Is RAM Disk worth it?

[LightningJR]

I have 32GB of ram. (Boxing day sale $109.99) I have 8GB set aside for any Minecraft servers I wish to run when playing with friends. Some of the mod packs have over 200 mods and are intensive, having this on a mechanical HDD isn't feasible after the world gets large and people have lots of machines going. I could use my SSD but I like to keep reads/writes on it to a minimum so the ramdrive is a perfect alternative. Plus removing any possible lag on the server side is imperative when I have only 2Mbps upload. The drop in load time of the server startup is also a plus, sometimes it's literally 75% quicker.

Some software allows for incremental backups, I have mine set to backup every 30min.

Idk how much benefit the average user/gamer/geek can get from a ramdrive.

 

[_JP_]

Well, the only use for one that I found was for content caching on firewalls.
As for the pagefile, again, it is useless. If you have use win7 or newer, pagefile management is done right, so if you have more than 4GB of RAM, windows will rarely resort to the pagefile.
If you aren't finding anything to do with your RAM, start virtualizing.

So... what if I built a ramdisk... loaded my operating system onto it (would take forever to boot up but be wicked fast) ... then used software RAID0 to make it stripe with *another* ramdisk... all cached on a SSD for nonvolitile storage... would I have the fastest computer in the world?

You do realize that a win8 64b install needs (at least) 20GB of storage. That much spent on RAM (because it would have to be buffered ECC modules) would be better sent to a PCI-e SSD...which is already mind-blowing fast.
Still, I think that it is feasible with a beowulf config.

EDIT: You could also move some steam games to it and have neat loading times. Or steam itself...which sometimes takes forever to load.

 

[LightningJR]

The only games I wanted faster loading times on were large ones, like LOTRO and BF3. These games are 25-35GB so not really an option for a ramdrive. Other than that my SSD and mechanical HDD loaded games quick enough for me anyway. So I don't see any reason to want games on RAM.

As for virtualization, I only did it once and only partially successful then so I know very little about it. I don't really know why I would want to.


Having lost of ram is good, it allows you to have a bunch of things running without issue, I have had 3 games running at the same time and lots of chrome tabs and other programs, while it doesn't happen often it's still nice to have the ability when the situation arises.

With the consoles having 8GB of shared memory how difficult would it be to use system ram in tandem with VRAM? I noticed with Watch Dogs that I couldn't play on Ultra because I only have 2GB of VRAM, does it already buffer into the system ram? if not is it possible and would it be too slow maybe?

 

[Arjai]

I used this during the CEP2 Challenge, in order to slow down the read writes to disk. It works dynamically, as in acting like a hard drive and writing into files, as opposed to just stacking writes, like DataRam did.

http://www.superspeed.com/desktop/supercache.php

My trials of it during the challenge: Want to run 100% CEP2 WUs? Here's how...

 

[AsRock]

Now being all SSD these days i don't use one any more, when i did i used Dataram RAMDisk with symboliclinks which helped with games like Arma 2 and very high spawning rates.

 

[OneMoar]

for 99.9% of users see the following

 

[dr0thegreatest]

like everyone suggested, Ram DIsk really didnt make a difference on my personal rig. There was a tutorial while back t hat said firefox/ browsing could be sped up putting temp files on ram disk but loading new pages was slower, restart comp was a little slower, oveall not really worth it. For now

 

[fusionblu]

I am referring to this:

http://memory.dataram.com/products-and-services/software/ramdisk

Since I have 16GB, I'm wondering if I should set aside 4GB just for page file, and all the temporary folders for both windows and firefox. The 4GB is also free.

Are there any downsides for this? Like slower bootup times? And I'm assuming the partition will just appear under explorer as a local disk?

Simple answer for the question is no.

Clear downsides is that using RAM for storage isn't reliable and if it fails any data which was on the RAMdisk would be lost entirely.
Also the ideal of this setup is for performance and not storing stuff for "fast" storage and the use of RAMdisk is not particularly more useful for storing temporary files than the default method given you will still be slowed down by the main system disk (which is almost certainly not installed on the RAMdisk).

Affect on performance can vary when using RAMdisk, but it would probably not be significant overall and it is possible that change in performance wouldn't be noticeable.

The general purpose of making a RAMdisk is for benchmarks, fast performance on OS installed on RAM disk along with fast loading times from games installed on the RAM disk with the OS.

