SSD vs USB flash for perf boosting

[Tripredacus]

I had an idea but was wondering if it makes any sense, and/or if it would be beneficial to do.

I have already seen the benefit of using a USB flash drive with ReadyBoost in Windows 7. Now, if I were to get a small SSD I was wondering if it could be used for a performance gain. If so, which of these would be better to use an SSD for:

1. Page File

2. ReadyBoost

However, I do not even know if it possible to use an SSD for ReadyBoost.

What do you guys think?

[JorgeA]

Tripredacus,

Sorry, I don't have an informative reply -- I just want to say that I have wondered the same thing as you, and it's a shame that nobody here has piped in with anything useful.

SSDs seem to be most popular among hard-core gamers, so you may have better luck in a forum dedicated to that.

In another part of MSFN, we recently conducted a series of Word file loading tests, where we conlcuded was that using an SSD would shave maybe a couple of seconds off the loading time; the real delay in loading seems to happen during file processing, and an SSD wouldn't help there.

So the benefit of using an SSD remains mysterious to me: Since you can't start playing a game till the OS is loaded, does it really matter so much that the system takes 15 seconds instead of a couple minutes to get ready? Is it worth paying $150 or $250 or more just to be able to start playing a minute or two sooner? Maybe if your average playing session is 5 or 10 minutes, but otherwise...

I'm sure I'm missing some important factor, but I've been looking for a good excuse to get myself an SSD and I just don't seem to be able to find one! I keep my PC turned on almost all the time anyway, so even the OS loading-time gain is mostly moot.

--JorgeA

Edited October 28, 2010 by JorgeA

[Tripredacus]

I agree about the boot time. I leave my PC on all the time, and I am not in a situation where I need my computer to turn on in order for me to do work. The only possibility is when I need to do a reboot mid-day because of a Windows Update.

However, I have seen that using an SSD is VERY helpful when doing image testing. I have seen a 4 second deployment of a full XPe image onto an SSD. Unlike most people here I do all my image and software testing using actual hardware instead of VMs. So in that case, using an SSD is a lot better than a regular HDD.

[JorgeA]

However, I have seen that using an SSD is VERY helpful when doing image testing. I have seen a 4 second deployment of a full XPe image onto an SSD. Unlike most people here I do all my image and software testing using actual hardware instead of VMs. So in that case, using an SSD is a lot better than a regular HDD.

Tripredacus,

Wow, very impressive!

Here's a link to a thread on another forum that may (or may not) shed light on your question about putting the page file on an SSD.

And here's another one.

There doesn't seem to be a clear consensus on whether using an SSD for a page file is either (1) worth more than the wear and tear that paging implies, or (2) at all helpful to performance even if one is willing to accept the wear and tear to the SSD.

I'll be curious to know if you discover anything that decides either of these points!

--JorgeA

Edited November 2, 2010 by JorgeA

[jaclaz]

There doesn't seem to be a clear consensus on whether using an SSD for a page file is either (1) worth more than the wear and tear that paging implies, or (2) at all helpful to performance even if one is willing to accept the wear and tear to the SSD.

JFYI there is NOT EVEN any consensus about the actual utility of having a pagefile on modern hardware and big amounts of RAM and, if yes, how big it should be AND if it should be "fixed sized" or "windows managed".

It usually turns out in a FAT32 vs. NTFS, Mickey Mouse vs. Dracula, Godzilla vs. King Kong kind of discussion....

(and yes, if you really want to know, IMNSHO the good ol'reptile can kick a§§ of the grown monkey with BOTH hands tied behind it's back )

jaclaz

[JorgeA]

JFYI there is NOT EVEN any consensus about the actual utility of having a pagefile on modern hardware and big amounts of RAM and, if yes, how big it should be AND if it should be "fixed sized" or "windows managed".

jaclaz,

Yup, my further reading on the topic yesterday (after posting) confirms what you said. Although apparently the introduction of the Trim command and similar utilities for newer SSDs did seem to tilt the balance of opinion slightly toward favoring putting the page file on the SSD. Still, though, as you noted, there is hardly a consensus on anything related to SSDs... except that they're really cool! B)

For what exactly, I'm not sure yet...

--JorgeA