- FANCYCACHE WINDOWS 10 64 BIT
- FANCYCACHE WINDOWS 10 UPDATE
- FANCYCACHE WINDOWS 10 DRIVER
- FANCYCACHE WINDOWS 10 32 BIT
FANCYCACHE WINDOWS 10 64 BIT
Of course case #4 will also prevent you from running a large number of useful other tools that (rightfully) do not exist in a 64 bit version, so it is the least smart choice/possibility.
FANCYCACHE WINDOWS 10 32 BIT
if you run a 64 bit "default" PE without the WOW64 32 bit subsystem, you need the 64 bit version AND another 32 bit PE with the 32 bit version for use on machines that won't boot from a 64 bit PE.if you run a 64 bit "advanced" PE with the WOW64 32 bit subsystem added, you need the 32 bit version ONLY AND another 32 bit PE with the 32 bit version for use on machines that won't boot from a 64 bit PE.If you run a 64 bit "full" system complete of the WOW64 32 bit subsystem, you need the 32 bit version ONLY as the 64 bit version would not give you any advantage besides the increased disk occupation.If you run a 32 bit "full" system you need the 32 bit version ONLY.Sure you are missing the chance of occupying without any need some hard disk space. I always keep just the 32-bit version, but at the same time I'm left wondering, am I missing something? When using BranchCache with Windows client, simply set the Delivery Optimization mode to Bypass to allow clients to use the Background Intelligent Transfer Service (BITS) protocol with BranchCache instead.
FANCYCACHE WINDOWS 10 UPDATE
The baggage is unacceptable and the benefits dubious. In Windows 10, version 1607, the Windows Update Agent uses Delivery Optimization by default, even when the updates are retrieved from WSUS. Based on before/after registry checks Its uninstaller appears to completely and cleanly remove the program.Thus it decreases the reliability of the system to unacceptable levels. Again, the numbers are skewed by benchmarks. According to its own statistics, configured for "lazy writes" with a long delay, it can reduce the write load on the hardware a fair bit, but this depends on how many short-lived temporary files your applications make.The Windows 8.1 file system cache is already very effective. There were no measurable practical speed advantages to using it to do the normal I/O-heavy operations I do.My conclusions, given a system with high I/O hardware performance: Basically, block-level cache is ineffective considering the Windows file system cache is already on duty.Īll a block level cache like PrimoCache really does is fool the benchmarks by inserting a RAM cache below the direct I/O calls, but it comes with baggage: It permanently blocks off a big chunk of RAM and what's worse, my test system rebooted spontaneously in the middle of the night during a backup. It doesn't actually speed up the normal operations I do: Starting big applications like Photoshop a second or third time is NO faster, and software builds with Visual Studio - which I always figured are I/O bound - are NO faster. It makes impressive improvements in benchmark results, BUT. NOTE: During Beta stage, each version comes with 180-day evaluation period.I tried it out on a test system. Hence, the more requests can be served from the cache the better the overall system performance is. Otherwise the data has to be fetched from volume/disk. If requested data is contained in the cache, this request can be served by simply reading the cache, which is comparably faster.
FANCYCACHE WINDOWS 10 DRIVER
One of the Fanc圜ache's core components is a storage class filter driver which resides in the storage stack, intercepting I/O requests for data on volume/disk. Fanc圜ache caches data on a logical block basis (offsets within a volume/disk) while windows cache manager caches on a virtual block basis (offsets within a file). It improves system performance by transparently storing data into memory such that future requests for that data can be served faster. Fanc圜ache for Volume is a handy and reliable application designed to cooperate with system memory to provide data caching for volumes.