That's the result after installing Primocache 4.4.1 on my Windows 11 24h2 Studio Computer.

I installed 96GB (2x48GB) on a Gigabyte Aorus 870E Pro Ice with a AMD Ryzen 9-7900

64 GB for Windows and 32GB for Primocache which is set for all NVMe drives.

I have never had such a fast system ever.

I havent bought Primocache yet, its still on its 30 Days Trial without limitations.

The Standard Transferrates of my Samsung EVO990Plus are on the next picture.



and a standard Crucial SSD 1TB MX500 no primocache



and here the same 1TB Crucial SSD with Primocache



These results are pretty amazing and unexpected to be honest.

The combination of DDR5-6000Mhz and Primocache is awesome.

So far i tried Studio One 7 which is starting up in under 5 seconds now, Medium Projects load at the same speed around 5-6 seconds.

Different Games like Starfield, Guild Wars 2 and others.
Windows 11 itself cant be faster, no delays, everything is almost instant.

The Cache is permanent and is loaded every Windows Boot.

crazy stuff !!

if you have questions feel free to ask.

 

Last edited: Mar 17, 2025 at 1:00 PM

I used to mess with RAMdisks years back,
problem is, unless you do fit all the frequently accessed files into the RAM capacity, you're wasting what could be used elsewhere,
I feel like my old system became "almost instant" fast after getting new NVME SSDs (with its own DRAM cache),
most programs (and especially games) don't really make use of those extra speeds yet

 

Last edited: Mar 17, 2025 at 8:06 PM

Please read and learn about Primocache 1st. (its not a RamDisk)

And before you judge or compare it with old Trash RamDisks from our youth time in the 2000s, install it an Test it. Takes 10 minutes.

Its all automatic, enhancing over time, and that pretty perfect and dynamically.

Primocache is no traditional RamDisk. That would be PrimoRamdisk, a extra product.

Primocache is truly something special nothing else out there compares.

you have to do nothing but set up the drives you want to Boost.

 

5 sec load on S1 v7 ?

ryzen 7 5700x, 32gb ddr4, win11 24h2/ReviOS (no telemetry, no defender)
Kingston KC3000 PCIe 4.0 NVMe (brutal)
no fancy ramdisk. but thanks anyway. enjoy your rig !

 

Last edited: Mar 17, 2025 at 6:10 PM

yea it's a glorified HMB (host memory buffer) your EVO990Plus should do natively "for free" under Windows 11

PS: benchmarking 16MiB filesize is rather worthless

 

We should see benchmarks on real I/O heavy workloads to see the actual difference.

I'm not putting down FS caches, of course not. It's just that they're most beneficial in things like read-heavy multi-client databases and shared large storage with slow disks in it. So I'm guessing this wouldn't add to realistic track counts, or amounts of plugins. I think I'd personally prefer the extra RAM, and just tweak my OS cache.

Remember ReadyBoost? While the idea was sound, boosting slow disks with faster random access media (USB disks in this case), it amounted to very little in practice. I've still got a 750GB HDD with a SSD cache, and it kind of works... for the first seconds of I/O before the cache is filled and it's back to slow disk again.

 

Hi
I'm planning to build a new pc to replace an ~11-yo one (Gigabyte Z170X-Gamimg 5 + I7 6700) and the X870E platform seem interesting
Could you tell me if it worth the price? Is BIOS stable enough? Have you activated EXPO mode? TIA

 

You should actually be very careful with brand-new products; they usually
come to market too quickly and then it takes weeks to fix the bugs.

USB4 as the only new feature

Motherboards with this consistent chip aren't simply a 1:1 copy of their predecessors, however, because AMD is bringing another piece of silicon into play: X870 and X870E boards are required to solder an additional USB4 controller. This was, of course, already possible, as demonstrated by several X670E flagships with Intel's "USB4 compliant" Thunderbolt controller JHL8540 ("Maple Ridge", 40 Gbps Thunderbolt requires a license, USB4-40G compatibility unclear, support for USB 3.1 but not for 3.2 at 20 Gbps) as well as Gigabyte's B650E Aorus Pro X USB4 with ASM4242 (USB 3.1, 3.2, and USB4 40G, but no Thunderbolt 4). In the 800 series, the latter seems to be winning the race.

Compared to the competition

Compared to its predecessors, the situation is clear, but what about the duel with Intel? On their Socket 1700 motherboards, PCI-E 5.0 M.2 slots are generally only available via graphics card lane sharing, making them unattractive for gamers. Conversely, boards with at least three USB 3.2 slots have been around for some time, while the X670(E) allows a maximum of two, and the B650(E) even just one. The additional USB capabilities of the X870E and X870 turn a weakness into a strength, while the qualitative loss of 5.0 capabilities merely reduces a significant lead to a still considerable one. Quantitatively, however, the X670E was already slightly behind; Z790 motherboards have more PCI-E resources. The X870E falls further behind, and the X870 even falls below the B760 mid-range.

AMD's main problem, however, is likely yet to come: The jump from the 600 to the 800 series is a direct reaction to Intel, whose 700 generation, despite extending the Socket 1700 lifespan from two to three years, is expected to soon give way to the Z890 – along with Arrow Lake. Leaks suggest that the latter will feature an exclusive 5.0 × 4 link for M.2 SSDs (=> PCI-E 5.0 tie with the X870E) as well as two native Thunderbolt 4 ports including USB 4 capability (=> USB 4 tie with the X870E), while still maintaining a relatively high number of I/O hub lanes, all of which should support 4.0 speeds. Such a configuration would have no overall disadvantages compared to X870E designs, but would offer significantly more spare resources for additional M.2 slots, PCI-E slots, or additional controllers, and a corresponding upgrade is expected in the mid-range B760 successor.

Buying X870/X870E Boards: The Price (Preview) Question

The fact that the X870E doesn't clearly occupy a top position in the motherboard market, and that the X870, unlike the B650E, is no longer "quite good" but rather sufficiently equipped, doesn't make boards based on it bad deals. On the contrary: For many users, the X670E and Z790 were too large and too expensive; the B650E class also ranks significantly higher in price and features than its once very popular, nominal B350 predecessors. Offering less for less could therefore be a real winning concept - but one that AMD and partners are not pursuing, or rather cannot pursue due to the high requirements of the AM5 platform for routing and voltage converter quality.

Source: www.pcgameshardware.de/Mainboard-Hardware-154107/Specials/X870-X870E-im-Detail-1456565/3/

 

If the read and write figures are even close to accurate, that's not great, it's exceptional.
It's quite incredible how far speeds have come in as little as five years.

 

It would be interesting to see how it fares under stress (i.e. real word conditions) like in a video rendering or 3D capacity over time.

 

What's the exact use case though? My DAW, browser, file manager, music app and all my frequently used stuff is never evicted from cache (RAM), so start-up times are virtually always CPU-bound.

Loading the game I play once per day at 6GiB/s vs 30GiB/s (when most of the time is spent decoding assets on the CPU anyway) doesn't seem very "must have" to me.

Kinda feels like putting speed stripes on your car to make it go faster.

 

For your described workflow, faster storage offers marginal gains since your bottleneck lies in CPU-bound tasks like decoding assets.

Upgrading the CPU or optimizing software would yield more noticeable improvements than investing in ultra-fast storage. Your analogy about "speed stripes on a car" aptly captures this tradeoff—it looks impressive but doesn't necessarily improve real-world performance for your use case.

Source: AI

 

Last edited: Mar 17, 2025 at 8:42 PM