StamatisX

RAMDisk and computer performance

14 posts in this topic

A very nice way to boost your computer's performance is by installing an SSD. Even though SSDs are way faster than HDDs, still NANDs used on SSDs and the SATA 2/3 protocol cannot be compared to the speed of a DDR3 RAM.

A solution to this gap is a RAMDisk. With current chipset architectures that allow even laptops to have up to 32GB of RAM, someone who can afford it and wants the maximum performance for the money s/he paid should seriously consider a solution like that.

I was thinking of a scenario with the soon to be released Alienware M18x, that supports up to 32GB of RAM.

Keep 8GB for the OS and dedicate the rest 24GB to the RAMDisk. Inside that space you can allocate the pagefile, assign all the temp files, caches like that used by the web browser (that instead of being written on the disk would now be written much more faster on your RAM) and install programs that you use the most and you need them to run as fast as possible.

You won't have to worry about the wear and tear of your SSD, since at the end of the day all the data will be written in a serial manner to your SSD, you will utilize your RAM in a more efficient way since most of the times it remains unused, the pagefile will remain on your SSD instead of the slower SSD/HDD and will reduce the wear of it.

You can even install an OS in there using VM. That OS would literally fly.

Cons are the cost and the limited size of RAM, plus you need a 64bit version of windows to be able to utilize more than 3GB of RAM, it will as prolong the shut down times since it will have to write everything to your SSD at the end of the day.

So what do you think about it? Do you have any other ideas about maximizing your computer's performance?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Have you already worked with a system which used this setup? I'm really curious about whether you can actually fell the difference or not. I heard about this idea a couple of times and I think it's really interesting. However there are also people saying it isn't really worth all the effort because you don't gain enough performance... I'd love to hear from someone who uses this whether it really (noticeably) boosts the system.

BTW, did you check the prices of the 8GB RAM sticks? :D

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Yeah kinda pricy I know, but if it can really increase the performance that much, it might be worth it, unfortunately I only have 4GB of RAM and I need pretty much all of it, but if I had 8 I would dedicate half of it and install programs in it to see the difference.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Yeah, I only have 4GB myself, otherwise I would have tried it already a while ago. I'm really curious whether it works fine.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It should work better than fine, ie, let's say you have Linux and installed using vmware on the ramdisk, compiling the kernel would me blazing fast, so would be the whole OS.

Think about it, you would run an entire OS on your RAM...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Yes, when running a VM on the RAMdisk it will be incredibly fast... I agree. But I'm wondering whether having the pagefile on the RAMdisk really makes a big difference.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

About the pagefile, I usually keep it off, unless I plan to play a game like Metro 2033, for some reason if I don't have a pagefile larger than 4GB the game crashes with an error about low memory, while my RAM still has 2GB free. So keeping the pagefile in RAM (given that we have plenty, like the scenario described on my first post) will prevent the wear and tear of an SSD or makes things a lot faster if we have an HDD.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

All the concept checks out, I tried it actually with my system when it worked I used a 1gb size ram disk to give it a try. It did improve speed to the temp files a lot. I didn't try a page file and as people start to have more ram by default config this should be a good solution for all the uses you posted Stam. There is another thing, you have an option if not using sensitive data to be saved like a pagefile, instead your using it for browser temp files and cookies, if you don't have the ramdisk save it's contents at shutdown you have a automatic way to delete your history and temp files. So a ramdisk can provide better security. Those who bench could keep the executable in a ramdisk and tests with a lot of reads and writes. If I had 32Gb I would do very similar to what you suggested Stam. Your pagefile is basically like a second version of your ram... It contains everything you may need but isn't work putting in your ram yet(according to windows) and if those files when needed were accessed faster then you would see speed improvement in everything. There is a option to clear pagefile every shutdown (in windows) if you pair that with don't save ram disk contents at shutdown, you won't lose more crucial ssd disk space and will see the benefit of a page file on ramdisk. SSD operations per second is shadowed by ram's max operations per second. We need to see some benches of systems with their temp files and page files on ramdisk versus systems without. Then we need to see the program aspect of things like install Vantage or 3DMark2011 and see it's performance versus normal install on SSD and platter disk drives.

Stam, I found the same thing some programs cannot have no page file and I found a 1-2gb minimum or I would have similar errors. That's when I decided the pagefile was crucial and integral. I get better bench scores with 8gb page file with 8gb of ram...

