Database Users

Browser lag/memory leak solution thread.

I'm currently running Zmod4 with Cognition B7, and almost everything seems to work perfectly for me. (Thank you DG and everyone else! Your work is nothing short of amazing!) I always install from a reset back to stock via Odin and complete wipe/master clear and have tried about every Rom when it becomes available. Everything usually installs perfectly and this setup was no exception. I do notice that the interface is smoother and the phone runs quicker in general with the ZMod4, but the lag is still there in the browser. It's not a placebo effect for me because I have Cog 2.1.4 on a friends Captivate at work as well as another friend that I have set up with a SRE with overclock and after every different setup I try, I always compare the browsers.
No matter which rom or configuration I am running the browsers on 2.1 based roms are always faster. They load a little faster which doesn't really bother me, its when you try to scroll up and down the heavier content pages that you get the hitches and lag. I've even tried different variations of the libwebcore.so files. Can't seem to get it running as smooth as 2.1. I figured it must have something to do with the fact that this is a leaked version of Froyo, but the same problem is persisting with others in the I9000 forum with the official release so I'm a little discouraged. The lag and hitches that I get, especially in larger content pages like engadget, pocketnow, huffingtonpost, etc. kinda drives me crazy when I see with my own eyes the browsers running completely smooth on the 2.1 setups.
I'm hoping with all the expertise and brain power we have amassed here in the developers section that someone may be able to figure out a way to fix this.
As a band aid to the real problem, I've tried running autokiller to free up more available memory with pretty limited results.

Why couldn't you just have continued discussion in this thread:
http://forum.xda-developers.com/showthread.php?t=803370
It's barely on MY page 2..

People usually disagree with me but I even found scrolling on busy webpages to be slower on my Nexus One with froyo vs eclair. This is with plugins either on demand or disabled.
I wouldn't expect it to get much better until scrolling/panning is offloaded to the GPU. Which should come first with Opera Mobile and hopefully the stock browser will support it in Gingerbread.
According to google engineers, the slow scrolling and hitching is due in part to garbage collection which ties up the CPU and keeps scrolling from being smooth.

Or maybe its because our froyo is leaked software?
Sent from my SAMSUNG-SGH-I897 using XDA App

SkitchBeatz said:
Or maybe its because our froyo is leaked software?
Sent from my SAMSUNG-SGH-I897 using XDA App
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
this^ at least wait til froyo is released on the captivate before saying this.

maybe Flash is loading or something

richierich1212 said:
maybe Flash is loading or something
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I've tried it both ways, flash on and flash completely disabled. Its better when disabled of course, but still far more laggy than it should be. I don't think a lot of people notice it because:
A. many people don't frequently go to sites that have enough content to dramatically slow the browser down and most of all........
B. Almost no one has two, let alone three different Captivates available, each running a different Rom to get a side by side comparison so its harder to see and measure the real world difference.
Maybe my expectations are too high but I do frequent larger web sites and I know that the browser does not have the lag on the 2.1 roms so it irritates the bejeesum out of me.

Id imagine the more active content on web pages due to flash 10.1 is going have an effect on scroll speed. Ive seen the same thing on an OCed droid. I havent played with cog 2.2 much as i really enjoy how smooth 2.1.7 is and didnt even need to OC it. Now that they have a new lagfix for 2.2 im thinking about flashing 2.2 again.

\/icious said:
Id imagine the more active content on web pages due to flash 10.1 is going have an effect on scroll speed. Ive seen the same thing on an OCed droid. I havent played with cog 2.2 much as i really enjoy how smooth 2.1.7 is and didnt even need to OC it. Now that they have a new lagfix for 2.2 im thinking about flashing 2.2 again.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Your comments made it occur to me that while I have "disabled" flash in the browser settings, I've never completly tried to uninstall it....so I just did. With TiBu, so I'll run it this way for a bit and see what the real world effects are and report back.

FWIW, I didn't see a difference in scrolling between having plugins disabled and uninstalling Flash on my Nexus One. Haven't tried it on my Captivate for that reason.

dalingrin said:
People usually disagree with me but I even found scrolling on busy webpages to be slower on my Nexus One with froyo vs eclair. This is with plugins either on demand or disabled.
I wouldn't expect it to get much better until scrolling/panning is offloaded to the GPU. Which should come first with Opera Mobile and hopefully the stock browser will support it in Gingerbread.
According to google engineers, the slow scrolling and hitching is due in part to garbage collection which ties up the CPU and keeps scrolling from being smooth.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
This is straight up discouraging. I thought it was just Samsung's crappy Froyo leaks, but this makes it sound like the Froyo browser just doesn't scroll as smoothly as the 2.1 browser.

I think something that kinda pisses me off with this browser hogging ram is the other problem that doesn't get brought up very much and when it does its shot down. The missing 208mb of ram that is supposedly being used by the gpu or whatever (I forget what I heard). With a browser that can easily creep up on 100 mb's of used ram with pages open and with give or take 150 mb's free at boot right there your down in the red zone where things start to lag. And the launcher takes 20 mb's so now your down to 30 free mob's. God forbid you wanna play angry birds too, you'd be screwed. So that makes multitasking not as efficient as it should be if we had the lost 208mb's. I do like this phone but I'm not real happy with Samsung. The galaxy s phones were advertised with 512 mb's, that's what we should get. People use to say that it would be available when froyo came out since eclair couldn't use all of the ram. Well here it is officially out on the i9000 and were still stuck with 304mb's.
Sorry about the rant. The only thing I miss from my iPhone 4 was booting it up and having 350 mb's free

di11igaf said:
I think something that kinda pisses me off with this browser hogging ram is the other problem that doesn't get brought up very much and when it does its shot down. The missing 208mb of ram that is supposedly being used by the gpu or whatever (I forget what I heard). With a browser that can easily creep up on 100 mb's of used ram with pages open and with give or take 150 mb's free at boot right there your down in the red zone where things start to lag. And the launcher takes 20 mb's so now your down to 30 free mob's. God forbid you wanna play angry birds too, you'd be screwed. So that makes multitasking not as efficient as it should be if we had the lost 208mb's. I do like this phone but I'm not real happy with Samsung. The galaxy s phones were advertised with 512 mb's, that's what we should get. People use to say that it would be available when froyo came out since eclair couldn't use all of the ram. Well here it is officially out on the i9000 and were still stuck with 304mb's.
Sorry about the rant. The only thing I miss from my iPhone 4 was booting it up and having 350 mb's free
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Yeah, what they did is pretty deceiving. I usually had more free memory on my Aria and it only had 384 MB of RAM.

