Finally decided to buy a new laptop to replace my old one. It came with Windows 8 (x64) pre-installed and 8GB DDR3 physical RAM.
My question is: Is it worth using ReadyBoost on the system?
Currently it only has a standard 5400rpm HDD, and an SSD isn't an option for the time being. I have a 16GB Class 10 UHS1 MicroSD card which I had dedicated to ReadyBoost, but after some digging, it seems like ReadyBoost is pretty much useless if the system has more than 1GB of physical RAM.
Sent from my GT-N7105
ReadyBoost is potentially useful with any amount of RAM, but the point at which it becomes useful varies depending on usage. If you only ever run one 2MB install footprint / 5MB working set program on Windows, 1GB of RAM is plenty and ReadyBoost won't help you; SuperFetch will happily cache that program in the handful of spare RAM that the system already has. If you run a ton of background processes that use up 6GB of RAM at all times, and then periodically want to run a program that has a 10GB install footprint, then 16GB of ReadyBoost (which is just SuperFetch cache) will dramatically improve the load times for that program.
Thanks for that. I've had my lappy for more than a month now and my RAM usage rarely goes above 20% (and never goes above 24%) so I don't think RB is necessary for me.
I also read on somewhere that ReadyBoost can wear out a device through constantly writing to it. Is that true? Can ReadyBoost do more harm than good?
Sent from my GT-N7105
I dont use RB, nor superfetch either..truth is i disable all but bare essentials.
Ive also heard that rumor, about excessive wear. Im sure there is some truth to that. Usage causes wear. Just how much wear I have no idea. Im sure it dont help mechanical drives...ssd's prolly dont bother them. *shrugs*
Best practice I have found is just to keep your system maintained, and clean of bloat/malware.
With todays hardware, gains im sure are marginal at best. Seriously you cant wait n extra second for that app to load?
Sent from my LG-E730 using xda app-developers app
@KCA.: In your case, I don't think you would benefit much from ReadyBoost, no. You can always add it later if you want, though. I mostly find it useful with games that have very large install footprints, as Flash memory reading is typically much faster than magnetic hard disk reading. However, reading from RAM is much faster still, and if you're only actively using up to about 2GB of your RAM, that means the other 6GB is already being used for a SuperFetch cache.
@13lack13ox: Your system, your choice of how to use it... but unless you're already seriously stressing out the capabilities of you hardware, caching (which is all that SuperFetch and ReadyBoost are) can significantly improve performance. On an old machine I had with 1280MB of RAM, loading Eve Online (which at the time had about a 2GB install footprint) took almost twenty seconds on Windows XP and only about six seconds on Vista (with a 2GB SD card being used for ReadyBoost) even though the system was massively above the XP minimum specifications and only slightly above the Vista ones. It's a much bigger difference than a mere extra second.
As for wear, it's true that RB will shorten the life of Flash storage. NAND Flash memory (the type used in all flashdrives, SD cards, SSDs, and so forth) has a limited number of write operations for a given block of storage, and ReadyBoost will probably write to your SD card much more often than it would be written to if it just sat in your camera or similar. However, the write limits for modern Flash storage are typically in the tens or hundreds of thousands of times, and the storage controllers use a technique called "wear leveling" to ensure that no portion of the storage gets burned out early. The SD card will almost certainly become obsolete due to size and speed well before ReadyBoost would wear it out, so if you want to use it for that purpose, go ahead.
13lack13ox said:
Best practice I have found is just to keep your system maintained, and clean of bloat/malware.
With todays hardware, gains im sure are marginal at best. Seriously you cant wait n extra second for that app to load?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Lol can't argue with that.
GoodDayToDie said:
@KCA.: In your case, I don't think you would benefit much from ReadyBoost, no. You can always add it later if you want, though. I mostly find it useful with games that have very large install footprints, as Flash memory reading is typically much faster than magnetic hard disk reading. However, reading from RAM is much faster still, and if you're only actively using up to about 2GB of your RAM, that means the other 6GB is already being used for a SuperFetch cache.
