Please register or login. There are 0 registered and 1178 anonymous users currently online. Current bandwidth usage: 326.30 kbit/s June 12 - 08:23am EDT 
Hardware Analysis
Forums Product Prices

  Latest Topics 

More >>


  You Are Here: 
/ Forums / Off Topic /

  XP RAM drive??? 
 Date Written 
Continue Reading on Page: 1, 2, 3, 4, Next >>
Chris McNally Apr 15, 2006, 07:24pm EDT Report Abuse
>> Re: XP RAM drive???
Wow-want one of those. That's faster than I go in and out of standby.


Chris McNally

Moderator - Hardware Analysis
Want to enjoy less advertisements and more features? Click here to become a Hardware Analysis registered user.
Dale Groves Apr 23, 2006, 08:47am EDT Report Abuse
>> Re: XP RAM drive???
HEH - believe it or not, there is a real use for a ramdrive under XP...

if you want to run a set of programs or batch files repeatedly - say walking a directory tree, if you
place them on a ramdrive and place it first on your path, you won't beat up your hard drive reloading the
same program over and over from the hard drive...

enjoy :-)

Dale Groves

Paul wrankle May 10, 2006, 12:11pm EDT Report Abuse
>> Re: XP RAM drive???
Not a RAM Drive, but if you have enough RAM dissable your page file, it will all run in RAM that is very much faster, accomplishes the same thing but does not speed up reboot.

warmonger May 17, 2006, 07:37pm EDT Report Abuse
>> Re: XP RAM drive???
if ya wanna ram drive, get this:

edit: hehe missed the vid link. that's d@mm fast a startup

Lian Li PC65b; Asrock 939Dual Sata2; X2 4800+; X850XTcat7.5; X-Fi Xtreme Gamer Fatal1ty; Ultra X2 550w; 2GB OCZ Gold Ed. DDR400 DC; WD3200KS, WD800JD; 52x32x52 LG cdrw; x16 DVR110D
J J Aug 31, 2006, 01:43am EDT Report Abuse
>> Re: XP RAM drive???

J J Aug 31, 2006, 02:36am EDT Report Abuse
>> Re: XP RAM drive???
Just to add to why you would want to use ram drive as a swap file. The good old hard drive is has physical moving parts - ram doesn't as for the speed ram is faster - there is no thrashing of the hard drive. Now there is one draw back that is you would have to have lots of ram other wise you will run into issues. With the hard drive swap file it was alway 1.5 time larger than the amount of ram you would have. Not sure if this ratio would still be applied to a ram drive being used as a swap drive. So you would be working with less memory unless you have 2gb of ram. But what about if you have a spare pc with 2gb of ram and two network cards capable of gigbyte data transfer. You could potential set up the other pc to run a swap file across a network cable allowing for your self to have ample ram on your pc to run your favourite application as well as having a resonably fast swap file with out hrashing your harddrive. This is an idea - I haven't tried it but it is worth thinking about .

J Morgan Nov 12, 2006, 04:25am EST Report Abuse
>> Re: XP RAM drive???
Ok just for the record, And who knows who will be reading this post as it is like 3 years old, Creating a Ramdrive in windows, and then having windows place the swap file on the ramdrive. Will increase your system speed ALOT. If you know much about windows and or microsoft, you know that it is difficult to run windows without it. Many programs ive run required the swap or tried to use/access it even when disabled and missing. (With LOTS of free RAM available mind you) You may have 2 gigs of ram on your computer but windows is a poorly written os when it comes to ram consumption. (And many other things) Using a ramdrive for swap is actually a pretty good, though wasteful solution to system speed. Wasteful just in the fact that, you might allocate 512mb-1gb of ram to the swapfile, and not always be using that much of it. : ) Good luck tweakers.

angryhippy Nov 13, 2006, 06:31pm EST Report Abuse
>> Re: XP RAM drive???
Well this is an interesting little thread. At least it got some people to sign up if nothing else. If you are interested in doing this, check out CENATEK RAMDisk. Doesn't work with XP Home or 64bit though. You can download a trial edition which will allow you access to the disk 30 times. After that it will cost you. If nothing else their FAQ and users manual section gives a pretty decent overview of what's what with RAM Disks. Toodles! Oh and hello JJ and J Morgan and welcome to HWA.