di11igaf said:
I think something that kinda pisses me off with this browser hogging ram is the other problem that doesn't get brought up very much and when it does its shot down. The missing 208mb of ram that is supposedly being used by the gpu or whatever (I forget what I heard). With a browser that can easily creep up on 100 mb's of used ram with pages open and with give or take 150 mb's free at boot right there your down in the red zone where things start to lag. And the launcher takes 20 mb's so now your down to 30 free mob's. God forbid you wanna play angry birds too, you'd be screwed. So that makes multitasking not as efficient as it should be if we had the lost 208mb's. I do like this phone but I'm not real happy with Samsung. The galaxy s phones were advertised with 512 mb's, that's what we should get. People use to say that it would be available when froyo came out since eclair couldn't use all of the ram. Well here it is officially out on the i9000 and were still stuck with 304mb's.
Sorry about the rant. The only thing I miss from my iPhone 4 was booting it up and having 350 mb's free
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
The Galaxy S phones indeed have 512 MB of RAM. As for whether part of that is allocated by GPU (of which I believe no more than 32-64 MB must be for that), you still have to consider that android as an operating system sets aside a VERY LARGE chunk of RAM just for radio. It would be VERY STUPID of a phone to not set aside more than enough RAM to make sure the radio *always* gets top priority. Also, complaining about RAM getting "filled up" is a moot argument to begin with. Android honestly allocates RAM as fast as possible. It WANTS RAM to be as filled as possible, leaving between 50-75 MB free. If you use a task killer and kill everything, yeah you'll jump back up to 200+ MB free, but android will reallocate that memory just as fast to something else because that's what the OS is designed to do.
So, say we set aside 64 MB of RAM for VRAM, 128 MB for the GSM radio and other vital-to-operation-and-functionality processes that are specifically reserved and untouchable by us (these numbers are pulled out of my ass, for all I know the VRAM is 128 MB and the GSM only uses 75 MB... the point still stands) that drops us down to the ~300 MB range for user accessible functionality. Also, the browser RAM/smoothness issue you're referring to is a BUG because the froyo build is NON-FINAL, complaining about that is like saying "my knees hurt when I drag them on the ground." I assume this is something they will try to improve before final release, but I don't know, maybe they consider it "good enough."
On top of this, let's discuss the potential that maybe NONE of the RAM is set aside for the GPU and it runs itself. The complaint about a lack of the full 512 is also hard to discuss because HIGHMEM support was only added in 2.2 to have the full access to 512. Just because the potential to enable in 2.2 exists, doesn't mean they're taking advantage of it. I'd like to believe they are, so again, that drops back to the ~100 MB taken up by the GSM radio/phone functionality. As for whether this is "too much," that's not really up to you unless you want to go ahead and build a ROM from scratch. It's in the best interest of the company who made the phone to err on the side of caution and give it too much than too little. On top of that, the core OS allocates itself to set areas of RAM that you also can't change because man that would be stupid if they let you (want to see your phone crash? try to kill a process that controls the OS).
Basically, the RAM is there, we just don't have full userland access to all of it, it's pointless to complain. If it bugs you, take a stab at fixing it and prove you're better than samsung and make your own ROM.

Kaik541 said:
The Galaxy S phones indeed have 512 MB of RAM. As for whether part of that is allocated by GPU (of which I believe no more than 32-64 MB must be for that), you still have to consider that android as an operating system sets aside a VERY LARGE chunk of RAM just for radio. It would be VERY STUPID of a phone to not set aside more than enough RAM to make sure the radio *always* gets top priority. Also, complaining about RAM getting "filled up" is a moot argument to begin with. Android honestly allocates RAM as fast as possible. It WANTS RAM to be as filled as possible, leaving between 50-75 MB free. If you use a task killer and kill everything, yeah you'll jump back up to 200+ MB free, but android will reallocate that memory just as fast to something else because that's what the OS is designed to do.
So, say we set aside 64 MB of RAM for VRAM, 128 MB for the GSM radio and other vital-to-operation-and-functionality processes that are specifically reserved and untouchable by us (these numbers are pulled out of my ass, for all I know the VRAM is 128 MB and the GSM only uses 75 MB... the point still stands) that drops us down to the ~300 MB range for user accessible functionality. Also, the browser RAM/smoothness issue you're referring to is a BUG because the froyo build is NON-FINAL, complaining about that is like saying "my knees hurt when I drag them on the ground." I assume this is something they will try to improve before final release, but I don't know, maybe they consider it "good enough."
On top of this, let's discuss the potential that maybe NONE of the RAM is set aside for the GPU and it runs itself. The complaint about a lack of the full 512 is also hard to discuss because HIGHMEM support was only added in 2.2 to have the full access to 512. Just because the potential to enable in 2.2 exists, doesn't mean they're taking advantage of it. I'd like to believe they are, so again, that drops back to the ~100 MB taken up by the GSM radio/phone functionality. As for whether this is "too much," that's not really up to you unless you want to go ahead and build a ROM from scratch. It's in the best interest of the company who made the phone to err on the side of caution and give it too much than too little. On top of that, the core OS allocates itself to set areas of RAM that you also can't change because man that would be stupid if they let you (want to see your phone crash? try to kill a process that controls the OS).
Basically, the RAM is there, we just don't have full userland access to all of it, it's pointless to complain. If it bugs you, take a stab at fixing it and prove you're better than samsung and make your own ROM.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
It doesn't seem to make sense that it would be the ram anyway because the browser is blazing fast on 2.1 on the same phones with the same amount of ram available.
By the way, completely deleting flash did not improve the browser speed at all so I don't believe this has anything to do with it either.

I've looked high and low for a definitive answer on where the "missing" RAM is. I havent found one yet. I guess samsung would need to weigh in on that. But I do know that on my captivate going into quadrant system info says we have 311,xxx KB's of memory available to Android OS. A coworker has a verizon fascinate, his has 332,xxx KB's of memory. Another coworker has a droid incredible and his has 422,xxx KB's of memory. They all start with 512MB and obviously some of it is partitioned off and reserved for other functions such as GPU, ram disk, radio, etc.

derek4484 said:
I've looked high and low for a definitive answer on where the "missing" RAM is. I havent found one yet. I guess samsung would need to weigh in on that. But I do know that on my captivate going into quadrant system info says we have 311,xxx KB's of memory available to Android OS. A coworker has a verizon fascinate, his has 332,xxx KB's of memory. Another coworker has a droid incredible and his has 422,xxx KB's of memory. They all start with 512MB and obviously some of it is partitioned off and reserved for other functions such as GPU, ram disk, radio, etc.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Yeah, we definitely have 512 MB of RAM. Samsung just seems to reserve more of it for other as yet unknown functions than other manufacturers.

Kaik541 said:
The Galaxy S phones indeed have 512 MB of RAM. As for whether part of that is allocated by GPU (of which I believe no more than 32-64 MB must be for that), you still have to consider that android as an operating system sets aside a VERY LARGE chunk of RAM just for radio. It would be VERY STUPID of a phone to not set aside more than enough RAM to make sure the radio *always* gets top priority. Also, complaining about RAM getting "filled up" is a moot argument to begin with. Android honestly allocates RAM as fast as possible. It WANTS RAM to be as filled as possible, leaving between 50-75 MB free. If you use a task killer and kill everything, yeah you'll jump back up to 200+ MB free, but android will reallocate that memory just as fast to something else because that's what the OS is designed to do.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
The problem is that garbage collection doesn't come free. I agree that the operating system is designed to use RAM as data cache as much as possible but the problem with the Galaxy S models is the lack of free RAM to begin with. This causes more garbage collection calls than on other phones because phones with more ram have a greater chance of the program or library being already in RAM.
I agree that a task killer isn't a good solution. I find that making the garbage collector more aggressive works to reduce the stuttering much better. If a program needs to dynamically load library calls while it is running and you don't have enough free memory then you are going to see a lot of stuttering when the garbage collector gets called to make room.
So, say we set aside 64 MB of RAM for VRAM, 128 MB for the GSM radio and other vital-to-operation-and-functionality processes that are specifically reserved and untouchable by us (these numbers are pulled out of my ass, for all I know the VRAM is 128 MB and the GSM only uses 75 MB... the point still stands) that drops us down to the ~300 MB range for user accessible functionality. Also, the browser RAM/smoothness issue you're referring to is a BUG because the froyo build is NON-FINAL, complaining about that is like saying "my knees hurt when I drag them on the ground." I assume this is something they will try to improve before final release, but I don't know, maybe they consider it "good enough."
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
You are assuming it is a bug. In my experience it isn't. The problem is exaggerated on the Galaxy S vs my Nexus One but that could easily be attributed to having 100+mb less available memory.

Kaik541 said:
The Galaxy S phones indeed have 512 MB of RAM. As for whether part of that is allocated by GPU (of which I believe no more than 32-64 MB must be for that), you still have to consider that android as an operating system sets aside a VERY LARGE chunk of RAM just for radio. It would be VERY STUPID of a phone to not set aside more than enough RAM to make sure the radio *always* gets top priority. Also, complaining about RAM getting "filled up" is a moot argument to begin with. Android honestly allocates RAM as fast as possible. It WANTS RAM to be as filled as possible, leaving between 50-75 MB free. If you use a task killer and kill everything, yeah you'll jump back up to 200+ MB free, but android will reallocate that memory just as fast to something else because that's what the OS is designed to do.
So, say we set aside 64 MB of RAM for VRAM, 128 MB for the GSM radio and other vital-to-operation-and-functionality processes that are specifically reserved and untouchable by us (these numbers are pulled out of my ass, for all I know the VRAM is 128 MB and the GSM only uses 75 MB... the point still stands) that drops us down to the ~300 MB range for user accessible functionality. Also, the browser RAM/smoothness issue you're referring to is a BUG because the froyo build is NON-FINAL, complaining about that is like saying "my knees hurt when I drag them on the ground." I assume this is something they will try to improve before final release, but I don't know, maybe they consider it "good enough."
On top of this, let's discuss the potential that maybe NONE of the RAM is set aside for the GPU and it runs itself. The complaint about a lack of the full 512 is also hard to discuss because HIGHMEM support was only added in 2.2 to have the full access to 512. Just because the potential to enable in 2.2 exists, doesn't mean they're taking advantage of it. I'd like to believe they are, so again, that drops back to the ~100 MB taken up by the GSM radio/phone functionality. As for whether this is "too much," that's not really up to you unless you want to go ahead and build a ROM from scratch. It's in the best interest of the company who made the phone to err on the side of caution and give it too much than too little. On top of that, the core OS allocates itself to set areas of RAM that you also can't change because man that would be stupid if they let you (want to see your phone crash? try to kill a process that controls the OS).
Basically, the RAM is there, we just don't have full userland access to all of it, it's pointless to complain. If it bugs you, take a stab at fixing it and prove you're better than samsung and make your own ROM.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
The official 2.2 release is out for the i9000 is out and it has a total of 304 mb of ram. The os takes a big chunk of this so with nothing running the most that is possible to access EVER for programs is about 170mb. Your launcher takes 20. The browser even on 2.1 with a couple of large pages loaded can easily take 100 mb. That leaves you with maybe 50mb available if you lucky. This is when things might get a little slow and the os will start killing off processes as it sees fit. So if you have a game open that you want to keep open in the background it wont. It will kill it which makes muttitasking very poor on a phone where its supposed to be above the rest. The point is we only have around 170 mb's available to the user. That's pretty ****ty. This is on the OFFICIAL froyo release for the i9000 and I highly doubt it will change for us. There is 208 mb's that are missing that should be user accessible. I don't care what uses it the fact is that I can't. The phone was advertised with 512 ram not 304 mb's with 208 vram or whatever. I traded an iphone 4 in for this phone and I still think that was a great decision as I love this phone. But at least when I booted my iphone 4 I had at least 350mb's of user accessible ram which we will not see. We have half of that and I think that sucks. Sorry for stating my opinion. Here's my old phone not even after a fresh boot and I could access all of it
{
"lightbox_close": "Close",
"lightbox_next": "Next",
"lightbox_previous": "Previous",
"lightbox_error": "The requested content cannot be loaded. Please try again later.",
"lightbox_start_slideshow": "Start slideshow",
"lightbox_stop_slideshow": "Stop slideshow",
"lightbox_full_screen": "Full screen",
"lightbox_thumbnails": "Thumbnails",
"lightbox_download": "Download",
"lightbox_share": "Share",
"lightbox_zoom": "Zoom",
"lightbox_new_window": "New window",
"lightbox_toggle_sidebar": "Toggle sidebar"
}

