Performance compare: v6.1 vs v5.7

FAQ, getting help, user experience about Primo Ramdisk
Post Reply
User avatar
support
Posts: 2585
Joined: Sun Dec 21, 2008 2:42 am

Performance compare: v6.1 vs v5.7

Post by support »

Testing computer: Intel NUC 6i7KYK
Baseboard: Intel HM170 (Skylake PCH-H)
CPU: Intel Core i7-6770HQ CPU @ 2.60GHz
RAM: Samsung DDR4-2133 8GB x1
Drive : LITEON IT L8T-256L9G SSD
Video Adapter: Intel Iris Pro Graphics 580 (Built-in)
OS: Windows 10 Professional x64 Build 16299.251

Ramdisk Config: SCSI/Direct-IO, 1280MB, basic mode (w/o DMM, w/o Image), FAT32 file system.
5.7 vs 6.1.png
5.7 vs 6.1.png (130.42 KiB) Viewed 9251 times
Primo Ramdisk | PrimoCache
Romex Software Support

User avatar
support
Posts: 2585
Joined: Sun Dec 21, 2008 2:42 am

Re: Performance compare: v6.1 vs v5.7

Post by support »

Testing Computer: HP OMEN II Notebook
Baseboard: Intel HM170 (Skylake PCH-H)
CPU: Intel Core i5-6300HQ CPU @ 2.30GHz
RAM: Kingston DDR4-2133 16GB x2 (32GB)
Drive: HGST HTS721010A9E630 (1TB, 7200RPM, SATA3, 32MB)
Video Adapter: NVIDIA GeForce GTX 960M (GM107M) 2GB
OS: Windows 10 Professional x64 Build 16299.125

Ramdisk Config: SCSI/Direct-IO, 4GB, basic mode (w/o DMM, w/o Image), FAT32 file system.
hp-omen 5.7 vs 6.1.png
hp-omen 5.7 vs 6.1.png (183.08 KiB) Viewed 9250 times
Primo Ramdisk | PrimoCache
Romex Software Support

User avatar
Jaga
Posts: 451
Joined: Sat Jan 25, 2014 1:11 am

Re: Performance compare: v6.1 vs v5.7

Post by Jaga »

Testing computer: Custom - Intel Core i7 6700K @ 4.7ghz
Baseboard: MSI z170A Gaming M5
RAM: Ballistics Sport DDR4-2400 16GB x 4 (64GB)
Drive: Samsung SSD 850 Pro 512GB
Video Adapter: Nvidia GTX 1060 3GB
OS: Windows 10 Professional x64 Build 16299.431
Ramdisk Config: 20GB Direct-IO / DMM+Compact Mode
Note: Ramdisk was originally created under 5.7

Testing against Primo Ramdisk v6.1 only to confirm results.

Image

Side note: if there are any gains in performance from re-creating the Ram Disk, it would be good to know! I'm still using a v5.7 disk with 6.1

User avatar
support
Posts: 2585
Joined: Sun Dec 21, 2008 2:42 am

Re: Performance compare: v6.1 vs v5.7

Post by support »

Thank you, Jaga!
No need to re-create virtual disks. Same performance.
Do you have the test result against v5.7?

BTW: I forgot to mention that our ramdisks were created in basic mode (no DMM, no Image) with FAT32 file system.
Primo Ramdisk | PrimoCache
Romex Software Support

User avatar
Jaga
Posts: 451
Joined: Sat Jan 25, 2014 1:11 am

Re: Performance compare: v6.1 vs v5.7

Post by Jaga »

I looked when I did that benchmark and I don't have any saved from 5.7, unfortunately. But I am certain it is faster - I don't ever remember numbers over 10k before. If you were really interested, I could uninstall 6.1 and reinstall 5.7 to bench it for comparison - I have the disk saved as an image.

Good to know about the config schema not changing too.

I suspect a few of my slightly lower numbers are from my config auto-expanding into RAM as needed. But that's a really nice feature, so keeping it on.

User avatar
support
Posts: 2585
Joined: Sun Dec 21, 2008 2:42 am

Re: Performance compare: v6.1 vs v5.7

Post by support »

Jaga wrote:If you were really interested, I could uninstall 6.1 and reinstall 5.7 to bench it for comparison
Don't bother. I think the result of 5.7 in your computer is just close to that we got in the NUC computer, since your result of 6.1 is similar to ours.
Primo Ramdisk | PrimoCache
Romex Software Support

pocarrie
Posts: 2
Joined: Sun May 27, 2018 2:18 pm

Re: Performance compare: v6.1 vs v5.7

Post by pocarrie »

As I wrote in another thread (viewtopic.php?f=28&t=4491&start=10#p12221), I had some problems of BSOD with the previous versions of Primo Ramdisk (5.7 and 6.0.0).
With the new version (6.1.0), all problems has been solved and my system works flawlessly.

While waiting for the release of the new version, I tried another software (Softperfect Ramdisk v. 4.0.7.0).
Now I have the possibility to show the results of a comparative test between the two software: the difference is very impressive! :shock:

SoftPerfect Ramdisk v. 4.0.7.0:

Image

Primo Ramdisk v. 6.1.0:

Image

That's all... :geek:

User avatar
support
Posts: 2585
Joined: Sun Dec 21, 2008 2:42 am

Re: Performance compare: v6.1 vs v5.7

Post by support »

@pocarrie, thank you very much for sharing the comparative test!
I see that Primo Ramdisk v6.1 is better than Softperfect in the first 3 test items, except the last test item. I think you were using a SCSI ramdisk, not Direct-IO ramdisk, right?
Primo Ramdisk | PrimoCache
Romex Software Support

pocarrie
Posts: 2
Joined: Sun May 27, 2018 2:18 pm

Re: Performance compare: v6.1 vs v5.7

Post by pocarrie »

support wrote:@pocarrie, thank you very much for sharing the comparative test!
I see that Primo Ramdisk v6.1 is better than Softperfect in the first 3 test items, except the last test item. I think you were using a SCSI ramdisk, not Direct-IO ramdisk, right?
No, in Primo I use Direct-IO ramdisk.
In Softperfect the same, I didn't use "hard disk emulation" (the correspondant parameter in that software)

User avatar
support
Posts: 2585
Joined: Sun Dec 21, 2008 2:42 am

Re: Performance compare: v6.1 vs v5.7

Post by support »

So there're still something can be improved for Primo Ramdisk.
Primo Ramdisk | PrimoCache
Romex Software Support

Post Reply