ReadyCache, Kingston 60GB SSDNow, or nothing at all?

Stephen Weller

Honorable
Jan 6, 2014
6
0
10,520
Hi, Folks.

I just completed this build and I'm fairly happy with the results:

CPU: Intel BX80637G2030
Motherboard: ASRock B75M-DGS R2.0
Memory: Kingston KHX1600C9D3X2K2/4GX
HDD: Western Digital WD10EZEX
OS: Window 7 Home Premium 64-bit

I didn't really need or want a 1TB drive, but the price difference made it a no-brainer. Now I'm thinking my Mrs. can put it to better use, so I may swap it for her 320GB drive.

My question is, if I only have $50 to spend, is it better spent on

1) the Sandisk ReadyCache 32GB?
2) the Kingston 60GB SSDNow V+300?
3) dinner for two?

I'm leaning toward the convenience of the ReadyCache, but the SSDNow looks to be the better bargain. My system is primarily used for web surfing and light home office work.
 

popatim

Titan
Moderator
If you're looking for caching then at this point it may be easier to go the readycache route. The v300 would give you more space but you would wind up doing a full reinstall I believe.

If you're looking for a dedicated ssd boot drive or programs drive then the readycache would be a tight fit at best. I would say its too small but others have managed with drives that small.
 

Stephen Weller

Honorable
Jan 6, 2014
6
0
10,520

Thanks, popatim.

I took part of the plunge last night and did a bunch of cloning to/from a spare drive, so now the 1TB drive is in her machine - and I have her old 320GB drive. I was very pleasantly surprised when I realized that (after clean-up) I had less than 20GB of stuff.

I'm still left undecided, though. I'm under the impression that the way the ReadyCache works is that it's a self-managed hands-off device that learns and caches based on usage. True?
 

Stephen Weller

Honorable
Jan 6, 2014
6
0
10,520
I have another question, please...

There are several assertions on the web claiming that though SSD's are wicked fast, they pale in comparison to the speed of system RAM. So I was playing with ramdrives last night. I created a small (512MB) ramdrive and installed Firefox on it. Firefox was right-now fast. Since there was ample room left on the ramdrive, I removed ASRock's Extreme Tuning Utility and re-installed it on the ramdrive. When run from the HDD, start up is very slow I assume because it polls the hardware first. On the ramdrive, it wasn't particularly impressive, either.

Here's the question: Since a ramdrive is supposed to be an order of magnitude faster than an SSD, are my expectations set too high for either the ReadyCahe or the SSDNow?
 

popatim

Titan
Moderator
Readycache - Yes but there is a software component. If you have an intel motherbd you may have an SSD caching alternative and you just need to supply the small ssd.

Ram drives - These are lost when power is removed because your ram cannot 'hold' its contents without power. So the ramdrive itself is physically destroyed everytime you shut your pc off. Unforatunately with the worst of these when you power down all contents are lost. The good ones will write their contents to disk before shutting down and restore it on booting up ...thus slowing you down in the startup/shutdown process.
 

Stephen Weller

Honorable
Jan 6, 2014
6
0
10,520

That's what I was playing with. Softperfect Ram Disk. I'm not concerned about shutdown/startup times, but since I have the older drive now, I *am* concerned about wear and tear.

Which takes me back to the ReadyCache, thinking after the software has done its thing, it should let the HDD have a rest. True?