Of course to make use of RAMdisk more effectively you would at least want more than 16GB of RAM in total and would almost certainly need to go higher end Sandybridge-E or above chipsets to have more than 32GB of total to have a larger storage capacity for the RAMdisk. Normal chipsets such as Z97 only allows a maximum of 32GB with most (if not all) motherboards.

 

[AsRock]

Simple answer for the question is no.

Clear downsides is that using RAM for storage isn't reliable and if it fails any data which was on the RAMdisk would be lost entirely.
Also the ideal of this setup is for performance and not storing stuff for "fast" storage and the use of RAMdisk is not particularly more useful for storing temporary files than the default method given you will still be slowed down by the main system disk (which is almost certainly not installed on the RAMdisk).

Affect on performance can vary when using RAMdisk, but it would probably not be significant overall and it is possible that change in performance wouldn't be noticeable.

The general purpose of making a RAMdisk is for benchmarks, fast performance on OS installed on RAM disk along with fast loading times from games installed on the RAM disk with the OS.

Of course to make use of RAMdisk more effectively you would at least want more than 16GB of RAM in total and would almost certainly need to go higher end Sandybridge-E or above chipsets to have more than 32GB of total to have a larger storage capacity for the RAMdisk. Normal chipsets such as Z97 only allows a maximum of 32GB with most (if not all) motherboards.

Dataram has a option you can save on shutdown or after so many minutes.

 

[fusionblu]

Dataram has a option you can save on shutdown or after so many minutes.

I still have to insist using RAM as storage isn't reliable and most people aren't going to turn RAM into storage or data storage purposes or rather the space on the RAM would be used for something either benchmark or performance related.
Of course there are many methods of having a copy of the data on other storage sources should the data on the RAM (turned into storage) have significant importance.

 

[AsRock]

If you mean storage for important data then you should have a backup of a backup which is were cool apps like Synctoys ( should of come with win7\8 as default ) comes in handy.. I been using ramdisk for a long time for dedi servers and it can help with some when access demand gets high.

Then i use Simbolic links\Hardlinks as well. And as i said in my last post it's all backed up on shutdown or when you like it to be just depends on what data.

 

[Shambles1980]

dont really see the point in a ram disk. alot of people here seem to say put the page file on it.. But thats kind of a pointless exercise in a way. all you really do then is make less space in ram for apps so they have to use the page file which you have put in ram..
seems pretty futile.

the only ram drives that ever interested me were those old pci cards you could plug ram in to and had a battery on them so you could use them as a hard disk (batterie died = lost ya data though) which wouldnt be so bad apart from the fact you have a stupid 133mb/s bandwidth limit on pci.. which is the same as Pata so pointless. (they also did pata versions too)
using a ram drive as data cache is probably the best option. but windows generally does a good job of that any way..

honestly the only reason id go for a drive based on ram is if it was a physicall plug in adapter with a batterie (like the old ones before ssd's) and it ran on pci-e x16. one of those combined with SSD's and your systems memory would be a benifit. although you would probably end up spending a fortune on the most and fastest ram you could get your hands on simply to get the most out of it.

and if you didnt have the best cpu and gpu(s) on the best board. over clocked as far as they could possibly go. with the fastest ssd's then you would probably be better off spending the money els where.
and even then it probably only holds true whilst scaling of gpu performance as you go to 3-4 gpus is less than adequate.

any way thats my thoughts on it personally. its a bit pointless especially if your just using it for page file.

 

[Papahyooie]

You do realize that a win8 64b install needs (at least) 20GB of storage. That much spent on RAM (because it would have to be buffered ECC modules) would be better sent to a PCI-e SSD...which is already mind-blowing fast.
.

The sarcasm is not strong with this one...

Read the rest of the post, and my previous post.

 

[TheHunter]

I used it only for Firefox temp. folder, it started a lot faster then from hdd.

Now on ssd it doesnt matter anymore.

 

[KiwiSteve]

I'm using XFASTRAM on my ASROCK 990FX to hold a 24Gb RAM disk for Steam and my modded Skyrim. My PC sleeps, when I want it to, has a UPS and boots off a Samsung 840 Pro SSD. I'm doing this because I don't have a lot of time to wait for startup and game loads. My observation is that Skyrim does everything faster and smoother than when running off SSD. I take a backup of the RAMDisk everytime I change/add a mod or Steam does an update. It takes less than 2 minutes to backup. If I have to do a Shutdown, then copying the backup to the RAMDISK also takes less than 2 minutes.