Get Hippied out!
Me at work:
My rig! A Blah blah.With a blah blah! SWEET!
Da Beast!
i5 3570K 4.6GHz
Win7-8 Pro 64bit
Arquero Feb 28, 2007, 11:53am EST Report Abuse
>> Re: XP RAM drive???
Has anyone thought of a RAM drive as a page file because of WinXP SP2 (non-64-bit) only recognizes 2.5GB? What if the computer has more? Can a RAM drive be used to utilize the remaining RAM as the page-file?

I have a computer with 4GB and I'm stuck with WinXP Pro 32-bit because of a driver issue in one of the programs I need to run. 1.5GB of my RAM is just sitting there not being used. Can I fool WinXP into utilizing this wasted RAM?

I haven't had much luck searching for this topic as most people don't have more than 2GB of RAM and those that do are high-end workstations that are using 64-bit OSes. I would love to run 64-bit, but the machine industry moves quite a bit slower and require hardware dongles which don't always get along with 64-bit drivers.


angryhippy Feb 28, 2007, 12:49pm EST Report Abuse
>> Re: XP RAM drive???
If you are running XP Pro there is a maxmem switch that you can append to a line in the boot.ini file to designate what you want Windows to recognize. The documentation from MS is talking about setting the max memory to very low levels in their examples (12MBs). I'm not sure if it works the other way or not. Their example:

multi(0)disk(0)rdisk(0)partition(1)\winnt="Windows NT" /MAXMEM=12

For 4GBs of course you would have to change the 12 to 4GB. I honestly am not sure if it works but you could check it out further after reading the basic info on the switch here:

Here's some more on the switch:

Get Hippied out!
Me at work:
My rig! A Blah blah.With a blah blah! SWEET!
Da Beast!
i5 3570K 4.6GHz
Win7-8 Pro 64bit
shane smith Dec 18, 2007, 10:31am EST Report Abuse
>> Re: XP RAM drive???

Rhort Dec 18, 2007, 11:28am EST Report Abuse
>> Re: XP RAM drive???
Biggus Dickus said:
One other thing you can do is to put your swap file (Page File) on the RAM drive. This is probably better than putting anything you want to keep on it in case you ever want to restart your machine, anyway.


LOL. I know the internet is often strewn with information you've got to verify before taking as gospel, but this really takes the biscuit! :D

~ The manual said "Requires Windows '95 or better" I installed Linux!
john albrich Dec 18, 2007, 08:46pm EST Report Abuse
>> Re: XP RAM drive???
It's too bad the mobo manufacturers don't set something up where you can allocate how your mobo's physical RAM is used: jumper or BIOS switch select.

With memory being so cheap now, it would be cheap to setup 4GB as system RAM and 4GB as virtual disk RAM in 4 slots on a mobo....specifically for Windows pagefile.

That seems like such an obvious idea that would go a long way toward improving the performance of any computer running a recent version of Windows.

For example, using a handful of cheap 2GB DDR2 RAM sticks, one could set this up with no problem.

2x2GB in slots 0&1 = Normal OS allocation
2x2GB in slots 2&3 = Virtual disk allocation

If they wanted to take it even further, they could provide the selectable interface and backup power to the modules so that contents could survive a re-boot, just like the Giga-Byte pci-based RAMcard. However, it would be more suitable for systems that are on 24/7 or just get re-booted without completely powering completely off (e.g. unplugging the computer)

It could even be controlled entirely on the mobo so no special drivers would be would just look like another disk to the OS...just as FLASH drives appear as another disk drive.

I don't see any technical reason why this would be very difficult to implement on a mobo.

That would be very, very cool.

Paul wrankle Dec 19, 2007, 10:46am EST Report Abuse
>> Re: XP RAM drive???

Arquero Dec 28, 2007, 06:15pm EST Report Abuse
>> Re: XP RAM drive???
Since this thread has resurfaced (I'm assuming people trying to do the same thing and finding this thread on a search engine as I did 8 months ago), I will update my experience. The PAE switch does not seem to work with SP2 to get WinXP to recognize more than 2GB of RAM. The MAXMEM switch is made to go backwards to dignose a system so that Windows uses less RAM. I couldn't get it to go the other way.

To show you how slow the machine industry moves along... There still isn't a driver available that works. I'm stuck on WinXP Pro 32-bit. Even worse, Vista has 32-bit as a standard. 64-bit just didn't gain momentum in the standard consumer market (read me and you, not big businesses). I thought AMD's 64-bit CPUs would force Intel to follow suit and make 64-bit mainstream. This just didn't happen.

