Ramdisk to remove load times completely!!

"

aurisacra wrote:

"

Xendran wrote:

"

Joel_GGG wrote:

With a ramdisk files still need to be copied to it from the hard drive after each boot right?

I just bought an SSD, makes a world of difference. Might not be as fast as a ram disk, but it's still pretty damned fast.

Which SSD did you get and how would you say it performs compared to the price? I've been meaning to get some SSDs (One for dedicated OS, one for games), but the price has put me off a little bit, since i just spent a bunch on an i5 3570k, GTX 570 and Sabertooth Z77

I highly recommend the Crucial C300 128gb SSD. Nice build!

I managed to get a 160Gb intel SSD for 180$ Sata 2, works like a dream =)

"

Xendran wrote:

"

Joel_GGG wrote:

With a ramdisk files still need to be copied to it from the hard drive after each boot right?

I just bought an SSD, makes a world of difference. Might not be as fast as a ram disk, but it's still pretty damned fast.

Which SSD did you get and how would you say it performs compared to the price? I've been meaning to get some SSDs (One for dedicated OS, one for games), but the price has put me off a little bit, since i just spent a bunch on an i5 3570k, GTX 570 and Sabertooth Z77

You can get a high performance SATA3 SSD right around $1/GB these days. newegg.com is your friend for buying parts (and they have insanely good sales on individual parts, so keep checking and before long I'm sure a well-reviewed SSD in your price range will pop up on shell shocker or daily deals). I use a combination of newegg user reviews and Tom's Hardware reviews/buying guides to research parts - basically, if a part looks appealing based on price and user reviews on newegg, it goes on a shortlist, then I look up everything on the shortlist on tomshardware.com and see which, if any, stand out.

I have an old 60GB Corsair Force 3 for my OS drive, and this 120GB for game installs: http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16820226236

edit: url tag

"

aurisacra wrote:

"

Xendran wrote:

"

Joel_GGG wrote:

With a ramdisk files still need to be copied to it from the hard drive after each boot right?

I just bought an SSD, makes a world of difference. Might not be as fast as a ram disk, but it's still pretty damned fast.

Which SSD did you get and how would you say it performs compared to the price? I've been meaning to get some SSDs (One for dedicated OS, one for games), but the price has put me off a little bit, since i just spent a bunch on an i5 3570k, GTX 570 and Sabertooth Z77

I highly recommend the Crucial C300 128gb SSD. Nice build!

Thanks, i'll go price hunting for one of these

I just tried this and putting the SSD hijack aside, I cant get the mklink command to work properly. I get an error saying "cannot create a file that already exists". I assumed this is because the folder names were the same when i copied over but i couldn't fix it. In the end i just made a link for the content.ggpk file but I still want to just run the whole thing off of the ramdisk

"

anubite wrote:

"

It's quite easy to use up 8gb or more, it just depends what you are doing.

3d modeling, animating, rendering, really high quality photoshop(or whatever other program you use) painting can take up quite a lot.

Add that on top of multitasking and you can easily burn through 8gb.

For the average person though, probably not going to get that close to 8gb with just games or multitasking.

Operating Systems cannot make use of more than 64 bit address spaces, meaning, even if you install 1000 gb on your computer, your OS will only manage 8 of it for programs and tasks, the other 992 gb of ram you bought is sitting around uselessly doing nothing. This is generally why people who have PCs with >8 gb are laughed at. You'd need a 8192 bit operating system to handle up to 1024 gb of ram, or 128bit to handle 16gb - neither of which exist. 4gb for 32 bit systems. It's the same with files - you'll be hard pressed to have a single file over 4gb on many file systems. It has to be broken up.

I'm not sure how ramdisk works, but I guess it could allocate tempdata in ram over 8gb? I have no idea and that was my question. I don't think it can, but that'd be my guess.

This is not even close to being remotely correct. I hope your job doesn't depend on you knowing how this sort of stuff works.