Edited by mw86

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Pagefiles are needed for 32bit game executables with poor memory management.

The developers have 2 options when it comes to 32bit games:

1: Fit everything into 2GB and manage it properly, using time and effort (or 3Gb if the user has the /3gb environment variable, but thats not reliable)

2: IDGAF it and code poorly, lazily, and quickly and rely on the page file for memory overflow.

I bet you can fucking guess what they choose?

So if you have a 64bit machine with 9999999gb memory, that game exe can only use 2gb. So the devs throw all their extra crap into the pagefile.

If you have your pagefile switched off and the devs do this you will get the "close programs memory too low" error, which is actually bullshit if you check out your task manager. Its windows responding to one program hitting its pitiful 2gb limit.

If it is a 64bit app, you wont have this problem with your pagefile switched off.

So, the best solution if you have more than 8gb ram, is to have a 4gb ramdisk with a 4gb pagefile on it, set size. Then your 32 bit apps will be more than happy. Also, use the /3gb switch on startup for a bit of extra legroom.

-Ash

3 people like this

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Great post Ash. So when I got bluescreen errors or program crashes with the page file off its because a program or game exceeded it's 2gb memory limit. Cool If I get 8gb - 32 GB of ram I'll throw my pagefile on a ramdisk @ 4gb size.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

so been using my pagefile in a 4gb ramdisk for maybe a week... the OS is what I notice a difference in... seems like moving through windows os interface in this config is much snappier. any suggestions on a test to see real world benefits guys?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

bump guys any thoughts i went to 1gb ramdisk with 1gb swap files to see if better... shutdown and start up speed improved since ramdisk backup at shutdown has less to save....

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

As long as you don't see any weird behavior with programs, like sudden crashes or BSOD then you can leave it like that. It means that what you use doesn't require anything more than that.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Sweet thanks Stamatis... This on standard hard drive still.... I will use this on SSD no doubt. As I will be raiding mine although it disables trim. Raid says do not place page file on raid partition... So I won't I'll place in ramdisk.

plus saves ssd from many writes... This way only write from page file will be at each shutdown then as ramdisk backup. Need help though sometimes I see total page file size is larger then I had set and is currently set in system properties. I am reading max from hwinfos latest version. Mumak added its reading to sensors window which is so cool mumak!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.

  • Similar Content

    • Cannot boot from SSD (Alienware 15)
      By charliez
      Hi guys!
       
      Forgive me for any spelling mistakes but I have not slept for about 6 days now trying to get this to work and the men in white coats will be picking me up soon.
       
      I bought an Alienware 15 with 1GB HDD and 1GB SSD (PM951 NVMe Samsung 1024GB).  For reasons that can only be attributed to criminal insanity the PC was delivered with the OS on the HDD and a blank SSD.
       
      I have now spent the last 5 days trying to install Win10 on the SSD (clean install from Win ISO file on USB).  It kept failing for all sorts of reasons but I finally managed to use diskpart to set a combination of disk format and partitions that Win was happy with.  The installation now goes all the way through until the restart.  This is where my problems start.
       
      For reasons I cannot understand, it simply refuses to boot from the SSD.  If I leave the USB stick in, the installation starts all over again, if I take it out I get "Checking media presence" and then "No bootable devices" (I have physically disconnected the HDD).
       
      The SSD is showing in the BIOS as "M.2 SSD-1 PM951 NVMe Samsung 1024GB".  If I run the Win installer and then uses Shift+F10 I can also access the SSD as drive C and see that there are Win files on it.  But I cannot get the BIOS to boot to the SSD.  I have tried all sorts of combinations now of Legacy and UEFI with and without Secure Boot and/or Load Legacy Option Rom.  I have installed everything with the SATA set to both RAID and to ACHI.  I have kissed the machine, I have punished it, I have asked for forgiveness and given it flowers and chocolate.  And still the bastard will not boot to SSD.
       
