ASUS P9X79 Deluxe Motherboard Review

RAMDisk Performance Testing

RAMDISK is a free utility where we can allocate a portion of our memory and convert that to a Volatile storage device, and we can use this Volatile storage device for various things that can help improve our overall computers performance. We can use this volatile storage as a ready boost (for those who are using HDDs for their Operating Systems) or use RAMDisk temporary files for windows or for specific programs to utilize as a temporary folder.

ASUS P9X79 Deluxe RAM Disk, Crystal Disk Mark

RAMDisk testing was performed with a 4092 MB drive while using a portion of the memory as a storage device while using a set of Crucial 1866MHz memory on all tested platforms.

Starting off with Crystal Disk Mark testing of RAM Disk, here we can see that the P8P67 EVO motherboard gives us the best overall performance levels when we take a portion of our memory and use it as a storage device.

During the writing portion of testing the P8P67 EVO motherboard maintains its significant lead over all other tested platforms.

ASUS P9X79 Deluxe RAM Disk, HD Tune

Turning our attention over to the HD Tune’s performance numbers while using RAMDisk.

This is the only time that I actually seen the performance be similar between the P8P67 EVO and the P9X79 Deluxe motherboards was during the Read Burst testing with HD Tune. But as we look at the Average Read testing the P8P67 EVO motherboard reclaims its lead over the other 2 tested platforms.

Once again during the Write testing the P8P67 EVO motherboard maintains the performance lead over all 3 of the tested platforms.

The one area that has me scratching my head with the RAMDisk testing portion of this review is that since the P8P67 EVO and the P9X79 Deluxe motherboard performance has been pretty much on par with one another (Besides the SiSoft Sandra’s memory bandwidth testing portion). But, during this testing the P8P67 EVO motherboard while using a 2600K Sandy Bridge CPU kept and maintained its significant lead over the other tested platforms. I even ran this test a half a dozen times on all tested platforms to ensure these numbers were not a result of some random anomaly, and I still kept getting the same results.