"

anubite wrote:

If you have over 8 GB of memory you're a nut in the first place! No OS or program in existence can make use of that. Can you even use it to store loaded information with something like ramdisk? That'd be the only practical use for memory over 8 GB.

umm... I'm sitting at 24gb of RAM currently and I wish I had more :\

3ds Max, After Effects, Photoshop.. working with 4k / 1080p video sucks for ram usage. Granted, I'm not an "average user", but you're wrong about saying no OS / program in existence can make use of it.

Also, you may want to look at data center / server software, and then, once you get a bit of knowledge about the "high end".. then come back and tell us what you've found =)

http://msdn.microsoft.com/en-us/library/windows/desktop/aa366778%28v=vs.85%29.aspx

"

Physical Memory Limits: Windows 7
Version - Limit on x86 - Limit on x64

Win 7 Ultimate - 4gb - 192gb
Win 7 Enterprise - 4gb - 192gb
Win 7 Pro - 4gb - 192gb
Win 7 Home Prem - 4gb - 16gb
Win 7 Home Basic - 4gb - 8gb
Win 7 Starter - 2gb - n/a

"

Physical Memory Limits: Windows Server 2008 R2 (only available as x64)

Datacenter - 2TB
Enterprise - 2TB
Foundatation - 8gb
Standard - 32gb
HPC - 128gb
Web Server - 32gb

Shall I continue?

"

anubite wrote:

It's the same with files - you'll be hard pressed to have a single file over 4gb on many file systems. It has to be broken up.

This is quite laughable as well. You have obviously never worked with raw (raw, meaning, non-compressed) 720p video, let alone 1080p / 4k. I've had files that were sitting at 50gb at one time :\ And I only work on < 10 minute clips.. imagine what a motion picture studio works on.

I just checked the adobe site and storage requirement for output files. for 1 frame (you know how frames work, right? imagine a flippable picture book, each page is a frame) 1080p requires 16mb. 4k digital cinema requires 144mb.

So, at 24FPS (euro standard, US standard is 30fps).. for 1 hour, that is 3600 seconds; and that is 86,400 frames. So that means that the video would equate to 12,441,600mb (or approx 12 terabytes). Would you like to throw in some audio into the mix as well?

"

wikipedia wrote:

As implemented, the maximum NTFS file size is 16 TB minus 64 kB

just found something interesting.. the GPFS partition format has a maximum file size of 512YB.

wtf is a YB?

Yottabyte.

1,208,925,819,614,629,174,706,176 bytes.

And I remember when I thought to myself, "holy !@#$, how in the @!# can I ever possibly use 1.44mb?"

Wow Ram disks back in style!

I remember making a ram disk in DOS in 2MB of memory.
Or maybe I've forgotten.

"

anubite wrote:

If you have over 8 GB of memory you're a nut in the first place! No OS or program in existence can make use of that. Can you even use it to store loaded information with something like ramdisk? That'd be the only practical use for memory over 8 GB.

Are you sure. Ever heard of SQL server?
It can use up as much RAM as you allow it.

I picked up a SATA III 120Gb SSD at tigerdirect for $59.99. Installed and set everything up on a clean OS install last night, holy crap things fly now. Load times are gone, restart time is literally a few seconds.

I think they still have them on sale. It is a OCZ drive, which I know doesnt have the best rep for SSD's but its the 3rd gen drives, and at .50 a GB who cares.

Unfortunately, I got rid of the development files (as I do with any project I work on, due to my limited budget, and the fact that it is "for fun")..

However, this video: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_kJ4Ch1aHfQ

Used up 250 gigs on my 1tb "swap" hard drive that I use only for pre-renders / raw rendering / etc..

However, needed storage space is getting alot smaller since I switched to CS5, since I can now import projects to and from photoshop, premiere, and after effects. Now I don't have to render raw footage in order to bring it into another program. It is still high, since I don't like my unedited footage to be compressed at all (due to artifacting when compressing multiple times).