I've seen utilities that allow you to section off some of your RAM and turn it into a drive letter. This means it's volatile (erases when the computers turns off), but for a page file (swap file), would not this be a great idea??? Have your swap file, say 512MB, in super fast RAM???

I'm thinking of upping from 512MB to 1Gig and using half of it for a swap file. I'd hate to use another hard drive just for swap file. I do Video and audio work.

Any drawbacks to this idea???

Take a read, long, but might answer a few of your questions etc.:

"I've seen utilities that allow you to section off some of your RAM and turn it into a drive letter."

I wrote one of the first ones out there back in 1996 in "APK RamDisk 4.0++" in fact, lol! Based off the Microsoft DDK Ramdisk.sys driver...

"This means it's volatile (erases when the computers turns off), but for a page file (swap file), would not this be a great idea??? Have your swap file, say 512MB, in super fast RAM???"

I do something like that here, & that is to use a CENATEK "RocketDrive" (a ramdisk on a dedicated board with 2gb of PC-133 SDRAM RAM on it that the system recognizes as another harddisk off a RAID controller).

Works... VERY well!

The Pagefile is on 1gb of it (1/2), & temp ops, most logging (like eventlogs & app logs), + webpage caching is on the other 1gb 1/2 of it!

That card is now in my newest machine (3.2ghz P4, 512mb PC-3200 Corsair RAM, Dual WD "Raptor" 10,000rpm disks in RAID 0, & ATI Radeon 9800XT 256mb DDRAM), but, I used to use it that way in my last system also!

I am SURE it makes a diff. doing it the way I do using a solid-state hardware + driver based solution... how? I've seen it in motion!

Well, read on:

Example - I recently gave my older system to my Mom (who is getting into the internet for email communications with us all over the country & our relatives overseas plus my brother, sister, father & I are 'scattered' all over the nation basically & it saves on phone bills (plus, you can send photos, you get the drift!)).

I ran that system (Dual Pentium III CPU's @ 1152mhz & 1gb of PC-133 SDRAM & a GeForce 4 Ti4600 128mb RAM plus my old Kodak Digital Camera DC-215 1.3mpixel type for her to use) with that ramdrive board I speak of above & it performed better with it, noticeably so in fact.

It runs without it now, you can tell the difference... it pages to disk, & is slower (tuned the same too, exactly as it was when I had it) w/out the CENATEK solid-state RamDrive board in place.

"I'm thinking of upping from 512MB to 1Gig and using half of it for a swap file."

You'd be paging RAM-to-RAM... not really worth it w/ only 1gb if you ask me, & depends on what you usually do as well!

If you had, say 4gb of RAM (or more, really... lots more like 16GB)?

Then I would say "Sure, you have a massive excess, go for it that way by using something like ArSoft's 256mb capable (maybe more, not sure, that is how far I have pushed it myself in the past) to do webpage caching, temp ops, & maybe even paging since you have that much RAM to burn!"

If you had that much? You could probably operate w/out a pagefile, but... the system & apps get paged out usually anyhow at some point... that's just how virtual memory system type Os' work anyways, you are best off with one in place, even a smallish 256mb size one!

"I'd hate to use another hard drive just for swap file. I do Video and audio work."

Ok... Like I said above "Depends on what you do"...

"Any drawbacks to this idea???"

Yes, I think so, by using system RAM & especially w/ the type of applications you are using & work you are doing!

That type of work needs memory... lots of it, if not an AthlonFX 64-bit memory addressing capable CPU as well (since I heard they excel @ that type of stuff in fact from reviews I read).



* Go for a solid-state ramdrive as I did... costs, but would be your BEST ticket for putting a paging file onto (as well as temp ops, webpages cached, logging, & more)...


APK

P.S.=> I would say do it, MAYBE, if you had 4gb of system RAM... still, I would opt for my method... I've seen it in action on a system with a CENATEK RocketDrive... & then, that same system given to my Mom without it in place doing temp ops, paging, & webpage caches + most all logging the system does too... there IS a difference in that machine now (slower) without it in place! apk

That stinks. Just looked up that Ramdisk you mention and their smallest unit at 1GB is a freakin $1000. Too rich for my blood, but thanks for the detailed info Alec, it is appreciated. I guess I'll just stuff my page file on another hard drive. Better than nothing.

i tried the cenatek ramdisk. they updated it so it could work for u like that.
it uses system memory like the one alec wrote.
i use a 1 gig ramdrive for my volitile work drive.