As for wear, it's true that RB will shorten the life of Flash storage. NAND Flash memory (the type used in all flashdrives, SD cards, SSDs, and so forth) has a limited number of write operations for a given block of storage, and ReadyBoost will probably write to your SD card much more often than it would be written to if it just sat in your camera or similar. However, the write limits for modern Flash storage are typically in the tens or hundreds of thousands of times, and the storage controllers use a technique called "wear leveling" to ensure that no portion of the storage gets burned out early. The SD card will almost certainly become obsolete due to size and speed well before ReadyBoost would wear it out, so if you want to use it for that purpose, go ahead.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Thanks for the info. I'll just leave it. Seems like the benefits are negligible.. A waste of a port
KCA. said:
Finally decided to buy a new laptop to replace my old one. It came with Windows 8 (x64) pre-installed and 8GB DDR3 physical RAM.
My question is: Is it worth using ReadyBoost on the system?
Currently it only has a standard 5400rpm HDD, and an SSD isn't an option for the time being. I have a 16GB Class 10 UHS1 MicroSD card which I had dedicated to ReadyBoost, but after some digging, it seems like ReadyBoost is pretty much useless if the system has more than 1GB of physical RAM.
Sent from my GT-N7105
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Readyboost uses high speed USB drives to swap kernel memory. If you have an SSD, there is no point. If you are using a conventional HDD, the readyboost will improve performance (that is why they made it). I use it on all my Windows 7 machines except my ultraportable, which has an SSD. With USB drives so cheap, why not? Of course, you need to make sure the USB drive supports ReadyBoost; not all of them have good enough performance.
Unless MS changed this since Vista, ReadyBoost does *NOT* swap kernel memory. ReadyBoost had a specific requirement that removing the device while it was in use shouldn't disrupt the system (even so far as crashing a program). Removing paged-out kernel memory would very quickly cause a BSOD. If you have any additional info, please do share it; I'm curious.
Now, it's possible that RB will act as a read cache (not a write cache, because any changes must be written down to disk) for the pagefile. In that case, it may still improve performance. However, what I read about it initially said it was simply additional SuperFetch cache (SF typically uses unallocated RAM to pre-load files that it expects you to need soon, based on past usage patterns, so that they are available instantly without waiting on disk access). For machine with limited RAM (or which load very large programs or files), SF can dramatically improve load times. RB storage, while not as fast as RAM, is still faster than disk access.
In any case, if you have gobs of RAM, ReadyBoost doesn't matter. The kernel won't be paging stuff out, so no need for a kernel swap cache. The pagefile won't be getting much use at all, in fact (some writes to "clean" changes in memory so it can be swapped out fast, but very few reads). Unless the files you access are large than your free RAM, they shouldn't slow anything down either.
GoodDayToDie said:
Unless MS changed this since Vista, ReadyBoost does *NOT* swap kernel memory. ReadyBoost had a specific requirement that removing the device while it was in use shouldn't disrupt the system (even so far as crashing a program). Removing paged-out kernel memory would very quickly cause a BSOD. If you have any additional info, please do share it; I'm curious.
Now, it's possible that RB will act as a read cache (not a write cache, because any changes must be written down to disk) for the pagefile. In that case, it may still improve performance. However, what I read about it initially said it was simply additional SuperFetch cache (SF typically uses unallocated RAM to pre-load files that it expects you to need soon, based on past usage patterns, so that they are available instantly without waiting on disk access). For machine with limited RAM (or which load very large programs or files), SF can dramatically improve load times. RB storage, while not as fast as RAM, is still faster than disk access.
In any case, if you have gobs of RAM, ReadyBoost doesn't matter. The kernel won't be paging stuff out, so no need for a kernel swap cache. The pagefile won't be getting much use at all, in fact (some writes to "clean" changes in memory so it can be swapped out fast, but very few reads). Unless the files you access are large than your free RAM, they shouldn't slow anything down either.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
OK, I should not have mentioned kernel. I found a short article that indicates it swaps out pieces of the software that would otherwise be swapped to the slower HDD. It will not crash because when it writes to the readyboost, it also writes to HDD - but it can read the readboost much faster than the HDD, so it increases performance when it has to pick up that data again. And the article mentions that more memory is better than readyboost (but I still use it on my Windows 7 machine with lots of memory).
Earlier explanations did not mention the pagefile, although that seems to be to be the better name for what is swapped. But I'm not sure about that. The early web postings indicated that it wrote parts of the Windows system that were frequently accessed.
http://blogs.msdn.com/b/tomarcher/archive/2006/06/02/615199.aspx?Redirected=true
EDIT: From the Q&A it sounds like it is indeed the pagefile.
Cool, thanks for the link! Sounds like it does indeed act as a read cache. Very cool.
Still probably not a *big* boost on a machine with lots of RAM, but I expect it'll help anyhow.