di11igaf said:
The official 2.2 release is out for the i9000 is out and it has a total of 304 mb of ram. The os takes a big chunk of this so with nothing running the most that is possible to access EVER for programs is about 170mb. Your launcher takes 20. The browser even on 2.1 with a couple of large pages loaded can easily take 100 mb. That leaves you with maybe 50mb available if you lucky. This is when things might get a little slow and the os will start killing off processes as it sees fit. So if you have a game open that you want to keep open in the background it wont. It will kill it which makes muttitasking very poor on a phone where its supposed to be above the rest. The point is we only have around 170 mb's available to the user. That's pretty ****ty. This is on the OFFICIAL froyo release for the i9000 and I highly doubt it will change for us. There is 208 mb's that are missing that should be user accessible. I don't care what uses it the fact is that I can't. The phone was advertised with 512 ram not 304 mb's with 208 vram or whatever. I traded an iphone 4 in for this phone and I still think that was a great decision as I love this phone. But at least when I booted my iphone 4 I had at least 350mb's of user accessible ram which we will not see. We have half of that and I think that sucks. Sorry for stating my opinion. Here's my old phone not even after a fresh boot and I could access all of it
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
blah blah blah, same old story. also, if you read, the JPM release got pulled and they're pushing a later release toward the start of November. Also, I included the option that the final release only gives 304 MB RAM to userland. if you're just going to ignore all my comments, then feel free. this is like complaining that you bought a computer with 2 GB of RAM and are mad that Windows says "I'm going to take 500 MB of that and run in there." go ahead, kill those windows processes and watch the system crumble... same thing on our phones. you're also ignoring the fact that I never said "208 mb to vram," good for you for getting just about everything else I said wrong. on top of that, comparing the iphone (a BSD-based mobile OS) against android (a linux-based mobile OS running inside a dalvik java VM) is like saying "why are burritos more filling than these peanuts?" iOS is designed to run on ONE base hardware by ONE base manufacturer, android is modular and designed to work on a VARIETY of platforms and tweaked as the manufacturer wants to.
Samsung advertises the phone with 512 MB of RAM, there is 512 MB of RAM in the phone. Where in their advertising ANYWHERE does it says "512 MB of userland RAM access"? You have nothing worth complaining about. If you miss your free RAM so much, go back to iphone or get a device that doesn't set aside so much of the RAM for *radio* (notice this word, radio, not VRAM... hell I even posited an option that says samsung may not be including the VRAM from the total at all). if you're upset your phone only grants you permission to 3/5ths of your total RAM, get a phone that doesn't. you aren't being "robbed," the hardware is there, it's Samsung's decision to set aside as much as they want for whatever they want. YOU CHOOSE TO ENCOURAGE THIS DECISION BY BUYING THEIR PRODUCT. If you don't like it, return the product, vote with your wallet. Get a device that allows more userland access to RAM and quit your *****ing and moaning.

why does the vibrant not recognize all the ram even on 2.2

Guys, how can I get my samsung vibrant to recognize all the 512mb of ram. I thought froyo has all the software and kernels and stuff to recognize the full 512mb of my phone not just 308mb. Do I need to flash a new kernel or something. I have the nero v3 rom on my phone, with voodoo enabled. So how do we fix this?

308 MB you phone is showing you is the correct amount, your phone does have 512 MB of RAM total. However, part of that is used by the phone and android system to supply your phone's graphics card and other functions such as a RAM disk if I remembered correctly. In addition, You don't want your phone to run out of memory because you are running a game and missed that all important call right? well part of the RAM is reserved to keep the "phone" portion of the Android working.
It is a common misconception that Froyo will "unlock" this hidden RAM, but in reality we are already using all the RAM that came with the phone. The reason some HTC phone shows 512 MB of RAM is either because the phone is reading the "TotaL" amount of RAM or in the case of G2 the phone actually came with more than 512 MB of ram but advertised as 512 MB (the extra RAM is used in the same way as the Vibrant, GPU/Ram disk/Android, etc).

What about the iphone, my cousin always gets 300t mb of free memory on his iphone 4. Android can't be that much of a ram hog. By the way doesn't the power vr gpu have dedicated ram for it self, I man come on, its a high end phone. Samsung is really messing up on there phones.

My question is *why* do you need more free RAM? Are you really running out, ever? Don't think of it like a PC where you need free RAM as overhead when apps start utilizing more and more. Android will free up more RAM as necessary by killing apps that are preloaded in the background. I've never run into a situation where I've run out of memory, couldn't even tell you what happens when you do. I don't use task-killers, run a ton of widgets, and I've never seen it dip below 60-70mb free.

