![]() And Windows always looks at the latter first. So when you copy a file from SSD to RAMDisk, you're actually making two copies : 1. Secondly, whenever you access any file Windows loads it into the Windows File Cache anyway. ![]() First of all, you need to copy the game from disc into RAMDisk in the first place, which often takes as much time as loading it (actually more if you count the "human time" of setting it up and pre-loading it). And for increasingly bloated +50GB games it's a pointless never-ending rat-race vs buying a fast SSD and starting them directly off that.ĪB2012: If you have a decent SSD, then RAMDisks generally aren't worth it for gaming. So a lot of the benefits that RAMDisk's should provide actually gets wasted. This is visible the most on laptops with slow 5,400rpm mechanical drives and measuring "cold" (first start) start time, then quit, then restart it and measure "warm" (second startup time). You could even do something involving a "read without copy" like a CRC check on the game folder (without any RAMDisk) and they'd still be cached into RAM (Windows File Cache) the same way. So if your game uses only 4GB RAM, and you copied the files somewhere before starting it, then Windows will be holding it all in RAM anyway not due to the RAMDisk but due to caching it in the process of making a copy. Meaning a lot of the benefit you think you're gaining from the RAMDisk comes more from Windows simply "reading" the game folder before starting it rather than the actual RAMDisk. If you have a decent SSD, then RAMDisks generally aren't worth it for gaming. Now my 2060 is nothing compared to a titan though on the other hand 8 gb of ddr6 memory could in theory be the same as 20 gb's of ddr4 memory? which maybe even a better way of showing my stupidity on this topic then anything else!ĭo you work with this or similar kind of software with succes? Does anyone know if this is only is recommended for the systems containing way more memory then my does? There was one post found online containing some calculation how a 64 gig system running a titan fx card would actually almost need the use of the entire memory size to work in a most optimal state. Still, maybe i should have given the system a couple of days to get used to other use of ram load. I tried increasing the size of the ramcache from the 2 gb, which is recommended, to 4gb but that did seem to have a negative impact on the system i'm running. ![]() With other games i don't seem to recognize a lot happening. With some days under my belt on a super system without any prior measurements, no baseline, just my gut feeling i can say that it does seem to fasten several games such as total war, be it used from the m.2 i'm running or the SSD and even the HDD. Still i wondered about why would such a program exist and why would a company known for its gaming hardware speciality release such a program under their name ( it is rog strix ramcache III ) Searching the internet provides a lot of answer in the range of It won't do anything to you can hurt your performance when trying ![]() Would it seem a as a good idea to use a program such as ramcache for a fairly new pc?
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |