eBoostr brings Vista-like Readyboost to Windows XP

[HEXUS]

Windows XP system running low on RAM? In need of Windows Vista's Readyboost technology? No problem, eBoostr is the answer.

Read more.

[DeSean]

RAM is so cheap you might as well just buy more. 2GB will work with 32bit and will be enough for most people (those who don't play new games or use advanced programs).

[TheAnimus]

there are plenty of people with a veritable fleet of XP machines that might be maxed out in RAM upgrade support, and have USB2.0.

Question is, is there ANY advantage in this for the desktop user? Battery life in notebooks sure can seam to be extended, but will this help desktop users much?

Is there a performance boost in a box thats full of ram sticks at 512meg, having 2 gig of flash put on via usb.

In these situations the cost of rolling out their software might well be the largest.

[MSIC]

Readyboost, a disk caching technology in Microsoft's Windows Vista operating system, makes systems running the OS more responsive by using flash memory to create a cache of frequently accessed content.

Is this your opinion, or a quote?
Because if you believe this, link to the evidence... LOL

[Parm]

Touche MSIC, it now reads:

Readyboost, a disk caching technology in Microsoft's Windows Vista operating system, is said to make systems running the OS more responsive by using flash memory to create a cache of frequently accessed content.

[Sinizter]

OK, now where are the tests verifying whether it actually does what it says on the tin ?

[Bob Crabtree]

OK, now where are the tests verifying whether it actually does what it says on the tin ?

Tell me what tests you fancy reading about - I'll try to find time to do some.

For your info, I have two potential test-beds, one an AMD Clawhammer set-up, the other running an Intel E6660 and each with Vista Ultimate and 2GB of RAM.

The stick-drive I have available is a 2GB Kingston DataTraveler [sic].

Bob

[Bob Crabtree]

What might also be interesting is if I try eBoostr on a likkle Dell laptop I've got (a Latitude L400), which is running XP but can only take a maximum of 256MB of RAM (which it has, of course).

The company says that laptops such as this are likely to get a big boost.

Trouble is, as you'd expect, it also says that you need to have USB 2.0 on the PC and mine doesn't have that, it's USB 1.1.

Fortunately, I have already bought a CardBus USB 2 adaptor, so this might make for a VERY interesting exercise!

Mmmm, now I am interested!

Bob
(off to have a fiddle)

[Sinizter]

Tell me what tests you fancy reading about - I'll try to find time to do some.

For your info, I have two potential test-beds, one an AMD Clawhammer set-up, the other running an Intel E6660 and each with Vista Ultimate and 2GB of RAM.

The stick-drive I have available is a 2GB Kingston DataTraveler [sic].

Bob

Stuff like difference in load times with and without eboostr. Difference with 1 to 4 usb devices used for caching, same speed devices, mixed speed devices .. Anything I might have missed out.

My spec is 2.0 GHz C2D, 2GB RAM, 4500rpm HDD 120GB. USB devices are Kingston traveller 2gb and PNY 1gb. SD card slot too, havent got any suitable SD cards right now.

Once I plug in my two drives (1gb with all of it for cache and 2gb with 500mb for cache) I feel like some apps are slightly quicker to load. But the difference is small enough that I suspect it might be a placebo effect - either that or there is a small difference, but nothing thats going to make me fork out for the full version. I also have an SD card slot available to use as another cache device if it does give a benefit as it does mention the ability to use up to 4 different devices and to load balance across them.

[MSIC]

Can you do something like RAID over USB for speed / reduced latency etc?
Come on Bob, i want to see what you can come up with and how contrived it's going to be.
A P2 366 with 128MB RAM and a 4 Gig USB stick running some hacked USB 2.0 interface over a parallel port?

[Bob Crabtree]

I think you (and perhaps others) are labouring under a misapprehension about what eBoostr is claimed to do - and on what type of PC it's most likely to have an impact.

Either that or I've misunderstood the little information that is available on the company's site.

Surely, the only point at which it is likely to have any impact is when your PC is using all of its "real" RAM and - if a stick drive were not attached - would be using the hard disk to hive off stuff for which there is no room in RAM?

So, my further assumption (right or wrong) is that my proposed test-bed PC for eBoost is one that's far more likely to get some benefits than your far newer PC equipped with 2GB of RAM.

To save you reading my previous post, this test-bed is an old Dell laptop that only has a max of 256MB RAM but is equipped with USB 2.0 courtesy of the CardBus card that I've added.

Stuff like difference in load times with and without eboostr. Difference with 1 to 4 usb devices used for caching, same speed devices, mixed speed devices .. Anything I might have missed out.

My spec is 2.0 GHz C2D, 2GB RAM, 4500rpm HDD 120GB. USB devices are Kingston traveller 2gb and PNY 1gb. SD card slot too, havent got any suitable SD cards right now.

Once I plug in my two drives (1gb with all of it for cache and 2gb with 500mb for cache) I feel like some apps are slightly quicker to load. But the difference is small enough that I suspect it might be a placebo effect - either that or there is a small difference, but nothing thats going to make me fork out for the full version. I also have an SD card slot available to use as another cache device if it does give a benefit as it does mention the ability to use up to 4 different devices and to load balance across them.

[MSIC]

Yeah i saw. I'm not taking the mick (too much), i think in all honesty it's a fair idea.
I'm assuming that eBoostr will simply reproduce Vista's memory acceleration technologies (Ready Boost and/or Ready Drive), which (again to be honest) i wish i had come up with the idea myself - it's an interesting piece of technology in theory.
I guess the reason for the posts here (well, for me at least) is that the relative uselessness of the technology in practice makes for a very easy target, especially when anything Vista-related is already a walking target.
If you do find some good results in your particular scenario, do post the results.

[Bob Crabtree]

MSIC,

Thanks for clarification!

(Phew!)

- SNIPPED BY BOB - If you do find some good results in your particular scenario, do post the results.

However, honestly, where I'm really struggling is in finding those particular scenarios to test - so all (appropriate) suggestions would be most welcome.

[[GSV]Trig]

I had it on my machines and failed to notice any difference

[Bob Crabtree]

I had it on my machines and failed to notice any difference

And what is the rough spec of those machines - especially, of course, the amount of RAM in each?

[[GSV]Trig]

PC1
Q6600
4gb

PC2
E6420
2Gb

Laptop
P4M 2Ghz
512Mb

Probably better to stick your swap/pagefile on the USB stick...