Related
Can anyone tell me why I can't see a display for a backup battery on my MDA Pro, previously on the Alpine I had a main battery display and a backup batt display??????????
because there is none.
i gathered that much but is there a reason, does it mean if i let my current battery run dry i will lose data because theirs no backup???
no you won't loose anything becaue the data is saved on presistent storage in all WM5 devices unlike in the case of WM2003SE where it was saved on RAM
ady said:
because there is none.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
There is a second battery soldered in the Universal,
but it is probably only for the RTC.
In WM2003 and earlier devices, as in PalmOS, the "Storage" for users is actually a part of the device RAM, which means that if it loses power you lose the contents, where the other part of the ram was used as execution memory (ie, like the ram in your desktop pc). In WM5 (and presumably later) this is the other way around, all Storage is in the device's (flash) ROM, and the RAM is *only* used as execution memory. This is why WM5 devices like Uni tend to have 128 megs of rom and 64 megs of ram whereas earlier devices tended to 64 megs of rom and 128 of ram. So basically you're not losing any more data by running out of juice than you would if the power failed on your desktop PC: If a particular piece of software is careless you might lose what's currently opened and unsaved, but everything else is persistent.
I found that our shift's Vista has no Readybooster function when we plug in an external USB thumb!
How can we enable it ? It's a very useful function for speed up the Vista.
eken said:
I found that our shift's Vista has no Readybooster function when we plug in an external USB thumb!
How can we enable it ? It's a very useful function for speed up the Vista.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Search is your friend! This has been asked and answered many times!
By default the ReadyBoost service is disabled - renable it for automatic startup and everything should be fine.
Regards,
Dave
OH! really thanks for the help! I just forgot the Search function!
It works fine on my 8G Transcend SDHC Class 6
" 1. Click on the Start button.
2. In the search field on the Start button type services.msc and press the enter key.
3. When User Access Control asks if you would like to continue, do so or provide administrative account credentials to do so.
4. Scroll down to and double-click on the ReadyBoost service.
1. Change the Startup Type drop down menu to to Automatic.
2. Then press the Start button to start the service.
3. Press the OK button.
5. Now close the Services console.
The ReadyBoost service should now be started and if you reinsert the flash drive it will prompt you to use the drive for ReadyBoost."
.
Quoted from another thread in this forum, which is easily found using the search function *hint hint*
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Readyboost a usefull feature on the Shift??? Don't think so!
Problem: The slow harddisk - filling the ReadyBoost cache would keep the disk busy for an amazing time. Next problem: The slow processor. Remember: The ReadyBoost cache is encrypted - the encryption eats up pretty much processor power. In fact: ReadyBoost can easily SLOW DOWN (!) the Shift - and shorten the battery runtime.
ReadBoost is a nice idea for machines with powerful processors and 512MB RAM. On the shift? It's a perfomance killer - and: Even without an SD card or USB stick used as ReadBoost-Drive, the service would slow down Vista. There is a good reason why Vista is rather usable on the shift - because HTC disabled some of the fancy technologies within Vista wich slows down the machine.
skin57 said:
Readyboost a usefull feature on the Shift??? Don't think so!
Problem: The slow harddisk - filling the ReadyBoost cache would keep the disk busy for an amazing time. Next problem: The slow processor. Remember: The ReadyBoost cache is encrypted - the encryption eats up pretty much processor power. In fact: ReadyBoost can easily SLOW DOWN (!) the Shift - and shorten the battery runtime.
ReadBoost is a nice idea for machines with powerful processors and 512MB RAM. On the shift? It's a perfomance killer - and: Even without an SD card or USB stick used as ReadBoost-Drive, the service would slow down Vista. There is a good reason why Vista is rather usable on the shift - because HTC disabled some of the fancy technologies within Vista wich slows down the machine.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I agree. On the Shift, readyboost does more harm than good.
readyboost not usefull?
you are saying that readyboost on shif is not good?
i've an asus g1s that have an incorporated 512mb memory module dedicated to readyboost. and seems very very usefull.
pitt1983 said:
you are saying that readyboost on shif is not good?
i've an asus g1s that have an incorporated 512mb memory module dedicated to readyboost. and seems very very usefull.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Oh dear... i hope you don't want to compare the benefits of ReadyBoost between a Ultralowpower-Device like the shift with it's 800Mhz-Processor and an HighPower-FullSize-Gaming-Notebook with a let's say 3x faster processor, faster Harddisk etc???
