SD Card using ReadyBoost increases CPU to 100%

[rminnis82]

I have two IBM ThinkPads, X41 tablet and Z60m running Windows Vista
Business installed in exactly the same procedure. Both have SD card
slots so I bought 2 SanDisk Extreme III 2.0GB SD cards setup for full
use on ReadyBoost as I wouldn't use these card slots for anything
else.

The X41 with the SD card works perfectly. BUT when I enable ReadyBoost
in the Z60m, the CPU starts running at 100% and the HDD light starts
to flash and the whole system becomes laggy.

If I disable ReadyBoost, the CPU returns to normal. I have changed
cards around and its not the cards. I have formatted both cards, no
change. I have reinstalled latest driver for SD Card Reader from IBM
and no change.

The issue is purely a ReadyBoost one...anyone had the same problem or
might know where I could have gone wrong?

 

[Stephan Rose]

I have two IBM ThinkPads, X41 tablet and Z60m running Windows Vista
Business installed in exactly the same procedure. Both have SD card
slots so I bought 2 SanDisk Extreme III 2.0GB SD cards setup for full
use on ReadyBoost as I wouldn't use these card slots for anything else.

The X41 with the SD card works perfectly. BUT when I enable ReadyBoost
in the Z60m, the CPU starts running at 100% and the HDD light starts to
flash and the whole system becomes laggy.

If I disable ReadyBoost, the CPU returns to normal. I have changed cards
around and its not the cards. I have formatted both cards, no change. I
have reinstalled latest driver for SD Card Reader from IBM and no
change.

The issue is purely a ReadyBoost one...anyone had the same problem or
might know where I could have gone wrong?

Yea, you're messing with stuff that's likely to give you little to no
added benefit...in a best case scenario.

You're better off just putting more RAM into your machine and calling it
a day.

--
Stephan
2003 Yamaha R6

å›ã®ã“ã¨æ€ã„出ã™æ—¥ãªã‚“ã¦ãªã„ã®ã¯
å›ã®ã“ã¨å¿˜ã‚ŒãŸã¨ããŒãªã„ã‹ã‚‰

 

[rminnis82]

Well thats not actually true. The X41 has 1.5Ghz Centrino with 1.5GB
RAM and when the SD card is added it makes a massive difference.

The Z60m has the maximum 2GB RAM combination possible, and any extra
help in a slot never to be used cant be bad.

Yea, you're messing with stuff that's likely to give you little to no
added benefit...in a best case scenario.

You're better off not posting and calling it a day.

 

[Stephan Rose]

Well thats not actually true. The X41 has 1.5Ghz Centrino with 1.5GB RAM
and when the SD card is added it makes a massive difference.

Yea, I can see the massive difference it is making by your original post.
Your entire system becomes laggy, I admit, that's quite a massive
difference.

The Z60m has the maximum 2GB RAM combination possible, and any extra
help in a slot never to be used cant be bad.

Actually yes it *can* be bad.

Flash memory is by magnitudes slower than RAM. Adding it to a system as a
substitute for RAM helps with systems around 512 megs of RAM or so that'd
otherwise be constantly writing to the HDD instead. And even there,
improvements can't really be guaranteed.

If you already have 1.5 gigs of RAM, you're looking at next to nothing to
gain by adding Flash memory.

Even on systems where ready boost has been reported to actually give some
improvements, any improvements started to disappear at the 1 gig mark on
any benchmarks I've seen so far.

--
Stephan
2003 Yamaha R6

å›ã®ã“ã¨æ€ã„出ã™æ—¥ãªã‚“ã¦ãªã„ã®ã¯
å›ã®ã“ã¨å¿˜ã‚ŒãŸã¨ããŒãªã„ã‹ã‚‰

 

[rminnis82]

Thanks for your more detailed reply, your first post seemed very
dismissive of the problem by just saying add more RAM as that isnt the
problem in case.

With the X41 (slower processor and less RAM than the Z60m), the SD
card makes a visible improvement.

The Z60m has massive spike in CPU when ReadyBoost is enabled on the SD
card...it has a 2Ghz processor, 2GB of RAM and a very good graphics
card (by laptop standards) so why should the CPU overload of 80-100%
when the SD card is added even f the system is capable of running
Vista without the SD card.

The validity of the SD card is debatable, I just want to know why
ReadyBoost would cause a CPU overload?

Thanks.

 

[dennis@home]

Yea, I can see the massive difference it is making by your original post.
Your entire system becomes laggy, I admit, that's quite a massive
difference.

Have you been taking lessons in reading from alias?
The OP said quite clearly that it works perfectly in the X41 but not in the
other.

 

[MICHAEL]

* Stephan Rose:

Yea, I can see the massive difference it is making by your original post.
Your entire system becomes laggy, I admit, that's quite a massive
difference.


Actually yes it *can* be bad.