      I just cannot understand how it can show in BIOS and I can see the files on the drive from command line, but I cannot get it to boot.  Please, please help me.  I am on the brink and the only thing that has kept me alive is that I am on the ground floor and thus jumping from the balcony only looks silly, really.
    • Ark: Survival Evolved Performance Test on Xbox One
      By Brian
      Digital Foundry re-tested Ark: Survival Evolved on an Xbox One after the developer made some performance improvements and unfortunately the results are still less than spectacular. This isn't really much of a surprise as the game has always performed pretty poorly even on powerful PCs such as my own Titan X setup. If you've never heard of Ark: Survival Evolved before, it is an open world sandbox game that takes place on an island full of dinosaurs where you are free to gather resources, build bases, tame dinosaurs and attack other player built bases. In concept it is similar to other open world games like Rust but this game just runs a lot worse. 
       
       
      You can watch Digital Foundry's video review below:
       
       

      View full article
    • Ark: Survival Evolved Performance Test on Xbox One
      By Brian
      Digital Foundry re-tested Ark: Survival Evolved on an Xbox One after the developer made some performance improvements and unfortunately the results are still less than spectacular. This isn't really much of a surprise as the game has always performed pretty poorly even on powerful PCs such as my own Titan X setup. If you've never heard of Ark: Survival Evolved before, it is an open world sandbox game that takes place on an island full of dinosaurs where you are free to gather resources, build bases, tame dinosaurs and attack other player built bases. In concept it is similar to other open world games like Rust but this game just runs a lot worse. 
       
       
      You can watch Digital Foundry's video review below:
       
       
    • Gaming Performances & Behaviours
      By w4vz
      Im trying to start a thread where we can organise comments specifically about gaming performances with our EGPU rather than have all that scattered around the forum
      Comparing to to my desktop PC build (I5, 8go ram and gtx970) the EGPU system is definitely slower on Elite dangerous and also on other games that I can't include right now because I have not played them on this build so far. Two main comments:
      - FPS is around 30-45 FPS in Elite Dangerous (almost max settings) but many times dropping around 20 so It can be a drag sometime because I had full 60 FPS on the PC build; that is quite a loss but still playable. Curiously, lowering graphic settings do not give much gain (about 10FPS more)
      The MAC version of the game is still recent so I expect some software tweaks but still wondering where does the problem comes from. Maybe a TB1 bottle neck? Looking at ISTATS I can see that the GTX gets used at 70%max of its capacity; is this normal ? Could someone with OS X and GTX970 comment on that ?
      - Macbook FAN Behaviour: looking at Istats, my CPU appears o be used at about 10-20% so not much but still showing above 80 degrees so the fans are kicking quite a lot (5000RPM). Any comment on that would be much appreciated too. I have ordered a laptop cooler to see I that helps.
      - Another FAN issue while this one inaudible is the GTX 970 that appears to have one of its fan only running after gaming sessions. Reboot fixes the problem and the fans are off when not playing. Anyone having this issue?
      I Scored 1213 on Heaven Benchmark on extreme settings, is this a normal score ?
      My build is :
      Thunderbolt 1
      Webdrivers: 346.01.02f03
      EVGA GTX 970 4go
      Mid 2012 Macbook pro retina I7 2.6 Ghz
      Akitio + GTX 970
      OSX 10.10.3
    • Potential upgrades for Alienware M17x R4?
      By Lessinor
      Hey I am new here. I have had an Alienware M17x R4 for a while and I keep deciding to upgrade it instead of buying a new laptop. Mostly because it would be prohibitively expensive to buy a new one with comparable performance, expecially the more I upgrade it. I am quite inept when it comes to a lot of the tech stuff on this website, so bear that in mind if I make myself sound like an idiot.
      Currently running;
      OS: Windows 10-64bit Pro
      CPU: Intel Core i7-3840QM CPU @ 2.80GHz, 2801 Mhz 4 Core
      GPU: NVIDIA GeForce GTX 980M, 8GB VRAM
      -353.17 Modified Driver, in PEG mode with A11 unlocked BIOS
      RAM: 32GB of some Samsung RAM, not sure exactly what kind
      Wireless Adapter: Intel Dual Band Wireless-AC 7620
      Storage: Two 1TB HDDs in Raid0, and one 64GB SSD (that I believe is mSATA and used to be a cache)
      So what could I upgrade with what I currently have? The main thing I have thought is possibly replacing the 64GB SSD with a Samsung 850 EVO mSATA 1TB SSD. Transfer my OS to the new SSD and just use the 2TB Raid for mass storage. Would that work? What other upgrades could I do?
      Thanks.