Remember: Using ReadyBoost cost's a lot of processor horsepower - because the data are stored encrypted. And: Filling up the readyboost cache needs a lot of disk transfers during startup time. Doing so on a slow processor with a slow disk?? Bad idea - takes too much time, and too much CPU horsepower (thus, too much Battery life!).
Once again: In most cases, ReadyBoost is completly useless (and even worse) on the Shift - so, its a whise discussion to disable it.
That's why it is disabled by default on the Shift.
skin57 said:
Oh dear... i hope you don't want to compare the benefits of ReadyBoost between a Ultralowpower-Device like the shift with it's 800Mhz-Processor and an HighPower-FullSize-Gaming-Notebook with a let's say 3x faster processor, faster Harddisk etc???
Remember: Using ReadyBoost cost's a lot of processor horsepower - because the data are stored encrypted. And: Filling up the readyboost cache needs a lot of disk transfers during startup time. Doing so on a slow processor with a slow disk?? Bad idea - takes too much time, and too much CPU horsepower (thus, too much Battery life!).
Once again: In most cases, ReadyBoost is completly useless (and even worse) on the Shift - so, its a whise discussion to disable it.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
no, i'm do not comparing those two devices i know them are very different, but i thought, that readyboost may operate in the same mode.
by the way, have you tried it?
skin57 said:
Oh dear... i hope you don't want to compare the benefits of ReadyBoost between a Ultralowpower-Device like the shift with it's 800Mhz-Processor and an HighPower-FullSize-Gaming-Notebook with a let's say 3x faster processor, faster Harddisk etc???
Remember: Using ReadyBoost cost's a lot of processor horsepower - because the data are stored encrypted. And: Filling up the readyboost cache needs a lot of disk transfers during startup time. Doing so on a slow processor with a slow disk?? Bad idea - takes too much time, and too much CPU horsepower (thus, too much Battery life!).
Once again: In most cases, ReadyBoost is completly useless (and even worse) on the Shift - so, its a whise discussion to disable it.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
strange, i have notice a speed increase after i enable the ready boost, it makes my shift run faster and smoother
ready boost
put on shift a 512mb micro sd card.
configured forreadyboost.
the boot of the shift is better and faster. during usage in vista the cpu and ram consume is normal.
so i think that readyboost may increase performances of shift.
This is a very interesting thread, it is a very important point for all of us as this is certainly not a speed machine and I am not saying I am not happy with the shift, I am just saying that a quicker boot time would be a bonus and any speed increase would be appreciated.
We need to do some serious tests, I will time my boot time now and then activate ReadyBoost and time that and post the difference.....
i had the idea to time with a chrono the boot time and others operations. but don't had much spare time. remember i'm usingn readyboost with sp1
Hi,
I've noticed that over the course of a day, the memory consumption of the HD increases substantially... going up from about 30% to over 60% if I use it heavily. I imagine it has something to do with the different caches and the tweaks I've run (found on the forums) to increase performance. Is there a way to flush all caches so that I don't have to reset the device?
Thanks!
I'd like to know if anyone else is having this problem too.
After a fresh reboot my memory usage is about 30%. By the time Gyrator and TouchFlo restart it gets to about 40% where it stays.
However once I start using programs it will easily skyrocket to about 70%. Even if I close all the programs using taskmanager I will never recover more than about 2-3% of memory.
i use memmaid to free memory from time to time, but i we also backup a request for something that automaticly do that
shadow option for sktools made my hd to stuck so i rennounced to it
any ideeas?
now i don't know if this can affect battery performance but with computers the most efficient system is NOT the one with a lot of free ram, is the one that USES it totally... virtually having always ram at 99% would mean maximum performance... In other words: why do you want to flush the ram
This can not affect battery performance at all.
And it's totally normal to use ALL ram.
I guess you people grew up with normal Windows, that frees ram...
For example Linux has always used 99% RAM on your pc. It just uses all the free RAM as cache! So when there is more needed, it deletes some cache and allocates that RAM.
It is bad, very bad to waste memory by not using 100%. Using all memory for cache and only giving memory when it is needed is good for performance.
If you look at Vista, it does the same thing...
So it is normal behaviour, especially when you set all the caches high.
I use the SKTools application "FreeUP RAM" which does a sweep of RAM and normally saves about 5-10 mb.
