Question about ramdisk

[BanDeodorant]

I'm using the free version of Dataram (4gb max)

So if I want to play a game on it would I just have to copy and paste the game folder to the ram drive?

Or would I actually have to do a "real" installation with the ram drive as the drive path?

 

[gimp]

a copy/paste may work, depending on the game.
symbolic links would be another way to move the folder but not reinstall it

 

[devman]

Generally I'd say you would have to do an install to the disk.

I'm not sure why the poster above me recommended a symbolic link, that would defeat the purpose of using a ramdisk. (The contents would still be on the old drive.)

 

[Igthorn]

Generally I'd say you would have to do an install to the disk.

I'm not sure why the poster above me recommended a symbolic link, that would defeat the purpose of using a ramdisk. (The contents would still be on the old drive.)

You move the data to the ramdisk then make symlinks in the old location pointing to the ramdisk.

 

[bigdogchris]

Just an FYI, not all games benefit from faster disk time. I tried the ramdisk idea once with a few games that have smaller than a 4GB folder. Even though the ramdisk benchies at 8-9,000 MB/s, the games did not load any faster than off my SSD. Even an SSD I believe is overkill for some gaming.

Some games which use a separate folder for caching, say for example Vanguard, have had reported success running from a ramdrive by placing the cache files in them and using symbolic links, as mentioned.

 

[Cerulean]

Just an FYI, not all games benefit from faster disk time. I tried the ramdisk idea once with a few games that have smaller than a 4GB folder. Even though the ramdisk benchies at 8-9,000 MB/s, the games did not load any faster than off my SSD. Even an SSD I believe is overkill for some gaming.

Some games which use a separate folder for caching, say for example Vanguard, have had reported success running from a ramdrive by placing the cache files in them and using symbolic links, as mentioned.

The main reason it loads faster is because of the access/read/write latencies. It's almost entirely an illusion. Spindle-based HDDs offer more than enough read/write throughputs, just lack the same latency as SSDs.

In Windows 7, try setting the menu popup delay somewhere between 1-5ms and use Classic theme with a black background, "No sounds" + no startup sound selected in Sounds control panel, No boot logo + manually set to use all cores in msconfig, ensure that you are using a program like SmartDefrag or Diskeeper that keeps your HDD always defragmented, and have at least 4GB of RAM, and go into Services --> uncheck the option that includes MS services --> Disable All --> goto Startup tab --> disable all --> go back to Services tab and recheck the things that are critical (such as any licensing service for programs like AutoCAD/Photoshop and your anti-virus) --> go back to Startup tab and do the same.

Very basic and simple things to do, but will make you feel better.

 

[bigdogchris]

The main reason it loads faster is because of the access/read/write latencies. It's almost entirely an illusion. Spindle-based HDDs offer more than enough read/write throughputs, just lack the same latency as SSDs.

In Windows 7, try setting the menu popup delay somewhere between 1-5ms and use Classic theme with a black background, "No sounds" + no startup sound selected in Sounds control panel, No boot logo + manually set to use all cores in msconfig, ensure that you are using a program like SmartDefrag or Diskeeper that keeps your HDD always defragmented, and have at least 4GB of RAM, and go into Services --> uncheck the option that includes MS services --> Disable All --> goto Startup tab --> disable all --> go back to Services tab and recheck the things that are critical (such as any licensing service for programs like AutoCAD/Photoshop and your anti-virus) --> go back to Startup tab and do the same.

Very basic and simple things to do, but will make you feel better.

So hold on a second ... You believe SSD's are an 'illusion' for increased gaming performances, but tweaking MSCONFIG gives some real performance gains? I use those tricks you posted to make GUI's pop in rather than fade in. It really fools people into thinking their computer is faster and keep them from complaining. Talk about an illusion

 

[Cerulean]

So hold on a second ... You believe SSD's are an 'illusion' for increased gaming performances, but tweaking MSCONFIG gives some real performance gains? I use those tricks you posted to make GUI's pop in rather than fade in. It really fools people into thinking their computer is faster and keep them from complaining. Talk about an illusion

I hope you're not trolling.

I said the latency can be used to create the illusion. IOs may also, to some extent, be directly related to latency as well. When something needs to be written or read -- can be a single IO -- it takes time to get to it (think of spindle-based drives). With SSDs, that latency has been significantly reduced. In the same amount of time, you can pack more punches.

If you had a spindle-based HDD that had the same latency as SSDs -- where the head could move literally fast enough (and also assuming the motor was not always moving but rotated the platters forward or backward depending on physical proximity of desired sector, and motor were powerful enough to "instantly" rotate the platter to location) -- current IOs and throughput would be drastically higher than today's high-ends for spindle-based HDDs.

Did you even bother to try and think the mechanics through?

 

[bigdogchris]

I hope you're not trolling.

I said the latency can be used to create the illusion. <snip>

A lower latency which results in more frequent/faster reads/writes so that the system doesn't get bogged down while the HDD is accessing is not an illusion though. That's why to me it sounded like you were trying to talk yourself, and others, into not buying an SSD or something because it's all 'an illusion'.