 

[Pehla]

i gues we all had some expirience with ramdisk!!i also tried it recently..,and i saw big improvments in aplications startup.
when you first start aplication it takes normal (long) time,but when you close it and open any time again it blasing fast(regular hdd here)
my advice is try it your self...,its not something that can hurt..,experiment with it see how it goes and work for you then decide...,use it or delete it!

 

[Barney]

I have a intel i3 NUC with only a msata SSD (the non "H" model with no sata facility). And it is attached to my 60" TV as a HTPC and web browser use mainly.
So I use Primo Ramdisk just for all sorts of temp files as I have 16GB ram. It automatically adjusts its size within a set amount of GB.
It is only to save the SSD, not for speed increases.
So even today, it can have it's uses.
I used it years ago before we had SSD's and the PC ran so fast in comparison to a HDD.
And yes, I do have a big UPS attached for both my TV and PC
Being at the terminal end of a long streets power supply, I had both taken out during a big thunder storm (along with a other household electrical products), so I got a good UPS for the entertainment system. Spent a bit protecting the rest of the wiring as well.

 

[Freezer]

Sure, digging up an old thread, but it's current technology and geared more for today and the future.

I'm looking at what experience others experience between XFAST, Dataram RAMDisk, and Primo Ramdisk FancyCache. I see that ASUS ROG series motherboards had RAMDisk and they've included Junctions in the application.

Anyone know where I can obtain the ROG RAMDisk software?

 

[RejZoR]

I've tried RAMDisk on my system with 32GB of RAM and couldn't really find any real use of it.

Personally, i'd prefer if I could make Windows cache data more agressively. Currently it's caching stuff in memory really slowly. I guess I'll have to upgrade my eBoostr license to support RAM caching as well and do it more aggressively.

 

[Barney]

Sure, digging up an old thread, but it's current technology and geared more for today and the future.

I'm looking at what experience others experience between XFAST, Dataram RAMDisk, and Primo Ramdisk FancyCache. I see that ASUS ROG series motherboards had RAMDisk and they've included Junctions in the application.

Anyone know where I can obtain the ROG RAMDisk software?

It can be downloaded straight from their ROG product range website - just look for a ROG motherboard (MB) - Maximus VIII Gene. I found it easily via "support", then it was listed under "Drivers and Tools" for global download.
Do you have a Asus ROG motherboard?
I ask because as far as I have heard, it will only work if it recognizes a ROG motherboard.
Dimmdrive may be a easier low cost alternative, but there are free ramdisk programs out there (check out sites like - https://www.raymond.cc/blog/12-ram-disk-software-benchmarked-for-fastest-read-and-write-speed/ ). It is a relatively up-to-date version of a ramdisk program specifically for gaming. Primo Ramdisk is a good alternative, as it is fast and is dynamic (basically meaning that it's size will change, up to the maximum preset, depending on how much is free and how much is needed).
Remember, if you have it start when your PC starts, due to loading the ramdisk profile, it can slow down the start-up time (eg - a 16GB ramdisk load will extend start-up by approx 2 minutes). Similarly, when turning off the PC, any ramdisk info to be saved for next time will make shutting down longer.
On my NUC, it only loads a small amount (mainly used for temporary files and folders, et cetera) so it still has a fast boot and shut down time, and when necessary after starting, I load bigger items into it for work or play.
You would need to read up on their particular advantages and disadvantages to understand how to get the most out of them. Example - Dimmdrive has the ability to only load the necessary games files, which speeds up reloads and new levels (not sure how it works for all games and it has been designed with Steam in mind, as I normally prefer FPS and only recently obtained a copy and I am rebuilding my gaming PC at the moment, so no extensive testing done yet).
Just remember that it is using volatile memory, so shut down and power outages will cause a total loss of data. Some can be set to automatically save all information to a non-volatile memory (HDD or SSD) for recall later. Best to have a USB smart UPS attached to prevent any critical info loss.
Hope this helps.

 

[Freezer]

Thanks for the DL link to ROG. I'm currently using Xfast and 4-6GB used with this system as cache, scratch disk; though, previously used AMDs version of Dataram Ramdisk on my older Q6600/8GB system. The only reason I stopped using it as a cache, scratch, temp drive is basically memory limitation, and just needing to update the system. Otherwise, I liked the increased performance.

With my newer system 5820K, I'm looking for alternative methods and better ways to improve performance (not like it needs it, but there is certainly headroom), cache, scratch drives, etc... and perhaps I'm thinking well beyond 'outside the box' ... almost psychotic in some folks' eyes. LOL. It's ok.

 

[Barney]

Thanks for the DL link to ROG. I'm currently using Xfast and 4-6GB used with this system as cache, scratch disk; though, previously used AMDs version of Dataram Ramdisk on my older Q6600/8GB system. The only reason I stopped using it as a cache, scratch, temp drive is basically memory limitation, and just needing to update the system. Otherwise, I liked the increased performance.

With my newer system 5820K, I'm looking for alternative methods and better ways to improve performance (not like it needs it, but there is certainly headroom), cache, scratch drives, etc... and perhaps I'm thinking well beyond 'outside the box' ... almost psychotic in some folks' eyes. LOL. It's ok.

Sorry, I am so used to explaining about what this type of program is.
I have been using Primo for a while now and like how it works. When I have shown friends, they are always amazed at how fast things can load, even when using just the old HDD's.
I have been using the newer PCI-E x2 or x4 M.2 SSD's, and these get very hot (thermal photos of a XP941 show it over 110° after moving some files just over - see them about a third the way down the page - https://www.pugetsystems.com/labs/a...e-M-2-Qualification-575/#M_2DriveTemperatures). Interesting read if you are looking at getting one of the newer M.2's. On the plus side, if ever you were impressed with a 500+MB/s SSD speed, you will be blown away with these at about 4 times faster or nearing 15 times faster than a HDD (but still about quarter the speed of ramdisk - M.2 2150MB/s to 8000MB/s plus on 1600MHz DDR3).
Also talked to a fellow at Noctua and they saw exactly the same thing with the SM951. I am looking at getting a Raspberry Pi 2 copper heatsink and mini fan to replace the passive one I already have on my M.2 SSD. Fortunately my motherboard has the M.2 slot in a place where I have the room to do it.
So you aren't the only one looking for that little bit extra.
Once I get all the parts for my gaming rig, I will try to remember to post a comment about comparing Primo and Dimmdrive programs. I only have a i5 4690K and a reference 290x (may even try a crossfire set up), all watercooled with 32GB Crucial Ballistix Tactical memory on a Gigabyte Z97 gaming MB. So I am looking for a reasonable stable overclock when I set it up. I would like to compare a ramdisk program using the newer high speed (3000MHz or more) quad channel DDR4 and see how much difference the new ram makes. If that is faster, how about ramdisk with something like 128GB (or more because of it;s higher density) ram made with that new stacked HBM memory. Ah to dream, wonder how long before we see that as PC RAM. Also read a article a few months back about researching some type of HBM non-volatile RAM.
I think if ramdisk is used in the right way, it could still be a useful tool (given that the peak transfer speed of say using dual channel DDR3 1600 is 12,800MB/s, and we are now about double that and using quad channel). Even if just to free up the information pathways to and from the SSD's of unnecessary data traffic to leave it free to do other things (examples- reloading game maps, temp files, etc) by utilising the unused ram instead.
Sorry, I have been told I can talk the bark of a tree while swimming underwater.

 

[Ikaruga]

"Is RAM Disk worth it?"

NO, (unless you are still using HDD).

 

[Raybo58]

Yeah, I know this thread is old, but I believe I've found a benefit to Ram Drives that will be useful to some people. Those with newer Nvida gfx cards will have access to ShadowPlay (or whatever they're calling it now) to record their game sessions. I haven't done any benchmarking, but I think it safe to assume that recording video in real-time while playing triple A titles, especially at 4k resolutions, is going to demand a lot from your HD or SDD. So I've set mine up so that the temp files, which are the real-time recordings, use a Ram Disk. When you're done recording, ShadowPlay copies the temp files to a different (permanent) location of your choosing. I use the MSI Ramdisk that was developed for my class of motherboard. I have 32gb of mem clocked at 3,000mhz, so I set the Ram Disk to use 6gb and so far it's working like a charm.

 

[jboydgolfer]

no.not really. everyone i have known who tries it out, ends up saying the same things after a week or so...."i disabled/uninstalled it, i just got tired of it after a while."especially if you have an SSD.