"That stinks. Just looked up that Ramdisk you mention and their smallest unit at 1GB is a freakin $1000."

Yes, it is pricey, no doubt about it... I got a LARGE break on the one I have because I did a review for them on this unit (I paid $550 ++ for the 2gb model I have) that is shown on the CENATEK website.

(It was some work/research, but was worth the price-break they gave me, otherwise I too, would have felt as you did... no rich man here, & even if I was, that's TOO much I have to say as well!).

I tell you though: IF I had a website? I would get 4 of them, @ max 4gb per board size, & span them into one LARGE 16gb unit & run the files for the site off of it as well as any databases that drive the content as well for MAX SPEED!

"Too rich for my blood, but thanks for the detailed info Alec, it is appreciated."

You're welcome... again, they're pricey, but in my case after having used RamDrive softwares for years now for webpage caches, temporary systemwide environmental %TEMP% & %TMP% variables, & logging by the OS (event viewer for example) & apps (%PKTemp% & %WzTemp% for example) & temporary work space for apps too?

I just HAD to have one & doing a review of it was the sure-fire way to nail a discount of one since I was an "early adopter" etc.

"I guess I'll just stuff my page file on another hard drive. Better than nothing."

That is your BEST bet & most economical route as far as making paging more efficient/faster on a system w/out going "bust"... that's the way I used to go about it & it worked great!

(Take that pagefile off the drive where your system does launches of programs/apps & seeks/reads/writes of files? You can tell you speed up alot! It is the economical route to performance!)



* STILL, you can use the FREE "ArSoft" ramdrive software & do webpage caching, temp ops, temp variables & logging of apps/OS stuff to it... get more system RAM like you thought about & then setup a 128mb-256mb ArSoft RamDisk & go @ it (you won't be dissappointed).

APK

Alec,

Do you have a list of exactly what files and services should be put onto a second drive, aside from the page file? I use Win2000 (SP4). I'm kinda new at this.

Oh, one other question, Alec: Do I have to have THREE harddrives for all this? One for OS and apps, one for page file etc, one for Video/Audio files?? It would kinda suck to have three hard drives going. It will increase my power consumption and noise from my system! ARGH!

you can use system ram and benefit, but you need special configuration. i tried before "ramdisk nt"
it has an option to use excluded ram. this means, windows doe snot know the other ram is there, say exclude 512 ram and kep 512 live. windows wont know the ram s there, but it will be a drive letter, and ready for swapfile. to generally iuse a pagefiule for swapfile, the problem is windows sees the paged ram as being used ram, which makes it think most of the ram is used to it will page even more.

got it?

you need to use excluded ram to have this work. ramdisknt does it quite well. 92k/xp support too of course.

"I use Win2000 (SP4). I'm kinda new at this. "

That's the OS I am using now as well, I went back to it after messing with XP the last 2++ years or so now, & after a 6 month stint using Windows 2003 Server as well!

(I have to test & use the latest for programs I write along w/ diff. hardware (especially display cards) & then "jet-back" to the older ones to test as well... thank goodness for Roxio "GoBack", Norton Ghost, & NTBackup, &/or SystemRestorePoints (XP/2003 only))!

Those tools make my life easier on ANY Win32 based Os that way since I stash images on one HardDisk here for that ONLY, after I make "perfect" fully setup images of them all!).

"Do you have a list of exactly what files and services should be put onto a second drive, aside from the page file?"

That stuff you can put there is pretty simple:

1.) Webpage caches (this you set in your webbrowser of choice's options... IE has a nice GUI for it, Mozilla/FireFox/Firebird/Phoenix you have to mess with the userpref.js files thru notepad.exe etc. to set it to a RamDisk or other disks iirc. & Opera has its Opera6Def.ini & Opera.ini you can do this in for it... too bad no gui on those, they are better browsers than IE by a MILE now!)

2.) SystemWide & UserProfile based %TEMP%, & %TMP% are easily set in the System Icon in control panel (this will direct LOTS of temporary operations to the disk & folder on said disk of your choice @ one easy step). The Operating System will use those for UserEnvirons & SystemEnvirons as you set it, many apps will as well since many software authors just use those by pulling their values outta the DOS environs strings in RAM or from the registry etc. (some don't though... just so you are aware of it).

* OH... so you understand this (if you did not before): Environment is a set of values that are like an "in-memory" .ini file for applications & the Operating System by the way... each application & the OS get a copy of it as they start. You CAN manipulate it though... the ways I state above are some of them, along with SET statements in launch batches (primitive, but I "expound" on that next)...

