Not quite, Windows disk caching does work, but some users do not like its hard drive use while background loading. Personally it never had any negative effect(and I still have it on).
While it works well enough, any user with an SSD will not honestly see the improvements(maybe in a benchmark, but not in a blind test). If you have a very slow hard drive it may be more noticeable.
It can also be hit and miss. It will not cache a new program or game until it has been used for a while. Almost all the standard day to day stuff should be easy to cache within a system with 8 gigabytes.
Just as an example. My old(yeah I only call it old because I had it before my SSDs) WDC 2TB was a very fast drive and even with caching , a slow Kingston ssd(V series 100) with SRT made a noticeable improvident across the board(even after letting the cached files max out of 16 gigabytes of memory). I would have expected that after idle, things would load near instant from the cache, but they did not, while the ssd(and HDD using SRT) did get things much closer to that.
With a larger SSD only setup, things got even better.
While the caching feature is nice and has some improvements, they only go so far from what I could see.
Ram is FAST(I run some things off a ramdisk), but the implementation or caching does not seem to show it as much as one would hope for.