"Pegasus [MVP]" wrote in message
...

"Tae Song" wrote in message
...

"Pegasus [MVP]" wrote in message
...

"Tae Song" wrote in message
...
I thought I would share this with you all, a few little tricks to boost
Windows performance.

Seeing that flash drives are much slower than hard disks, I wonder if
your measures have the desired effect. Could we have some performance
figures, complete with the test methods you applied so that anyone can
perform the same tests on his machine?


You have to take in to account access hard drives are mechanical and have
access time of ms, where as flash drives have an access time down in to
nanoseconds.

Try this short paragraph for a starter:
"Modern flash drives have USB 2.0 connectivity. However, they do not
currently use the full 480 Mbit/s (60MB/s) the USB 2.0 Hi-Speed
specification supports due to technical limitations inherent in NAND
flash. The fastest drives currently available use a dual channel
controller, although they still fall considerably short of the transfer
rate possible from a current generation hard disk, or the maximum high
speed USB throughput."
Source: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/USB_flash_drive


It says "currently" , but it doesn't say when it was written.

Microsoft offers Readyboost, so perhaps things have changed since this was
written.


Or this:
"A typical "desktop HDD" might store between 120 GB and 2 TB although
rarely above 500GB of data (based on US market data[14]) rotate at 5,400
to 10,000 rpm and have a media transfer rate of 1 Gbit/s or higher. Some
newer have 3Gbit/s."
Source: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hard_disk

Now go and do some actual measurements before claiming that your idea will
"increase" performance. It won't.


My configuration isn't going to be the same as yours.

Anyways it doesn't take any kind of test to know USB mass storage is still
very fast.