BUT, I find I rarely need it as I don't seem to have any memory leak except with TomTom running.
i am not sure i can follow you
if i understand well, linux keem memory ocupied in order to fully use the whole capacity
but is not the case of windows, and sure is not the case of windows mobile
in my device, diferent processes and application take a slice of memory and does not release it even when you close them
so you end with a memory occupied 60, 70 even 80% despite the fact that you have nothing obviously running
because of that (not having enough free RAM), when you launch a new application, the HD became very slow or even stuck
correct me if i am wrong, but this is what i have noticed during the years of use of windows or windows mobile.
i am not computer literated so i might be wrong, though!
I also raise this problem here before, most expert's advise is that WM will manage memory itself, it is not necessary for us to do anything!!
I had tried to use memmaid, but it only free up 1-2M memory.
Back to the time when I use D810, if there are few MB left, I can't launch new application. Even when I close some and make free RAM left to 16+ MB, that program will still report out of memory........the only thing I can do is to soft reset.....
HD's RAM capacity is much better, but as time goes......maybe this problem will also happen!?!?
Sorry but not convinced. I agree that when in use 70-80% memory usage is not a problem. But when there are no programs running, then there is no reason to use ram.
Also on my previous wm6.1 device when you closed items in task manager it would restore ram. Sure not all of it but a good chunk of it. Heck, even on my previous HD using the task manager would free more ram.
The only thing that I can see that is different between my previous HD and this one is Tweak HD and the TouchFLO Calender. So I will try removing those first and see what happens,
Eventually, after flashing Laurentius's ROM, the problem went away almost completely. Have to say my memory usage is pretty stable now, at around 40-45% even after a day of full application and web use.
dunno personally i'd love to have a superfetch feature like in vista which keeps ram full
Higher memory usage causes minimal/neglectable effect on power consumption, RAM is powered as a whole, fractional/partial modes (where only used memory cells are powered) are not available on modern RAM chips. The CPU or DMA controller may use more power swapping memory data in and out as memory usage grows, however the increase is nothing in comparison with what the LCD backlight or loudspeaker would use.
I don't know what memory allocation method is used in Windows CE/Mobile, but regardless, being unable to start a new application while there are no other applications running in the background means that physical memory is depleted and this is not normal. OS may use RAM for caching/buffering to optimize performance, however memory allocated for optimizations should probably be released when it's required for other purposes. If this is not happening, than either OS lost track of allocated/unallocated memory or memory allocation approach is very inefficient and causes high fragmentation.
Here's a list of tools (for WinCE) that may also work on WinMo and help curious xda-devs figure out what's eating their memory...
http://blogs.msdn.com/ce_base/archive/2006/01/11/511883.aspx
It seems as though a few weeks ago my phone started draining its battery faster then ever before. I've been beating my head against the wall trying to figure out why.
My stupid question of the day is whether a full SD card can increase power consumption. I don't think so but maybe there's more work being done on file system or something. Anybody have any technical explanation pro or con?
I am currently running midNIGHT ROM v5.5 BYOR and have been since its day of release.
I know there are threads on how to reduce battery consumption and I've read them. I know that my bright screen is a problem as is having 2 Exchange push accounts. But I've had these settings since I got my phone last fall and won't give this up.
Thanks in advance.
(My first thread. Hope I did it right)
Unless you are accessing the files on the SD card it shouldn't use any extra power, regardless of how much is on the card. It's non-volatile which means it doesn't require any power to retain data.
I'd look at any additional apps you've installed, and if signal strength in the area has changed in the last few weeks.
Or, your battery could be dying.
poit said:
Unless you are accessing the files on the SD card it shouldn't use any extra power, regardless of how much is on the card. It's non-volatile which means it doesn't require any power to retain data.
I'd look at any additional apps you've installed, and if signal strength in the area has changed in the last few weeks.
Or, your battery could be dying.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Thanks, you're confirming what I know to be true. Back in the day we called it disk thrashing as the hard disk would work harder as it became full and swaps of virtual memory became more frequent due to low disk space. Wondering if there could be such a thing in Android.
have you downloaded spare parts or battstat to try to see whats using so much power? any new applications installed that may be running in the background?
swear0730 said:
Thanks, you're confirming what I know to be true. Back in the day we called it disk thrashing as the hard disk would work harder as it became full and swaps of virtual memory became more frequent due to low disk space. Wondering if there could be such a thing in Android.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Even if the sd card took power, disk thrashing wouldn't be a factor. Disk thrashing happens because as the disk gets full the OS has to scatter one file over more and more little remaining places. So the fragmentation sky rockets, which is a really big deal on disks with actually moving parts.
