View Single Post
  #12 (permalink)  
Old February 9th 07, 01:15 AM posted to microsoft.public.windows.vista.general,microsoft.public.windows.vista.hardware_devices
VicTek
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 83
Default Ready Boost missing in action?



"MICHAEL" wrote in message
...

"Victek" wrote in message
...


"MICHAEL" wrote in message
...

"Ken Gardner" wrote in message
...
"MICHAEL" :

The easiest way I've found to get ReadyBoost working again-
right click your device and format it- either FAT or FAT32.
After the format, you may have to click "Test Again" a couple
of times.

Why FAT or FAT32? I formatted mine with NTFS and it is working fine.

Typically, on USB flash drives, FAT is the default format.
On small drives, many say that FAT is a bit faster than NTFS.

If it is working for you, don't "fix" it. :-)


-Michael


What do you think about the amount or ram that Windows Vista recommends
for ReadyBoost?


I'm not exactly sure what you mean. ReadyBoost is not RAM.
If you have over 1GB of RAM, you will not see much of an increase
in performance using ReadyBoost.

I plugged in a 1gb flash drive and "Windows recommends using 880mgs for
optimal performance." Why not use the whole stick? And by the way,
where is the "test" option? I don't see it on the ReadyBoost properties
tab.


The recommendation is just that. You can use the slider to adjust it
so that it uses more. That recommendation is basically saying,
use at least 880MB for optimal performance. But, you can use more.

If your device is already being used for ReadyBoost, the "Test Again"
will not be there.


Thanks for the reply. I should have said "flash memory" instead of RAM,
which I realize was confusing. Regarding the recommended amount of "flash
memory" for ReadyBoost, I was wondering if assigning more than the
recommended amount might actually be less efficient for some reason. You
may be correct in your interpretation of the recommendation, but it doesn't
say "at least". It's not clear why Windows recommends less than 100% of the
flash drive if 100% would in fact be optimal.