3.) Apps can do this as well-> PKZip & WinZip for instance, have a %PKTEMP% & %WZTEMP% you can add in your user memory environment easily enough thru the System Icon in Control Panel again... you will have to add those though (WinZip now lets you do it from its own configuration panel too by the by).

Sure, you can launch an app via a batch too that lets you use SET statements to "rewrite the environment" as well, but this is simplest to do the way I said it first via GUI routes or app specific configuration files... this IS a way though!

Don't try to do this on an NT based Operating System via AutoExec.bat though (you could do that in DOS & Win3.x/9x & it would hold systemwide)... because SET statements that override the normal environment variables die on application exit if used from launching .bat files (not sure about .cmd scripts or .wsh/.csh ones though).

4.) On logging - that's something you do in the app itself, along with any temporary folder it has (that's IF the app allows you to, some do... some don't! IE lets you mess with webpage caching & WinZip also via a GUI on its temp ops folders etc.... BUT, as I stated above, Mozilla & Opera based browsers do not. SO, this is where you dig thru their configuration files (like userprefs.js or .ini files or even the registry) to set it yourself.)

I also went into the regedit.exe program, & found ANY .log reference (or, other files for logging like .txt ones some apps use (this varies by programmer idiosyncracy & how the designed log files if the apps the wrote have it)) & changed ALOT of my Operating System logging files from C:\ drive to my CENATEK RocketDrive solid-state ramdisk card!

For instance/example: I moved my EventLogs over to my Ramdisk (the CENATEK RocketDrive is not "volatile" like software based drivers for ramdisks/virtualdisks are... so, it saves all even @ shutdown!) & lots of other Operating System based logging (as well as services related ones too etc.)

These "tricks" alone made my system speed go up & allowed me to MASSIVELY audit trail things & not take a hit...

EventLogging is better (logs more now & FAST also) because EVERY object access is audited on my system in fact & flies (unlike the huge performance hit it gave me while doing it on C:\ or even another Harddisk!) since I set it that way now, done on a Ramdisk!

(You could do that for another harddisk too, takes time to find the values to put in... but worth it in efficiency & speed, just by moving it from your MAIN C:\ drive (ramdisk or other hdd notwithstanding))

"Oh, one other question, Alec: Do I have to have THREE harddrives for all this? One for OS and apps, one for page file etc, one for Video/Audio files?? It would kinda suck to have three hard drives going. It will increase my power consumption and noise from my system! ARGH!"

One other disk (on primary controller master off of IDE/EIDE #2 controller is best) should do it well enough... & take stress off the C:\ main disk so it has free-reign to launch programs only/mostly.

(That, after all, IS the bottom line on performance I think @ least... keep your main disk as a program launcher!)

STILL, it'd be COOL to do it like that actually using MULTIPLE other disks... but, you don't NEED to! Still, not a bad idea IF you have the disks!

APK

P.S.=> Whew... lots of writing! BUT, that oughtta do it for you... apk

Alec, just 3 more questions and I think I will be done, if you don't mind.

Is it a bad idea to put the page file and my large audio and video files on the same seperate disk? Or should I keep the audio/video files on their own disk? Big performance differences???

Also, What about duhmez' idea above, the ramdisk NT program that blocks off system memory so that the system won't know the blocked off memory is there?

Finally, if I use a second disk for the page file, does it need to be comparable in spec to the main drive, or can it be an older slower disk, or even a notebook disk and still get good disk speed improvements?

Thanks Alec, you are da best!!!

"Is it a bad idea to put the page file and my large audio and video files on the same seperate disk? Or should I keep the audio/video files on their own disk?"

In a "perfect world"?

I would put them on their OWN drive, a "data drive"... I do that here.

Two disks that store the EXACT SAME CONTENT (2 independent non-mirrored or RAID'd WD "Caviar" JB/SE 120gb 7,200rpm 8mb buffer units) are NOTHING but storage for downloads & datafiles of mine!

(That data is also updated @ each month's end & then supplement that storage w/ "burn" of that data to DvD+Rw, for 'safety sake', etc. & redundancy)

My Operating System & Programs are on my 2x WD "Raptor" 36gb (total 72gb) 10,000rpm 8mb buffer drive w/ both disks in a RAID 0 stripe that does nothing but run programs & the OS itself.