Flash memory is by magnitudes slower than RAM. Adding it to a system as a
substitute for RAM helps with systems around 512 megs of RAM or so that'd
otherwise be constantly writing to the HDD instead. And even there,
improvements can't really be guaranteed.

If you already have 1.5 gigs of RAM, you're looking at next to nothing to
gain by adding Flash memory.

Even on systems where ready boost has been reported to actually give some
improvements, any improvements started to disappear at the 1 gig mark on
any benchmarks I've seen so far.

Stephan,

You are correct. I have three machines currently running Vista,
all three have 2GB of RAM, and the only time I have ever noticed a
*little* bit of help from ReadyBoost is when I am using a virtual machine.

ReadyBoost is one of the most over-hyped features of Vista, by far.


-Michael

 

[Stephan Rose]

Have you been taking lessons in reading from alias? The OP said quite
clearly that it works perfectly in the X41 but not in the other.

Yes and I am responding in regards to the one that doesn't work.

Now, what exactly did you contribute with your post?


--
Stephan
2003 Yamaha R6

å›ã®ã“ã¨æ€ã„出ã™æ—¥ãªã‚“ã¦ãªã„ã®ã¯
å›ã®ã“ã¨å¿˜ã‚ŒãŸã¨ããŒãªã„ã‹ã‚‰

 

[Stephan Rose]

Thanks for your more detailed reply, your first post seemed very
dismissive of the problem by just saying add more RAM as that isnt the
problem in case.

I'm not dismissive of the problem, I'm just dismissive of the incorrect
solution.

With the X41 (slower processor and less RAM than the Z60m), the SD card
makes a visible improvement.

The Z60m has massive spike in CPU when ReadyBoost is enabled on the SD
card...it has a 2Ghz processor, 2GB of RAM and a very good graphics card
(by laptop standards) so why should the CPU overload of 80-100% when the
SD card is added even f the system is capable of running Vista without
the SD card.

The validity of the SD card is debatable, I just want to know why
ReadyBoost would cause a CPU overload?

It shouldn't, I'll agree on that much. Probably a bug somewhere in
Vista's 50 million lines of code.

That said, any kind of paging is bad. Period. I don't care if it's paging
to a hard drive or to a flash drive. It's bad. Everytime a page miss
occurs, it triggers a page fault interrupt, then the correct page has to
be loaded into memory from whatever slow media it is stored on, and if
insufficient memory is available for that, another page not currently in
use has to be stored to whatever slow media is available.

All around, it's a bad thing to be happening.

Computers that are really far below spec for Vista can benefit a little
from paging to a flash drive instead of a hard drive, under the condition
that said flash drive actually has sufficient bandwidth. Not all are
created equally.

But even if such a computer sees benefits from the flash drive, the
benefits said computer would see from additional RAM are by magnitudes
greater. So no matter which way you slice it or dice it, RAM is always
better than flash.

That's why I roll my eyes at Readyboost and it's hype and dismiss it as
one of the most useless things to ever come out of Redmond. Ultimately,
the best suggestion I can make to you is to stop mucking around with the
ready boost, throw some more RAM into the machine and be happy with the
far greater benefits you'll get as a result.

--
Stephan
2003 Yamaha R6

å›ã®ã“ã¨æ€ã„出ã™æ—¥ãªã‚“ã¦ãªã„ã®ã¯
å›ã®ã“ã¨å¿˜ã‚ŒãŸã¨ããŒãªã„ã‹ã‚‰

 

[dennis@home]

Yes and I am responding in regards to the one that doesn't work.

Now, what exactly did you contribute with your post?

Well you appear to have got the idea that it has made his x41 slow and laggy
which it hasn't.
Its his other one of the two that has the problem.
So my post should have cleared that up for you.. but maybe it didn't.
Maybe you are just so keen to get in a bad word you didn't read it properly?

 

[Stephan Rose]

Well you appear to have got the idea that it has made his x41 slow and
laggy which it hasn't.
Its his other one of the two that has the problem. So my post should
have cleared that up for you.. but maybe it didn't. Maybe you are just
so keen to get in a bad word you didn't read it properly?

Where did I mention the model number x41? Where did I say that?

And no, I don't need you to clear anything up for me.

--
Stephan
2003 Yamaha R6

å›ã®ã“ã¨æ€ã„出ã™æ—¥ãªã‚“ã¦ãªã„ã®ã¯
å›ã®ã“ã¨å¿˜ã‚ŒãŸã¨ããŒãªã„ã‹ã‚‰

 

[dennis@home]

Where did I mention the model number x41? Where did I say that?

Well its conventional to be commenting on the quote above your reply when
quoting in-line.
I suppose you may choose to be replying to something else if you want to
confuse people.

And no, I don't need you to clear anything up for me.

That OK but please try to clear things up for the rest of us not blessed
with sixth sense then.

