the page file (the official Microsoft name for it).

Please stop trying to sound like you know what you're talking about. I didn't say anything about apps and the above statement is as incorrect as your first. And FYI, you CANNOT disable the pagefile, you can only disable your ability to manage it. If you "turn off" the pagefile the OS will continue to page when and where it likes and you will never know it. Clearly the paging will be less efficient (and less utilized) which is why many systems will slow down significantly when the pf is disabled.

The subject of pagefiles has been done to death and pagefile threads invariably become contentious - in no small part because there are always plenty of people who like to sound intelligent on the subject but who are simply spouting nonsense.

[Zanaffer]

One thing to note about readyboost: it can be useful if you hibernate your machine. If you have 4GB memory and a 4GB readyboost stick, it will put the hibernation file on the stick which can dramatically improve resume times.

This seems like a really stupid thing to do. Readyboost was made because flash drives don't have the pesky seek time problem that hard drives too. When you tell a hard drive to read or write a file, it has to move the hard drive heads to the proper position to read them. Flash memory doesn't have to do this, so if you're dealing with lots of small bits of data or very small files, flash drives are faster. This is the basis for Readyboost.

However, for continuous reads, like for example reading a large, singe fairly un-fragmented 4GB file back into memory, the read speeds of a hard drive should be much faster, and then you don't have to worry about not having the flash drive in the USB port when you resume from hibernate.

I don't currently have a vista machine to verify what you're saying her, but are you SURE that it's true?

[Mark Schieldrop]

Yeah, quite sure. :) It seems to be an improvement on laptops with slow 5400rpm HDs. High performance HDs might not be worth worrying about.

[PermaSt0ne]

And, as others have said, the readyboost service also controlls the readyboot service. As a result, it shouldn't be disabled. Unless, of course, you want slower boot times and no boot optimization.

wrong. absolutely wrong. disabling the service will never slow your boot times

the only thing disabling the service does it make it so the OS can't use an external drive to help your computer boot faster. it only prevents you from gaining the benefit of a readyboost device.

there is a very big difference between the two. if you take a default installation with the service enabled but no readyboost device plugged in and compare the speeds to a default installation with the readyboost service disabled, there will be absolutely NO difference in boot speed

the way you said it makes it sound like readyboost helps all computers boot faster whether they have an readyboost device or not. it only gives you the opportunity to take advantage of an external drive. disabling it is not a negative, you just don't get to take advantage of the positive

Edited August 29, 2008 by PermaSt0ne

[ViperAFK]

wrong. absolutely wrong. disabling the service will never slow your boot times

the only thing disabling the service does it make it so the OS can't use an external drive to help your computer boot faster. it only prevents you from gaining the benefit of a readyboost device.

there is a very big difference between the two. if you take a default installation with the service enabled but no readyboost device plugged in and compare the speeds to a default installation with the readyboost service disabled, there will be absolutely NO difference in boot speed

the way you said it makes it sound like readyboost helps all computers boot faster whether they have an readyboost device or not. it only gives you the opportunity to take advantage of an external drive. disabling it is not a negative, you just don't get to take advantage of the positive

Readyboot is controlled by the readyboost service, but readyboot has NOTHING to do with an external drive, it uses RAM to speed up your boot times, disabling it WILL slow down bot times.

When a Windows system boots, a large number of files need to be read intomemory and processed. Typically, the files which need to be called upon boot depend on which services and startup programs the user requires to start the system up. This process can be quite inefficient since multiple portions of the same file may be accessed at different times during bootup. To reduce this inefficiency, the system can cache data that is frequently called upon during the boot process. Practically, code and data accessed during boot are traced by the system (ReadyBoost in this case) and the information is recorded as a cache file. ReadyBoot is, incidentally, implemented by the ReadyBoost service described earlier. ReadyBoost will continue monitoring the system for 90 seconds after start of the boot, or until 30 seconds after the shell has started, or until 60 seconds after all services have been initialised, whichever elapses first. ReadyBoost uses idle CPU time to calculate a caching plan for the next boot based on historical data it has collected as trace information from the previous boot (typically information pertaining to which files were accessed and where they are located on disk). The size of the cache depends on the total RAM available, but is large enough to create a reasonable cache and yet allow the system the memory it needs to boot smoothly.

[Akirajds]

Bad design in my opinion, Linux and Mac OS X use all available RAM at all times, after all, thats what it's there for.

but when vista uses more ram because its availible, its considered a big memory hog ;-)

[MMaster23]

I love the fact that everyone keeps qouting texts and explenations but no real valid sources.

I don't think we'll find soo much information on the matter via Microsoft to be honest.

[ManMountain]

Scroll down to read what Mark Russinovich has to say about ReadyBoot / Boost / Drive http://technet.microsoft.com/en-us/magazine/cc162480.aspx

[waruikoohii]

Readyboost is not designed to be used on systems with more than 2GB RAM.

I've heard people on the Readyboost team talking about using flash drives on computers with up to 2GB RAM, but not more.

Personally, I wouldn't use it on a computer with more than 1GB RAM. I used it on my old laptop for a while, and it didn't help at all. The computer had 1GB RAM.

[tsupersonic]

Readyboost is not designed to be used on systems with more than 2GB RAM.

I've heard people on the Readyboost team talking about using flash drives on computers with up to 2GB RAM, but not more.

Personally, I wouldn't use it on a computer with more than 1GB RAM. I used it on my old laptop for a while, and it didn't help at all. The computer had 1GB RAM.

It really depends on how you use your system. Don't assume everyone uses their system just as you would.

[adam.mt]

Scroll down to read what Mark Russinovich has to say about ReadyBoot / Boost / Drive http://technet.microsoft.com/en-us/magazine/cc162480.aspx

Finally the proof. Wonder if any apologies will be forthcoming? :rolleyes:

[CrashG]

Finally the proof. Wonder if any apologies will be forthcoming? :rolleyes:

I wouldn't count on it. :laugh:

[waruikoohii]

It really depends on how you use your system. Don't assume everyone uses their system just as you would.

It's more an issue of design. The feature is designed to provide a performance gain to computers with low amounts of RAM. The Readyboost team (the people at Microsoft who designed and built the feature) have said that Readyboost was designed for computers with between 512MB RAM and 2GB RAM. Common sense dictates that the more RAM you have, the less noticable a Readyboost cache would be.