Why would it be a nonsense? SSDs with DRAM are like completely indexed at all time since they got a chip with the map stored in it. DRAM-less SATA SSDs have a great penalty because of this, and may be the only case where I could think of keeping drive indexing enabled. On the other hand, DRAM-less NVMe SSDs can load their map to the system RAM at boot thanks to HMB, which makes them still way faster than W10 drive indexing.
My advice: leave it as it is. It may be hard to acceptbut there are some smart people at Microsoft.
Think of a car. Some people try to improve engine performance by tweaking it. And indeed, they get it! But at the expense of the shorter lifetime of the engine. If it were that easy to enhance the engine the manufacturer would have already done that. It would be nice on ads!
Windows knows about internal SSD. Don't worry.
I left it all is as default, so far replaced about 6 PC with SSD. What you need to do is prove the time difference is significantly better one way or the other regarding those settings.
I leave things alone and let Windows manage my drives. Never an issue and I run 5 SSD drives.
Indexing is at its default Windows settings.
I hardly ever use Windows Search for anything, but that's just because I use Everything.Either way, there is little to no performance to be gained from disabling indexing, and in fact Windows Search is not the only thing that can benefit from leaving indexing enabled so, depending on whether you use those extra features─and how─you might actually even bump into one or two adverse effects if you choose to disable indexing, i.e., contrary to what you had originally envisioned. You know as well as I do that Windows is highly proficient at backstabbing typically those users who subscribe to holding their own persistent beliefs about stuff like this. So, all you have to do is draw your own, logical, conclusions from that knowledge.
Hibernation can sometimes be useful. (Even, if you, like me, prefer to use Standby as much as possible.) This is merely a choice between saving a bit of extra storage space and still being able to use Hibernate the moment when you might want to use it in spite of maybe believing you never will use it. I leave it enabled, just in case the power goes down and then doesn't come back on before my laptop's battery runs out, like, just as a simple precaution. You know. Better safe than sorry.
Both ClearPageFileAtShutdown and LargeSystemCache are already disabled by default.
Disable Windows Search, you say? Are you being dead serious? I mean, it barely uses more than 3 MEGABYTES of memory while it's not in use. Sorry, but no. I don't do homeopathy.
Prefetch needs to be left at its default setting of 3, i.e., Applaunch and Boot enabled (Optimal and Default). Doing this will help to ensure that you don't run into any issues with it and besides, disabling it does not improve performance in any way whatsoever. As for SysMain, yes, it used to be called SuperFetch, and, there are some rare cases in which one might want to disable it. As a general rule, though, leaving it enabled will help to improve performance, albeit typically only just a little bit if your SSD is fast enough─mostly it will depend. But the fact it uses more memory is strictly intentional, as it is designed to use only the part of memory that would otherwise remain utterly unused. The old assertion, that it 'steals' memory away from other processes is baloney. If SysMain is not giving you troubles, just leave it on.
Write caching can be enabled if you have a battery. Some HBAs also have a battery, but they're usually expensive. Write caching in concert with the IntelliWrite technology of Condusiv Diskeeper is what I use on my old laptop because my old laptop has both an internal SSD and an internal HDD. But that's with a HDD, so... as for SSDs, the SSD performance gain resulting from Diskeeper is fairly microscopic on average, excepting only maybe if the SSD in question is the kind of SSD that's some 10 years old and that doesn't support TRIM and/or the SATA controller of the old motherboard doesn't support TRIM. (Even so, I can attest that the Crucial RealSSD C300 from over a decade ago did not slow down gradually over time in any way that could be noticed in the real-world performance realm, regardless of whether you had TRIM or no TRIM.) But, due to the fact that Diskeeper does not defrag an SSD─it just optimizes an SSD─and also due to the fact that it uses InvisiTasking technology, there's no immediate reason to not want to continue to use Diskeeper if you already have Diskeeper─using a HDD or not.
I don't know if you also have a HDD and if you have a SSD and what size is it.
Please edit your profile with ALL your hardware specs. It will help us to help you.
System Specs - Fill in at Ten Forums
You can optimize for speed, for life, for space etc.
I optimized my small SSD for life and space.
I have a 128G PCIe SSD for Windows and Linux and a 1T HDD for data.
- I moved C:\Users (from the SSD) to D:\Users (on the HDD) (Kari tutorial) so that the SSD only has Windows and programs. All users temporary files, downloads etc are now on the HDD
- I moved the virtual memory from C:\ to D:\ and disabled hibernation. This two files made me gain more than 24G on the SSD and also extended SSD life as they are rewritten on every start.
I disable hibernation which also disables Windows fast startup. Windows fast startup will interfere with multi-booting which I do a lot, and I just don't find Windows fast startup to be necessary when booting from an SSD.
powercfg -h off
That's the only tweak I do.
It makes little sense to move virtual memory to the slowest drive in the system. Very few members here will agree with doing that.
Quote