The CENATEK "RocketDrive" solid-state 2gb ramdrive board acts on one 1/2 as my pagefile (1gb), & the other 1/2 (1gb) is for %TEMP% - %TMP% operations, webpage caching, & logging etc. as I mention above.

* It is as "ideal" of a setup as is possible imo...

"Big performance differences???"

In my estimation after observation, with my old system (which my Mom now has)? Yes... huge.

My Mom's system is exactly as I had it pretty much (Dual Pentium III 1152ghz, 1gb PC-133 SDRAM by Micron, & GeForce 4 Ti4600 128mb DDR RAM, except no RocketDrive, & only single 7,200rpm 8mb buffered Maxtor 40gb ATA-133 harddisk w/ "fluid dynamic bearings" BUT no registry hack tuning really... only for the online stuff, nothing else!).

Now, it is not NEARLY as fast without the disk arrangment I illustrate/enumerate above, not by a long-shot...

My Mom's machine (when it was mine) had the multiple disk setup in it that my current system has now I show you above & with ALL of the performance hacks I illustrated above earlier!

(BIG DIFFERENCE, not nearly as responsive/crisp in performance using only a single drive to handle it all vs. multiple ones that handle diff. tasks!)

"Also, What about duhmez' idea above, the ramdisk NT program that blocks off system memory so that the system won't know the blocked off memory is there?"

Ram-To-Ram swapping, without a HUGE amount of RAM (like 4-8gb or more etc.) is not the greatest idea... Especially w/ the nature of work you do in video editing etc.

STILL, that type of arrangement is good for temp ops, logging, & webpage caching though!

"Finally, if I use a second disk for the page file, does it need to be comparable in spec to the main drive, or can it be an older slower disk, or even a notebook disk and still get good disk speed improvements?"

Ideally, you want your pagefile on an equal OR faster drive... you want it to be as 'responsive' as-is-possible... especially doing the work you mention.

You're DEFINITELY going to hit your RAM & page most likely... so you want that paging process to occur as fast/efficient as possible, agreed?

"Thanks Alec, you are da best!!! "

* You're welcome... good questions!



APK

One thing you have to ask about your current config here Ken B is, how large or the video data files you're currently working with ?!?

If they are large files, 1GB plus then I would look at adding a lot more RAM to your system, basically add more then you need currently so as to maximize your system ram use before paging.

Another option is to use a reg/system tweak app like X-Setup that would allow you to set the OS to use all/most available ram before paging.

Anytime you have to page it will slow the machine down, no matter how fast your I/O and HD subsystem happens to be

jmmijo,

If I use X-setup like you say, what will happen to the ram that was being used by the programs?

Also, my video files can be up 10GB files for a finished product (a 35 minute segment), my audio can be about 250MB files. Not sure how big individual clips are, probably less than a GB most of the time, per clip.

Aw man, I'm sorry Alec, one more.

How big do page files get usually? I remember there is the option of letting windows decide how to size-resize the page files, or force it to stay within certain parameters. I hate to use an 80GB drive for page files that might be only 1GB. I can put all page, temp, log etc files on this one disk, though, correct?

I do have 3 disks available, I'm just wondering if my system will be able to handle it (heat and noise), and if it will be overkill. I guess I'll find out. I'm using FDB drives.

"How big do page files get usually?"

As big as you make them either manually OR if you let the OS manage it? As large as the demand on memory force the pagefile.sys to grow... & that is done by "demand based paging" which is how modern Virtual Memory Operating Systems work.

I think that 4gb was the limit in NT 3.5x - NT 4.0, but can be larger in 2000/XP/2003... you can also span them into multiple pagefiles across different disks as well!

Personally, I make mine static in size (meaning upper bound & overall size is finite... so, if other programs & data reside on the same disk as the pagefile? They won't get fragmented & neither will the pagefile, assuming you formed it FIRST on that disk before any other files were placed there... you can use a disk partition too, not a WHOLE drive if you like! More on this later, & about using the first formed partition which forms out on the outermost, largest circumference fastest portion of the disk!).

I get performance bennies noted above, & I can do that because I am VERY familiar with the programs use patterns & data used w/ them etc., & that takes/took time to get down right... I think you may have to do the SAME thing, study it & tune as needed etc.

ANYHOW:

Programs don't page their entire content to disk "Swapping" anymore, they do it by using (iirc) 4096kb pages... pieces of themselves that are deemed "discardeable" to the pagefile.sys paging file.