I'm still stuck with using only 2GB of RAM... Messing with BIOS settings and memory hole settings I can get up to 2.75GB. Still I have RAM that WinXP is using for PCI Express buffers and whatever else Microsoft says XP uses the extra RAM for (I believe they call it a 'feature'). The RAMDrive was my hope to utilize the extra bit of RAM for my swapfile as it would be the next-best thing. I run Graphic Design programs that use a lot of RAM and I hate the extra time it takes running the page file with HD latencies.

I've been using just 2GB of RAM and have been suffering through those times when my RAM usage goes beyond 1.5GB. I haven't run into the problem often enough to justify spending too much money (after all, I've already PAID for the RAM I have now... Didn't expect my program to not work with 64-bit).

As to the lack of answers here I would assume it's not possible to easily allocate excess RAM to a RAMDrive.


Stephen Lutz Dec 28, 2007, 07:52pm EST Report Abuse
>> Re: XP RAM drive???
I have been struggling with this recently and had the thought that a ram drive could be implemented as a boot loader option. This seems to me to be faster delvelopment route than a BIOS feature. Although, I would much prefer the BIOS option. Either approach should be able to utilize the memory that is out of reach of the OS. Any boot loader developers out there?

john albrich Dec 28, 2007, 10:57pm EST Report Abuse
>> Re: XP RAM drive???
Arquero said:
...I run Graphic Design programs that use a lot of RAM and I hate the extra time it takes running the page file with HD latencies....

If it's that important to you, the smaller solid-state disk drives are becoming much more cost-competitive now. You could obtain a small SSDD and force the OS to place the pagefile on that drive. I'd probably also put my internet caches there as well. (and, by SSDD I mean a disk emulating device that uses standard RAM, not FLASH memory like that used in "thumb-drives" important distinction in performance and reliability)

It wouldn't do anything to reduce boot times, but it should improve your situation.

A Lucas Jan 10, 2008, 07:54pm EST Report Abuse
>> Re: XP RAM drive???
Arquero said:

I thought AMD's 64-bit CPUs would force Intel to follow suit and make 64-bit mainstream. This just didn't happen.

You are joking. right? You wrote this in Dec 2007 and you are saying that Intel has not made 64-bit mainstream? What do you think a Core 2 Duo is??? A 64-bit dual core processor made by Intel based on the Intel x86 architecture and has been in use by computer manufacturers for over a year. Apple's OS X and Microsoft's XP 64-bit, Vista 64-bit, Server 2003, and Server 2008 run on the Intel 64-bit Core 2 Duos, Core 2 Quads, and Xeon multiple core processors.

Before you open your mouth, do a little research.

A Lucas Jan 10, 2008, 08:05pm EST Report Abuse
>> Re: XP RAM drive???
By the way, for all you who say set your pagefile on a RAM Drive, that is the stupidest thing I have ever heard. Why would you set your pagefile (which is usually larger than your total RAM) to the RAM?

Here is how a pagefile works... The pagefile is a file on the hard drive that an operating system uses to swap information from the memory to the hard drive in order to free up memory for a currently running program when the system is running low on physical memory.

SO, if you set up a RAM Disk to hold your pagefile, then you are killing the amount of physical memory available to Windows and forcing it to want to use the pagefile... But if the pagefile is in the RAM, it defeats the purpose of the pagefile because it is using up valuable RAM space. If you have 1.5GB+ of RAM and want to speed up windows, just turn off the pagefile and see how you do. It really is that simple In Win XP, the pagefile is used more frequently when you have 512MB or less of RAM.

john albrich Jan 11, 2008, 02:07pm EST Report Abuse
>> Re: XP RAM drive???
That would be accurate...if we were talking about using existing system RAM to create the pagefile. However, in part of this discussion that's not what was proposed. If you are stuck with a configuration that ends up requiring a pagefile for whatever reason, then if you re-locate it to a Solid-State Disk Drive (SSDD) you will generally see some performance improvement (caveats apply: e.g. the SSDD not made out of flash memory...e.g. not a USB thumbdrive)

(edit to add--another part of the discussion was simply starting an inquiry as to whether unusable/32bit-Windows-inaccessible system RAM could be used for the pagefile or other purposes. That is RAM that otherwise would be wasted. They were simply proposing/asking if it might be possible to put it to some use)

Also as discussed above, using a separate SSDD for the system partition could provide additional performance improvements, especially reducing boot time.

Continue Reading on Page: 1, 2, 3, 4, Next >>



  Topic Tools 
RSS UpdatesRSS Updates

  Related Articles 

A weekly newsletter featuring an editorial and a roundup of the latest articles, news and other interesting topics.

Please enter your email address below and click Subscribe.