Nothing moves to go from place to place with your card, so fragmentation doesn't matter. Accessing the next, first, and last portions are just as fast.
I'm testing SD card speeds/rates on Note 10+ (512GB, Exynos) with Androbench. The same way as I did for my Note 9. The results go into the same google sheet as the old ones. As of this moment, it is mostly Work in Progress... and it should get some LG results, too, some day Soon(tm). I'll hopefully get most of the Note 10+ stuff done tomorrow.
Sheet here: https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1rs8S2yreJYYms6ik8NgoGagZ_6OKrU5bu1FotHJVz6g/edit?usp=sharing
Preliminary results with only 3 cards tested: seems my Note 10+ is getting even slightly slower results than Note 9.
Lucky me, it seems I won't be using an SD card on this phone; I got the 512GB model so there is plenty of internal storage, and I might end up using the slot for second SIM. (And the Note 9 will remain in use for video recording, due to needing 3.5mm mic input, which seems to be a no-go with the Note 10+ for the time being... So I won't be even needing much of that big internal space on the N10+ anyway.)
Feel free to add your own results in this thread, like done in the old thread for Note 9, I'll copy them to the sheet. Please remember to specify the particular Note 10+ model (i.e. which SoC), its state (which firmware and version, rooting/scheduler tweaks/etc.) and which card (preferably with specific product code / SKU, as namings are often ambiguous (due to manufacturers reusing the same name for different card tech/generation/whatnot, see how I record them on the 'extras' sheet).
Here is the Note 9 thread for reference: https://forum.xda-developers.com/galaxy-note-9/help/note-9-sd-card-slot-speed-rating-t3833981
EDIT: All the significant tests are done (need to clean up the sheet, still). Most cards behave relatively the same way as on Note 9, i.e. slower card is still lower, with roughly the same proportions. But there are couple notable differences. Especially Lexar 633x 128GB managed to squeeze a higher random write rate (yet is otherwise slower just like other cards). The UHS-II 3 card is still utter crap (with decent sequentials, which are comparable to good UHS-I cards) - i.e. even this flagship phone still doesn't work with that better interface, but only with UHS-I.
And indeed almost all results are slightly down compared to Note 9 results. Since there was a random good peak sequential result among everything, it makes me think the system could do better, if the firmware was working better for this use case. Perhaps, e.g., the scheduler/CPU state management and Androbench combination somehow has timings which end up mostly keeping the work on a slower core and/or in a slower state, and the result is unnecessary delays or such. And the random high score could be explained then by a random higher-demand process keeping the CPU at better state for a moment, Androbench benefiting from it as a side-effect. All that is just speculation, of course. And it does not affect the end result: most users may see less than flagship level card performance.
This is mine also using a samsung 64gb orange and white 512gb note 10+ 5g xenos version
liggerz87 said:
This is mine also using a samsung 64gb orange and white 512gb note 10+ 5g xenos version
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Judging from those numbers, I think you forgot to switch the test target to the card in the settings; it measured the speed of the internal storage, which is indeed reeeaally fast.
Oops feel a tit now haha just added it again
Here is mine. Samsung 512GB EVO Select (U3) 100MB/s
Galaxy Note 10 Plus 5G Verizon
My Note 4 pretty much gives the same results. 82MB/s seq R, 54 MB/s seq W, 9.9 MB/s random R, 2.8 MB/s random W.
This is with SanDisk extreme UHS-I A2 256GB. I wish they made the card interface faster as everything else gets faster!!!
Hi guys, just found this topic and tested my card in Note 10+
It's weird, I have high read speeds but very slow write speed. Have Samsung EVO Plus 128GB.
OP, I think you may be missing the whole point of using a data drive, its primary purpose is to retain critical data. It read speed is somewhat critical in that you need to be able to play music and vids from it with no glitches. The 10+ with a V30 rated card is well capable of that.
Data drives should never used for running apks.
Internal memory should never be used for critical data storage; only the OS, loaded apks, temporary folders and the DCIM folder (for temporary holding until transferred to data drive).
Temporary folders/vetting data before it goes onto the data drive is important, use the download folder for this. Open any downloaded images in the download folder before transferring to the data drive. A malware jpeg will do far less damage here than if it gets on the data drive! I've had a malware jpeg that effected the Android OS, they are real. Generally their rein of terror is confined to the folder they're in, but not always especially if you unwittingly move it!