(This is the diff. between paging & swapping in essence: entire programs & data don't get forced to disk/paging file/swap file anymore, only parts that can be shoved out of RAM once other programs &/or data make demands on the memory subsystem...

This paged out portions of a program gets put into a "standby list", which is HIGH SPEED ACCESSIBLE by the process that had it put there by the memory mgt. subsystem, & when that program asks for that needed data (say, data in another tab you don't use alot in that program... or, when you minimize a window? You might be surprised how much of that program's data gets paged-out, because the OS considers it backgrounded by you as a non-immediate use task)?

It technically gets that memory IMMEDIATELY (although, if another process asks for it, it can nail that too, based on the free memory situation for ALL processes & how much is available... in a tight-spot? Other programs can force a page of the "standby-list"/cache).

This "standby list" is the caching part of memory mgt., & the goal of it is to use as much of "FREE RAM" as it can find for data &/or programs as well & to keep it LOADED, making it appear you don't have alot of free RAM, this is why cache memory, the longer you load your system & keep more & more programs & their data running, seems to go down on RAM free, it is NOT a bad thing MOST OF THE TIME though!

Now... is it a 110% 'perfect' system?

Probably not, I mean... what is?

Hey, if I was to judge from past history in Microsoft's designs of cache subsystems (Windows9x had a REALLY poor one that would grow & grow but never seem to flush out, was a problem ... don't know how long you've been around computers, but it was a 'known-issue' years ago. Corrected in NT based Os'? Probably, at least to an extent w/ better algorithms for data aging & queues for demand paging etc., but I am not totally sure here by comparison of 9x vs. NT based Os' memory mgt. subsystems) I would say no... but I would say it has gotten better!

Microsoft has some VERY 'brainy' folks @ work for them, who get to look over & improve the work of their forebears building upon their foundation work... & improving their OWN work too! Good programs? They are not 'built' (& certainly not in a day)... they're grown, & over time!)

"I remember there is the option of letting windows decide how to size-resize the page files, or force it to stay within certain parameters."

Right, I state how I use a static-sized one of 1.5x actual memory, so I don't fragment other files on the disk I use where it resides OR fragment itself.

Depending on the nature of the work you do & how large the datasets are that you work on? This is a SAFE maneuver... but, if you are NOT sure on how large to make it, make it 1.5x your RAM memory lower-bound & let it grow on the upper bound alot more OR just let the OS manage it.

(Up to you... & it depends on how familiar you are with the workings of your system & data really!)

"I hate to use an 80GB drive for page files that might be only 1GB."

Right, I understand... this is why you can PARTITION that disk, make that 1-2gb partition on it, near the start of the drive (usually first partition formed on it) so you get the "MAX SPEED" out of it. Disks on their outer tracks are faster than their innermost tracks... makes sense, larger circumference & all that... that's where I would put my pagefile & used to when I used harddisks for it, & onto another disk other than the one my OS & programs resided on.

"I can put all page, temp, log etc files on this one disk, though, correct?"

Sure, & I would use 2 partitions: FIRST for pagefile, & second for data... I would put my webpage cache & temp ops on an ArSoft 128-256mb (depending on how much RAM you have) Ramdisk though... get the benefit of speed since Ramdrives are 1000x as fast as HardDrives & also not cluttering your disk with temp files &/or webpage cache data as well.

"I do have 3 disks available, I'm just wondering if my system will be able to handle it (heat and noise), and if it will be overkill. I guess I'll find out. I'm using FDB drives."

Nice quiet FDB drives, NICE!

They're NOT noisy by any means/stretch-of-the-imagination, especially by comparison to older IDE/EIDE designs, & especially to ScSi technology high 10-15krpm units...

I got one for my Mom when I visited her (Maxtor 8mb buffer 40gb 7,200rpm Fluid Drive Bearing one of ATA-133 design) & it is quiet as a churchmouse... no ScSi jet-turbyne whine on it for sure!



* Experimentation, based on your needs & programs + data, is REALLY the best way: There is NO truly "universal" solution!

APK

P.S.=> I think we covered most all of this topic... the sizing part's 'touchy' though... & I think you would be best served watching the pagefile size & how much of it gets used for say, 1 month... & then decide on how to size it statically if you wish! I would use a partition on the outermost tracks of a drive though for sure, & a second drive that your Operating System & Programs do NOT reside on... apk

Sorry to "steal-your-fire" here jmmijo, but since I am here replying to him, I might as well answer:

"jmmijo,

If I use X-setup like you say, what will happen to the ram that was being used by the programs?"

It gets allocated more to the diskcache (the "standby list" in the virtual memory subsystem I mention in my last post)... & gets more of the systems memory from FREE RAM.

HKEY_LOCAL_MACHINE\SYSTEM\CurrentControlSet\Control\Session Manager\Memory Management

* @ this place in REGEDIT.EXE? You will see the LargeSystemCache set to 0 by default on workstation/pro models of NT based Os' like NT/2000/XP/2003 etc. which means MORE RAM goes "free" for programs to access... if you set it to 1 (default on server Os type/models iirc)? The cache gets more "free RAM" allocated to it by default...



(I'd be willing to bet that is the area that particular tweak is working on in the X-Setup program, a mass registry re-writer like TweakUI, Fresh UI & the like work on reparameterizing system setup values!)

APK

"Sorry to "steal-your-fire" here jmmijo, but since I am here replying to him, I might as well answer:


* @ this place in REGEDIT.EXE? You will see the LargeSystemCache set to 0 by default on workstation/pro models of NT based Os' like NT/2000/XP/2003 etc. which means MORE RAM goes "free" for programs to access... if you set it to 1 (default on server Os type/models iirc)? The cache gets more "free RAM" allocated to it by default...



(I'd be willing to bet that is the area that particular tweak is working on in the X-Setup program, a mass registry re-writer like TweakUI, Fresh UI & the like work on reparameterizing system setup values!)

APK"

No problem APK

As for your system config Ken B., you may want to look at adding some extra RAM as it's pretty darn cheap now a days. The thing is it will not slow down your system performance and you maybe able to tweak it a bit to gain some extra performance, here's how.

If your machine can take up to 2GB of RAM via 512MB modules then you can adjust your pagefile size to say a static 1GB min & max and then reboot after adjusting this. Once you reboot, try out your video app and see how things work. See if there are any slowdowns or even if it seems to be working faster.

I myself also prefer static pagefiles rather then dynamic ones. Basically once you get above 1GB of physical memory you tend to need less of a pagefile to handle any overflow

So what kind of motherboard do you have again ?!?

jmmijo,

I have a Abit KG-7 RAID with a 2400+ Athlon XP on it. It's running with 266Mhz FSB, and the board is capable of up to 3.5GB of RAM, but only registered type in the high an amount. I'm using ECC non-registered, now.

I just bought an extra 256MB module for 512MB total, and a 120GB drive. I will probably just use three drives instead of doing the RAM thing, because I don't have any extra money to buy more RAM. I'll let you know how my system performs when it is finally finished upgrades.

One thing I noticed with my upgraded gaming rig is that a RAID 0 array with a pair of SATA drives really does make things faster, not just the OS loads but pretty much everything

I have two boxes, one is the Server/Workstation that I'm typing on now and the other is strictly for gaming so it doesn't have a lot of the extra crap running in the background nor any of the fluff that Microsoft includes with XP Pro.

Of course my gaming rig is a P4-3GHz with a matched pair of 512MB modules and this does make the system much faster then it was when running a 2.53Ghz running at the slower 533MHz FSB.

As for your Athlon system, my server is running a 2600+ Barton core on an Asus A7N8X Deluxe board with a matching pair or DDR333. It's a snappy little setup but I do sometimes see some slugishness, but only when I'm trying to run a game like Diablo II at the same time the server is running

jmmijo,

I can't wait to get this hard disk setup properly. I just hooked up my three drives. 2 are fluid bearings and one is ball (an IBM 60GXP). I will be selling the IBM and getting another fluid unit tomorrow. Even with the ones I have, after hooking up all three, they were extremely quiet. The only one that stuck out sound-wise was the IBM ball bearing unit. Not loud, but louder than the fluid bearings. Man, those fluid bearings must be silky. I had to put my ear up to it to even tell if it was spinning.

I'll keep you guys updated.

Is there any benchmark utility I should use to mark out the difference between my current setup and the new one I'll do this weekend with the three drives?

When looking at RAM drives you might check out this link

http://www.hyperos2002.com/07042003/products.htm

They have a couple of rather expensive hardware solutions but, they also offer a software product that basically lets you spawn-off volatile copies of your OS. It's a really interesting concept!

I was playing with the idea of putting a thumb drive on a system to cache the pagefile to but I started looking at the through put numbers and hard drives are still a better, cheaper solution. If you have lots of memory in a system, you might just make the page file small enough to force the system to use memory....