 

[David]

Yea, I can see the massive difference it is making by your original post.
Your entire system becomes laggy, I admit, that's quite a massive
difference.



Actually yes it *can* be bad.

Flash memory is by magnitudes slower than RAM. Adding it to a system as a
substitute for RAM helps with systems around 512 megs of RAM or so that'd
otherwise be constantly writing to the HDD instead. And even there,
improvements can't really be guaranteed.

If you already have 1.5 gigs of RAM, you're looking at next to nothing to
gain by adding Flash memory.

Even on systems where ready boost has been reported to actually give some
improvements, any improvements started to disappear at the 1 gig mark on
any benchmarks I've seen so far.

FWIW I have 2GB of ram and I see a slight improvement in responsiveness
with a 2GB SD card. Granted it's not like "night and day" but it's
better than not using it. The laptop it's in has a card reader activity
light, and I see it flicker often, so it's doing its thing. ONLY
because I got the card on sale ($19.99) do I feel it was worth the
effort. I'd feel foolish had I spent north of $40 for the card. YMMV.

Dave

 

[rminnis82]

I think I need to put a few things straight...

The X41 (1.5GHz 1.5GB RAM) improves with ReadyBoost.

The Z60m (2.00Ghz and 2GB RAM) gets the CPU overload with ReadyBoost.

BOTH machines have the maximum RAM configuration so adding more RAM is
out of the question. Both machines respond well without the SD cards,
but after the visible improvement in the X41 I did the same for the
Z60m.

Whether paging is bad or not is irrelevant, I just want to know why
the Z60m gets CPU spikes when ReadyBoost is enabled...??? As
ReadyBoost should surely cause the opposite!!

 

[dennis@home]

I think I need to put a few things straight...

The X41 (1.5GHz 1.5GB RAM) improves with ReadyBoost.

The Z60m (2.00Ghz and 2GB RAM) gets the CPU overload with ReadyBoost.

BOTH machines have the maximum RAM configuration so adding more RAM is
out of the question. Both machines respond well without the SD cards,
but after the visible improvement in the X41 I did the same for the
Z60m.

Whether paging is bad or not is irrelevant, I just want to know why
the Z60m gets CPU spikes when ReadyBoost is enabled...??? As
ReadyBoost should surely cause the opposite!!

Do they both use the same SD card reader hardware and drivers?

 

[rminnis82]

Different SD card readers, but I have installed the latest drivers for
both direct from the IBM website (both Vista drivers).

When ReadyBoost is NOT enabled on the Z60m, the SD card works as it
should. The issue I am having only occurs WHEN ReadyBoost is enabled
on the SD card.

 

[Frank]

Different SD card readers, but I have installed the latest drivers for
both direct from the IBM website (both Vista drivers).

When ReadyBoost is NOT enabled on the Z60m, the SD card works as it
should. The issue I am having only occurs WHEN ReadyBoost is enabled
on the SD card.

Have you tried disabling ReadyBoost on that card while in that laptop,
reformatting the card then enabling ReadyBoost?
Also be sure and go into device manager and under Disk drives enable in
properties on the card, "optimize for performance".
Frank

 

[dennis@home]

Same problem here, but I did not know the source was an SD card. I simply
found one of my 2 CPUs running at 100% and the cause ultimately was
ReadyBoost. Disabled it and things are again normal.

May experiment by reenabling it, then inserting an SD card, but it sounds
like this problem is generic to Vista?

I also have an iPod, SmartPhone, SD cards, and CompactFlash cards. Any one
of these may have been the trigger.

Comptuer is HP Paviliion desktop d4790y wih Core 2 Duo / 2.4GHz.

It sounds like its a problem with particular drivers and/or hardware to me.
People report it working with SD cards on some machine but not on others..
Vista is common but the drivers and hardware are not.
Someone needs to compile a list of not working hardware and drivers to see
if there is a common problem.

 

[Spirit]

My suspicion is A: the USB Drive has mixed memory, enough FAST so it passes
the
ReadyBoost test and then does not function properly. B. indeed there is a
USB driver
problem or conflict. Many cheap drives do used mixed memory.

ReadyBoost Drives - Compatible

http://www.grantgibson.co.uk/misc/readyboost/

http://www.activewin.com/reviews/hardware/memory/vista/readyboost.shtml

ReadyBoost Incompatible

http://www.grantgibson.co.uk/misc/readyboost/?status=incompatible

 

[Guest]

I built my own computer with an AMD motherboard and about two weeks ago
svchost.exe started taking up 100% of the cpu making the machine worthless.
With the Vista Community help I traced it to Readboost and disabled the
service returning my computer to a healthy state. I don't have a handle why
this started happening; however, two weeks ago was the first time I used a
memory stick in the computer just to transfer some files and then removed it
using the remove hardware function. Does anyone have any ideas is this a "new
feature" of Vista.

gsaxton825