Raxco RamDisk Plus

Discussion in 'other software & services' started by Osaban, Sep 6, 2013.

Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.
  1. Osaban

    Osaban Registered Member

    Joined:
    Apr 11, 2005
    Posts:
    4,222
  2. SweX

    SweX Registered Member

    Joined:
    Apr 21, 2007
    Posts:
    6,429
    If you don't want to buy it right away you can also.....:)
     
  3. Osaban

    Osaban Registered Member

    Joined:
    Apr 11, 2005
    Posts:
    4,222
    I know I can have my own opinion... But I thought perhaps somebody has already tested it and would save me the trouble of a download and possibly other problems.
     
  4. SweX

    SweX Registered Member

    Joined:
    Apr 21, 2007
    Posts:
    6,429
    Sure I was just pointing that out FYI. We had an active member here 6 months ago that used a ramdisk, I don't remember if it was this particular one, but he liked the one that he were using anyway :)
     
  5. J_L

    J_L Registered Member

    Joined:
    Nov 6, 2009
    Posts:
    8,516
  6. Osaban

    Osaban Registered Member

    Joined:
    Apr 11, 2005
    Posts:
    4,222
    I only have a fleeting interest in it, but Raxco usually promotes reasonable software. They claim it can boost system speed(actually Random reads and Writes) 50 times! Frankly i don't believe it and it is very expensive.
     
  7. NGRhodes

    NGRhodes Registered Member

    Joined:
    Jun 23, 2003
    Posts:
    2,331
    Location:
    West Yorkshire, UK
    Its a trade off, less memory for caching (more disc accesses read and write) and running applications (more likely to page out to page file), which the advert conveniently forgets to mention Windows already does (a lot of the claims are based on raw disk access without any of the standard windows performance enhancements such as caching, pre fetching etc.).
    Probably only make measurable difference if you have lots of free ram to spare (based on your normal day to day memory usage).
    Will probably be edge cases where people have a performance issue that can be addressed (where certain operations are slowed down by limited I/O), but in the general I remain sceptical until I see benchmarks.

    Cheers, Nick
     
  8. aladdin

    aladdin Registered Member

    Joined:
    Jan 9, 2006
    Posts:
    2,986
    Location:
    Oman
  9. J_L

    J_L Registered Member

    Joined:
    Nov 6, 2009
    Posts:
    8,516
    Actually RAM disks are still far faster than SSD's, but you're right about which is the better deal. SoftPerfect is free, works very well, and I have 12 GB to spare.
     
  10. Osaban

    Osaban Registered Member

    Joined:
    Apr 11, 2005
    Posts:
    4,222
    Thanks, this is the kind of info I was looking for.
     
  11. TheCatMan

    TheCatMan Registered Member

    Joined:
    Aug 16, 2013
    Posts:
    327
    Location:
    sweden
    thanks for the links and articles, am downloading softperfects ramdisk http://www.softperfect.com/products/ramdisk/

    I was thinking of downloading portable apps like firefox and others that I use daily and loading them into ram to use. Is this the best way going about doing it ?
     
  12. majoMo

    majoMo Registered Member

    Joined:
    Aug 31, 2007
    Posts:
    938
    @ TheCatMan, I don't see the point doing that. RamDisk's are useful to put them the browsers cache; thus you can save your hard disk use and clean your browser cache when rebooting (and maybe a quick browser).
     
  13. TheCatMan

    TheCatMan Registered Member

    Joined:
    Aug 16, 2013
    Posts:
    327
    Location:
    sweden
    If I load the firefox portable edition into the ram drive, then I was hoping the cache and exe runs from there ?

    Or are you guys just installing the browser cache into the ram drive?
     
  14. 0strodamus

    0strodamus Registered Member

    Joined:
    Aug 23, 2009
    Posts:
    1,047
    Location:
    United Surveillance States
    If you have enough memory for a RAM disk, why not just disable Firefox's disk cache and force it to use memory only?

    about:config "browser.cache.disk.enable" set to false and "browser.cache.disk.capacity" set to 0.
     
  15. Osaban

    Osaban Registered Member

    Joined:
    Apr 11, 2005
    Posts:
    4,222
    Thanks Nick for clarifying the issue, seems to me that spending any amount of money on this type of software would be unnecessary given the fact that there are free alternatives.
     
    Last edited: Sep 7, 2013
  16. J_L

    J_L Registered Member

    Joined:
    Nov 6, 2009
    Posts:
    8,516
    I personally only keep temporary files there, which includes testing portable apps or sandboxed programs. Putting the cache on a RAM disk instead of disabling it has the advantage of faster loading and less bandwidth usage for pages you've closed. Other objects, like online videos, are also kept there (and recoverable with VideoCacheView).

    If you use those apps daily, you can save the disk as an image and load that on startup (might be inconvenient for config), or copy/sync on startup and shutdown. Then you'll have to factor what to keep and when to save.

    If you think the increased performance and management is worth it, then go ahead. Could save some writes as well.
     
Loading...
Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.