Scan anything questionable (especially apk downloads)with online Virustotal.
Any downloads not recognized, delete without opening! Trojan preloaders will sometimes get by the browser and autodownload in spite of settings. Look at the download folder daily for crap that don't belong. This happens very rarely but it's of paramount importance you nip it in the bud.
Everything you need for a full reload including installable app copies, backup setting for all apps that support it, any passwords, all critical data that is on the phone goes on the data drive.
Back the SD card up redundantly with at least 2 hdds that are physically and electronically isolated from each other and the PC. I use more than 2 hdds including a .5tb OTG flashstick. Stagger backups when possible to help limit the possibility all will be compromised by a malware file.
Using the SD card as a data makes the phone more secure and secures your critical data better. Makes backups and reloads much easier.
Done right no PC, cloud crap or internet is needed for a full reload/restore. Plan ahead and develop a plan that protects and preserves your critical data or you will lose it eventually. Plan ahead for a factory reset so it goes fast and seamlessly to a fully restored phone with little or no data loss.
Currently I'm using 68 of 512gb internal and 344 of 465gb on the SD card. Will be upgrading to a 1tb card soon.
blackhawk said:
OP, I think you may be missing the whole point of using a data drive, its primary purpose is to retain critical data. It read speed is somewhat critical in that you need to be able to play music and vids from it with no glitches. The 10+ with a V30 rated card is well capable of that.
Data drives should never used for running apks.
Internal memory should never be used for critical data storage; only the OS, loaded apks, temporary folders and the DCIM folder (for temporary holding until transferred to data drive).
Temporary folders/vetting data before it goes onto the data drive is important, use the download folder for this. Open any downloaded images in the download folder before transferring to the data drive. A malware jpeg will do far less damage here than if it gets on the data drive! I've had a malware jpeg that effected the Android OS, they are real. Generally their rein of terror is confined to the folder they're in, but not always especially if you unwittingly move it!
Scan anything questionable (especially apk downloads)with online Virustotal.
Any downloads not recognized, delete without opening! Trojan preloaders will sometimes get by the browser and autodownload in spite of settings. Look at the download folder daily for crap that don't belong. This happens very rarely but it's of paramount importance you nip it in the bud.
Everything you need for a full reload including installable app copies, backup setting for all apps that support it, any passwords, all critical data that is on the phone goes on the data drive.
Back the SD card up redundantly with at least 2 hdds that are physically and electronically isolated from each other and the PC. I use more than 2 hdds including a .5tb OTG flashstick. Stagger backups when possible to help limit the possibility all will be compromised by a malware file.
Using the SD card as a data makes the phone more secure and secures your critical data better. Makes backups and reloads much easier.
Done right no PC, cloud crap or internet is needed for a full reload/restore. Plan ahead and develop a plan that protects and preserves your critical data or you will lose it eventually. Plan ahead for a factory reset so it goes fast and seamlessly to a fully restored phone with little or no data loss.
Currently I'm using 68 of 512gb internal and 344 of 465gb on the SD card. Will be upgrading to a 1tb card soon.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I agree with blackhawk. I have owned Samsung Galaxy devices, including SM-N975F 256GB/256GB since S6.
I store my CD audio on the SD, and I also store my backups of my phone there.
If you end up somehow clobbering your OS and need to restore there is no better way than having a backup that is easily available!
thevmax said:
I agree with blackhawk. I have owned Samsung Galaxy devices, including SM-N975F 256GB/256GB since S6.
I store my CD audio on the SD, and I also store my backups of my phone there.
If you end up somehow clobbering your OS and need to restore there is no better way than having a backup that is easily available!
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Exactly. I just upgraded from a .5tb to a 1tb V30 SD card on my N10+.
These speeds are real usage and more then fast enough to use as a data drive for streaming vids, whatever.
Internal copy times:
Old .5tb card (read speed)
SD card > internal memory [email protected]
New 1tb card (write speed)
Internal memory>SD card [email protected]
Both cards are V30 Sandisk Extremes.
N975U running on Pie.
The N10+ is a snappy fast device with exceptional capabilities if used correctly.
By comparison the new Samsung flagships suck.
My other N10+ N975U1 it came factory loaded with Android 10, neither one will be upgraded.
Sandisk Extreme V30 rated, 1tb: