Hi,
I am using SoftPerfect RAM FS as a replacement for SoftPerfect RAM Disk. So far, the difference in speed is noticeable—RAM FS is faster than RAM Disk across all the stress tests I've performed.
However, I'm encountering one issue: I use a RAM FS volume mounted at startup to store DirectX and NVIDIA shaders. When I check the used space in Windows Explorer, it doesn't show the accurate amount of data stored on the drive.
I have attached two screenshots: one showing the properties of the RAM FS volume (indicating only 234 MB used), and another showing the properties of the folder containing the shaders (indicating 2.57 GB used).
Is this a normal behaviour of RAM FS volumes?
Thanks in advance
SoftPerfect Support Forum
SoftPerfect RAM Disk & RAM File System
RAM FS volume properties show different used space compared to folder properties
Started by Phalanthos
|
RAM FS volume properties show different used space compared to folder properties 29 July 2026, 02:48 |
Registered: 3 years ago Posts: 12 |
|
|
Re: RAM FS volume properties show different used space compared to folder properties 29 July 2026, 10:27 |
Admin Registered: 21 years ago Posts: 2 110 |
Thanks for the compliments about the performance - great to hear it's working well for you.
That difference in the reported used space is normal, and nothing is wrong with your volume or your data. Both figures are correct, they simply measure different things.
Shader cache files are created at their full size up front and filled in gradually. In other words, the files are mostly consisting of zeros. A traditional file system like NTFS reserves memory for that empty space anyway. RAM FS doesn't: it only uses memory for bytes actually written, so empty space is genuinely free.
Those 2.57 GB is the size your files claim, empty space included, while 234 MB is the memory really in use. The volume figure is the one to trust - and it means you are getting ~2.3 GB back. As your cache genuinely fills up, that figure will grow to match.
One more thing: your screenshot shows the file system as RAMFS, which means you're on an older build. We've just published a new build with several fixes - please install it over, reboot, and let us know how you get on.
RAM FS volumes also now identify themselves as NTFS instead of RAMFS. This is because some third-party apps don't understand non-standard file systems and refuse to work, or fall back to slower paths. By reporting to be NTFS, the volume appears like a normal local disk across a larger number of various software products, which may also improve how third-party apps treat it.
That difference in the reported used space is normal, and nothing is wrong with your volume or your data. Both figures are correct, they simply measure different things.
Shader cache files are created at their full size up front and filled in gradually. In other words, the files are mostly consisting of zeros. A traditional file system like NTFS reserves memory for that empty space anyway. RAM FS doesn't: it only uses memory for bytes actually written, so empty space is genuinely free.
Those 2.57 GB is the size your files claim, empty space included, while 234 MB is the memory really in use. The volume figure is the one to trust - and it means you are getting ~2.3 GB back. As your cache genuinely fills up, that figure will grow to match.
One more thing: your screenshot shows the file system as RAMFS, which means you're on an older build. We've just published a new build with several fixes - please install it over, reboot, and let us know how you get on.
RAM FS volumes also now identify themselves as NTFS instead of RAMFS. This is because some third-party apps don't understand non-standard file systems and refuse to work, or fall back to slower paths. By reporting to be NTFS, the volume appears like a normal local disk across a larger number of various software products, which may also improve how third-party apps treat it.