Kubernetes said:
My question is *why* do you need more free RAM? Are you really running out, ever? Don't think of it like a PC where you need free RAM as overhead when apps start utilizing more and more. Android will free up more RAM as necessary by killing apps that are preloaded in the background. I've never run into a situation where I've run out of memory, couldn't even tell you what happens when you do. I don't use task-killers, run a ton of widgets, and I've never seen it dip below 60-70mb free.[/QUOTE
Yes I do run out of ram. Every time I watch a flash video and while leaving no heavy ram using apps to be multitasked, after I finish my vigo and go back to my other apps I finder them killed. It gets on my nerves. I expected more out of 512mb. I also spent too much money for my phone for it to perform under shar what it's specified.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse

I run autokiller and always have 150ish.free. even if I didn't run it I would never run out id ram even when I had my g1
Sent from my SGH-T959 using XDA App

So much for multitasking, right?
Phone has 384 app accessible ram. Typically runs with ~100ish free after a fresh boot with a stock ROM. The browser can take ~30mb, so that doesn't leave much to multitasking with. When ur phone starts auto killing performance decreases. They should have h put the aeverised ram in the phone, instead of playing the semantics game. Even Verizon updated their fascinate specs to change that to 384.
I'll make sure to check this before I buy my next phone in a couple weeks tho (soooo excited!!!).
Sent from my SGH-T959 using XDA App

N8ter said:
So much for multitasking, right?
Phone has 384 apparently accessible ram. Even Verizon updated their fascinate specs to change that.
Galaxy tab uses the same social and its alwaysvshowing 400+ MB ram on everyone I checked.
I'll make sure to check this before I buy my next phone in a couple weeks tho (soooo excited!!!).
Sent from my SGH-T959 using XDA App
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
This means that this is a software issue, not hardware because the tab has the same processor found in the vibrant. 400t is allot better than just 300, not only but the tab also requires more resources with it's 720p screen.

helikido said:
This means that this is a software issue, not hardware because the tab has the same processor found in the vibrant. 400t is allot better than just 300, not only but the tab also requires more resources with it's 720p screen.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
It's not a software issue.
And yes, 100MB RAM in a smartphone is a lot.
It's like getting a computer with 4GB RAM and ripping a 2GB RAM stick out out of it.
There's 128 MB RAM that isn't accessible to the system The OS itself probably uses abut 100+ MB RAM, and once you start installing applications/services that start eating up resources.
Some say the 128 is dedicated graphics ram (fast graphics RAM to allow the Hummingbird to achieve it's faster GPU performance). What a waste. I'll make sure my next phone isn't built like a game console.
They should have at least added another 64MB RAM the way HTC did in the HD2/HD7.
The phone has as much App RAM as a mid-range Android device (think HTC Aria). It's factorable, especially if you want to multitask. Running multiple applications on this phone, I basically have to manage my apps they way I did on Windows Mobile (i.e. open task manager to FC the browser, etc.) because you don't want to be playing a game or doing anything somewhat important when the phone starts trying to auto-close background tasks to recover RAM (and some services will simply restart themselves immediately).
Good phone, bad execution in the software, and they should not have advertised it as having 512 RAM, because to anyone that isn't an idiot Graphics RAM is not synonymous with Application RAM, and 128 less RAM is quite a big chunk to be missing.

...Graphics RAM is not synonymous with Application RAM, and 128 less RAM is quite a big chunk to be missing.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Virtually every computer on the shelf at Wally-World and Best Buy do exactly this - the motherboard graphics chip uses system RAM to operate. Admittedly does not directly correlate to a phone, and they should make a disclosure, but there is ample precedent in the general marketplace.

I don't understand why some of you attribute a free RAM amount (or lack thereof) as a memory hog?
If RAM is used instead of slower disk I/O it translates to a better user experience, the OS is good on keeping the taps on the memory and clean the thrash by itself, but nothing can prevent poor coding and a single rouge app can become the memory hog independent of how much RAM your system has, it might eat all of it.

The real problem is that the phone has only about 150mb of free ram and that'd on boot up. If the phone does have some ram dedicated to the gpu from the system ram (known as shared ram) then why
Don't other android devices do that too, and the iphone has more free ram on boot up then what is user acsesable to me. I thought the gloriose sgx540 had it's own high end dedicated ram for graphics?

N8ter said:
So much for multitasking, right?
Phone has 384 app accessible ram. Typically runs with ~100ish free after a fresh boot with a stock ROM. The browser can take ~30mb, so that doesn't leave much to multitasking with. When ur phone starts auto killing performance decreases. They should have h put the aeverised ram in the phone, instead of playing the semantics game. Even Verizon updated their fascinate specs to change that to 384.
I'll make sure to check this before I buy my next phone in a couple weeks tho (soooo excited!!!).
Sent from my SGH-T959 using XDA App
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
If you hate your vibrant so much why do you spend so much time on the forums? Dont seem to contribute much so just go get a new phone and leave us alone.

ionic7 said:
If you hate your vibrant so much why do you spend so much time on the forums? Dont seem to contribute much so just go get a new phone and leave us alone.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
There is an ignore list feature on these forums

helikido said:
The real problem is that the phone has only about 150mb of free ram and that'd on boot up. If the phone does have some ram dedicated to the gpu from the system ram (known as shared ram) then why
Don't other android devices do that too, and the iphone has more free ram on boot up then what is user acsesable to me. I thought the gloriose sgx540 had it's own high end dedicated ram for graphics?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
And how is that a problem?
Do you have an immediate need for something that requires 150+ MB after the boot?
Here's an absolutely healthy linux system with 2GB of RAM:
Code:
free
total used free shared buffers cached
Mem: 2049868 1982076 67792 0 146988 840748
-/+ buffers/cache: 994340 1055528
Swap: 6008824 820 6008004
I will be worried if my swap is being used a lot, but using my memory on the system is good.

I agree with this. 512 advertised, 308 seen, 150 Available after a boot....my phone keeps running out of memory so often its sad. It can never run my music player and my gps software at the same time. When I switch between the 2 apps, it closes the other one and its really really sad to see. ****ty job samsung, ****ty job. I hope the galaxy s mod gets ported for the ram which opens 338mb. At least its something.
Sent from my SGH-T959 using XDA App

}{Alienz}{ said:
It can never run my music player and my gps software at the same time.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I just went on a 700+ mile car trip with the music player and gps navigation software running the entire time. No problem. Was even able to simultaneously play games while my wife was driving.

}{Alienz}{ said:
I agree with this. 512 advertised, 308 seen, 150 Available after a boot....my phone keeps running out of memory so often its sad. It can never run my music player and my gps software at the same time. When I switch between the 2 apps, it closes the other one and its really really sad to see. ****ty job samsung, ****ty job. I hope the galaxy s mod gets ported for the ram which opens 338mb. At least its something.
Sent from my SGH-T959 using XDA App
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
you have a rouge app/apps running that memory hog your phone, getting 30MB of more available RAM will not save it. You need to find what is hogging your phone, I am yet to see a message that my phone is low on memory, sometimes I do a lot of browsing, txt, mytracks and playing music with Pandora or stock player at the same time and it never complained that it was low on memory to run these.

ionic7 said:
If you hate your vibrant so much why do you spend so much time on the forums? Dont seem to contribute much so just go get a new phone and leave us alone.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Who said that I hate my phone.I'm only truong to find out shar mashes it not recognize all it's ram. In this era, ram is a huge factor to run apps and most importantly newer os updates like ginger bread and honey comb. Don't wanna run out of ram right when you boot up your phone don't you? And if the tab can recognize more ram than this then this means it does gave something to do with software. I guess we have to wait for samsung to release froyo, because im sure that they will gave all threw tweaks that will boost this phone very high, bedside from shar I've noticed, all the,roms out thete dont really boost this phone allot. How do I know,i gave nero v3 and that only boosted me to 1137 on quadrant from 2.1 and with voodo enabled I get 1500 max on quadrant. Oclf the same thing too. so all I'm saying is that it's definitely a software issue. Pretty sure android does not hog 400mbt. And no sgx has its own ram for sure.

I still don't get how you're running out of RAM. Right now I've got Winamp streaming through BT and have started streaming a Flash video. Also running are XDA and Maps. No hiccups.
Sent from my SGH-T959 using XDA App

Why the low ram???

I'm using ss launcher.... Bt the ram is so low!
Earlier I used to hv abt 400mb free ram
Now there is a lot of battery drain. Any of u facing similar probs!? Ny tips???
{
"lightbox_close": "Close",
"lightbox_next": "Next",
"lightbox_previous": "Previous",
"lightbox_error": "The requested content cannot be loaded. Please try again later.",
"lightbox_start_slideshow": "Start slideshow",
"lightbox_stop_slideshow": "Stop slideshow",
"lightbox_full_screen": "Full screen",
"lightbox_thumbnails": "Thumbnails",
"lightbox_download": "Download",
"lightbox_share": "Share",
"lightbox_zoom": "Zoom",
"lightbox_new_window": "New window",
"lightbox_toggle_sidebar": "Toggle sidebar"
}
Sent from my GT-N7000 using xda premium

Why do you worry about free RAM? You should only care about it when it actually matters, like e.g. some application runs out of memory, but as long as nothing is affected then there's no reason to care.

chillteddy said:
Bt the ram is so low!
Earlier I used to hv abt 400mb free ram
Now there is a lot of battery drain. Any of u facing similar probs!? Ny tips???
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
The way Android manages RAM differs from Windows. It's about normal imho.
Sent from the galaxy far far away.

must be your keyboard leaking, it's missing characters

Your batterydrain is another issue.. make a quick search on the forum and you should find many threads with battery drain issues. and solutions

RAM is meant to be utilized. let it go.

Does excess ram use mean more battery drainage?
Sent from my GT-N7000 using xda premium

As most of you thought more RAM is used in Android, better the device performs. That isn't true (If it is why device with more RAM is always more desirable). More RAM used, phone performs more like sh!t- slow and lag until reboot. Low RAM could be the result of some apps don't release RAM after closed.

no..
applications can be resident in RAM but suspended in operation hence no cpu/system activity and any associated battery drain would be trivial.
what would matter to suspended apps is whether there is an automatic update associated with them...obviously the less frequent you are updating weather, news, feeds etc, the less battery drain you make.
chillteddy said:
Does excess ram use mean more battery drainage?
Sent from my GT-N7000 using xda premium
Click to expand...
Click to collapse

Can low ram effect battery?
Does having low ram cause your battery to run down??

Yours is a misleading post and not afaik, technically accurate.
apps take up memory space when resident. period. If all of your frequently used apps are resident then the performance of the device will not appear to be any "better" if the headroom is 50MB or 500MB... so more ram does not mean better performance .
A device with larger memory simply allows for more apps to be resident...and reduces the occurrence of system closing apps in order to open others.. so in this respect, you are correct that if a user is unaware of his responsibility to check his systems health he will see more lag/slow response in a device with smaller memory than a large one.. but such a user will have the problem regardless..
regards
CyberGhos said:
As most of you thought more RAM is used in Android, better the device performs. That isn't true (If it is why device with more RAM is always more desirable). More RAM used, phone performs more like sh!t- slow and lag until reboot. Low RAM could be the result of some apps don't release RAM after closed.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse

low ram doesn't mean you have a problem or cause battery drain.
but it might. best is to actually download an app to see what drains your battery..
low ram is like a cough, it might be some illness/problem but then again it might just be nothing.

Mystic38 said:
Yours is a misleading post and not afaik, technically accurate.
apps take up memory space when resident. period. If all of your frequently used apps are resident then the performance of the device will not appear to be any "better" if the headroom is 50MB or 500MB... so more ram does not mean better performance .
A device with larger memory simply allows for more apps to be resident...and reduces the occurrence of system closing apps in order to open others.. so in this respect, you are correct that if a user is unaware of his responsibility to check his systems health he will see more lag/slow response in a device with smaller memory than a large one.. but such a user will have the problem regardless..
regards
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Why open more app slow your device? Less RAM available require more time to allocate RAM when requested and make RAM chips hotter, and reduction of battery life is the consequence

WereCatf said:
Why do you worry about free RAM? You should only care about it when it actually matters, like e.g. some application runs out of memory, but as long as nothing is affected then there's no reason to care.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Actually I care about free ram. Sometimes I press the home button to multi task to only get back to the app that I was using to find that the Note had closed it, which can be somewhat frustrating. So... Why do I worry about free RAM? Well, to keep the apps I want open... well... OPEN! Good enough reason?

chillteddy said:
I'm using ss launcher.... Bt the ram is so low!
Earlier I used to hv abt 400mb free ram
Now there is a lot of battery drain. Any of u facing similar probs!? Ny tips???
View attachment 971726
Sent from my GT-N7000 using xda premium
Click to expand...
Click to collapse

CyberGhos said:
Why open more app slow your device?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Having multiple apps running slows the device down because they use CPU. Having multiple apps open, but not running does not affect the system.
Less RAM available require more time to allocate RAM when requested
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Yes, but the difference can be measured in nanoseconds, not even milliseconds. Let's take a very much simplified thought-excercise here:
Googling around reveals us that the Galaxy Note sports 1GB LPDDR2 memory. The speed isn't nowhere to be found, but so far I haven't seen a single mobile device with LPDDR2 have anything else than 1066Mhz memory, so I assume Galaxy Note belongs in that category, too. If one was writing 32bit double-words in memory at the maximum 1066Mhz speed that would translate into rougly 4TB/s.
The CPU can write a 32bit dword, ie. 4 bytes, per clock-cycle and running at 1.4Ghz that again would translate to 5.6TB/s.
There are several other hardware factors to play around with here, but neither the CPU or the LPDDR2 clearly is the bottleneck.
Now, on the software side of things, not all memory actually needs to be zeroed because the application code overwrites what was there before anyways when loaded, leaving only the data areas to be zeroed. Naively assuming an application consumed, say, 50MB memory for its data the whole data area could be cleared in 50MB -> 0.0000476837158203125TB / 4TBps ~= 0.000011920928955078125 seconds.
In addition to the ~0.000012 seconds it takes to clear that memory the OS needs to update its own data structures, like e.g. page tables and malloc tables, to reflect the new memory allocations. This adds another 0.000001 seconds to the time we deducted, leaving us at ~0.000013 consumed.
However, do you notice something? I'll give you a few seconds to think about it.
.
.
.
.
Yes, that's right: these things happen anyways every single time you launch an application, regardless of how much free RAM there is before-hand. None of these things correlate with the amount of free memory and as such the amount of free RAM actually does have no bearing on memory allocation speed whatsoever.
It would be a different matter if there was less RAM available than the application you're trying to run requires: the system would have to kill one of the already-loaded applications to make room for the new one. That is, however, again a very fast thing to do; just erase all references to the application from kernel structures, including allocation table - references, mark the pages as free, and continue as normal. Bear in mind, though, that this would mean you have like 1MB RAM free, something that is not all that easy to accomplish with the automatic memory-management of Android!
Or to put all this into much shorter, more friendly terms: you're talking out of your ass.
and make RAM chips hotter, and reduction of battery life is the consequence
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Given the Galaxy Note's size-constraints it is most likely a POP-package mounted on top of the CPU, not individual chips on the motherboard. Also, as long as the memory is powered-on they do not consume any more power when there's something in them as compared to when there is nothing in them; the chips do not know and do not care what type of content they hold, all the care about is 'on' and 'off.'
Besides, LPDDR becomes only warm, not hot. You can perfectly well put a finger on the chip and not burn yourself.
Also, you've got your reason->consequence - sequence wrong here. Something becomes warm because it consumes more power, not the way you claim that it consumes more power because it gets warm. The warmth is a byproduct of it consuming power.
As such you're again completely out-of-the-woods here.
---------- Post added at 02:13 AM ---------- Previous post was at 02:12 AM ----------
zkyevolved said:
Actually I care about free ram. Sometimes I press the home button to multi task to only get back to the app that I was using to find that the Note had closed it, which can be somewhat frustrating.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Android has a habit of doing that even when there's plenty of free RAM to go.

WereCatf said:
Having multiple apps running slows the device down because they use CPU. Having multiple apps open, but not running does not affect the system.
Yes, but the difference can be measured in nanoseconds, not even milliseconds. Let's take a very much simplified thought-excercise here:
Googling around reveals us that the Galaxy Note sports 1GB LPDDR2 memory. The speed isn't nowhere to be found, but so far I haven't seen a single mobile device with LPDDR2 have anything else than 1066Mhz memory, so I assume Galaxy Note belongs in that category, too. If one was writing 32bit double-words in memory at the maximum 1066Mhz speed that would translate into rougly 4TB/s.
The CPU can write a 32bit dword, ie. 4 bytes, per clock-cycle and running at 1.4Ghz that again would translate to 5.6TB/s.
There are several other hardware factors to play around with here, but neither the CPU or the LPDDR2 clearly is the bottleneck.
Now, on the software side of things, not all memory actually needs to be zeroed because the application code overwrites what was there before anyways when loaded, leaving only the data areas to be zeroed. Naively assuming an application consumed, say, 50MB memory for its data the whole data area could be cleared in 50MB -> 0.0000476837158203125TB / 4TBps ~= 0.000011920928955078125 seconds.
In addition to the ~0.000012 seconds it takes to clear that memory the OS needs to update its own data structures, like e.g. page tables and malloc tables, to reflect the new memory allocations. This adds another 0.000001 seconds to the time we deducted, leaving us at ~0.000013 consumed.
However, do you notice something? I'll give you a few seconds to think about it.
.
.
.
.
Yes, that's right: these things happen anyways every single time you launch an application, regardless of how much free RAM there is before-hand. None of these things correlate with the amount of free memory and as such the amount of free RAM actually does have no bearing on memory allocation speed whatsoever.
It would be a different matter if there was less RAM available than the application you're trying to run requires: the system would have to kill one of the already-loaded applications to make room for the new one. That is, however, again a very fast thing to do; just erase all references to the application from kernel structures, including allocation table - references, mark the pages as free, and continue as normal. Bear in mind, though, that this would mean you have like 1MB RAM free, something that is not all that easy to accomplish with the automatic memory-management of Android!
Or to put all this into much shorter, more friendly terms: you're talking out of your ass.
Given the Galaxy Note's size-constraints it is most likely a POP-package mounted on top of the CPU, not individual chips on the motherboard. Also, as long as the memory is powered-on they do not consume any more power when there's something in them as compared to when there is nothing in them; the chips do not know and do not care what type of content they hold, all the care about is 'on' and 'off.'
Besides, LPDDR becomes only warm, not hot. You can perfectly well put a finger on the chip and not burn yourself.
Also, you've got your reason->consequence - sequence wrong here. Something becomes warm because it consumes more power, not the way you claim that it consumes more power because it gets warm. The warmth is a byproduct of it consuming power.
As such you're again completely out-of-the-woods here.
---------- Post added at 02:13 AM ---------- Previous post was at 02:12 AM ----------
Android has a habit of doing that even when there's plenty of free RAM to go.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
-Any program (app) that uses Random Access Memory will require support of the Central Processing Unit. Of cause it's not directly connected to the CPU circuitry and therefore has to be transferred across the data bus. But any way your battery WILL BE ****ED.
WereCatf this is my present for you
and how is Galaxy SII using Double Data Rate 3?
And Galaxy Note DDR2?

avetny said:
WereCatf this is my present for you
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
and how is Galaxy SII using Double Data Rate 3?
And Galaxy Note DDR2?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
There is a difference between DDR2 and LPDDR2, the latter consumes less power. As for why no DDR3: perhaps they simply had access to large quantities of extremely cheap LPDDR2 at the time. Ask Samsung.

WereCatf said:
There is a difference between DDR2 and LPDDR2, the latter consumes less power. As for why no DDR3: perhaps they simply had access to large quantities of extremely cheap LPDDR2 at the time. Ask Samsung.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
hahahah you the best

WereCatf said:
---------- Post added at 02:13 AM ---------- Previous post was at 02:12 AM ----------
[/COLOR]
Android has a habit of doing that even when there's plenty of free RAM to go.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
That may or may not be true. I'm not sure, but what I can say is that I have never had that issue prior to the SGNote (at least not right away. I admit that if you leave an app in memory for a while then that can happen, but not while multitasking a 30 second task. That SHOULDN'T HAPPEN).

ASUS TF300 the first Android device to TRULY have 1GB of RAM?

I posted this in another thread but thought it was worthy of its own thread.
I've owned a lot of Android devices with 1GB of RAM - Xoom, Galaxy Tab 10.1, Galaxy Note, and the original Transformer. This is the first android device that actually shows 1gb of ram. Every 1gb phone or tablet I've had only lists around 750mb total, and then only about 400 or so free on a fresh boot. The explanation has always been that 1gb is shared ram and that the mixing 250mb or so is for video ram. You can see total and available ram in an app called OSMonitor. Anyway, the tf300 actually shows 1gb total ram, and 750 free on a fresh boot. So that's an extra 250mb of usable ram over other devices.
Thoughts?

The device has more as 1GB RAM (1,2GB maybe)?
Gesendet von meinem Galaxy Nexus mit Tapatalk 2

It's advertised as 1GB of RAM, so either it has more actual RAM (1.2 like you suggest) or it has dedicated video RAM somehow.
It's very possible this is inherent to Tegra3. I do not have any Tegra 3 devices to check. I'm going to ask in the Prime Q&A section.

Obviously either a design flaw or outright false advertisement. You should sue them for giving you more ram than advertised.

goodintentions said:
Obviously either a design flaw or outright false advertisement. You should sue them for giving you more ram than advertised.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
WTF? I'm not complaining I'm trying to understand it. It's different than every other Android device.

EvoXOhio said:
WTF? I'm not complaining I'm trying to understand it. It's different than every other Android device.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Goodintentions is known to be sarcastic you will learn that in time. Most likley it is because tegra 3's gpu has its own dedicated ram so it does not go into the system ram

mrevankyle said:
Goodintentions is known to be sarcastic you will learn that in time. Most likley it is because tegra 3's gpu has its own dedicated ram so it does not go into the system ram
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
That would explain it. do you have a source link to back that up? not finding anything in a google search.
Thanks.

Everything im finding is that it just has the 1gb of ram, but possibly the way it handles it is different and may expand or shrink that video ram depending on what it needs.
http://www.nvidia.com/object/tegra-3-processor.html
just general info

also is DDR3

jblah said:
also is DDR3
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Yeah DDR3 means it's faster and has more bandwidth, but that wouldn't affect whether the system has dedicated or shared video RAM.

Is it possible that it's just more efficient in the usage of it's 1GB of ram than the previous products? I can't find any mention anywhere of Tegra 3 specifically doing anything or of the TF300 having more secret ram or anything.

That was the first thing that I noticed about this tab, is that the memory management on this tab is awesome. I can be running GTA3, have two or three tabs open in the browser and also be streaming music and the RAM only drops to about 550MB. At idle on a fresh boot, around 750MB free at idle, and If i do a task killer it will jump up to 830MB temporarily. I can only think it's becuase of the Tegra3 CPU. Regardless it's nice to see a tab with so much free RAM.

Scavar said:
Is it possible that it's just more efficient in the usage of it's 1GB of ram than the previous products? I can't find any mention anywhere of Tegra 3 specifically doing anything or of the TF300 having more secret ram or anything.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
No because we're not talking about FREE RAM here we're taking about TOTAL RAM. either the system has more than 1GB or it's not sharing RAM with the video card.

das7771 said:
At idle on a fresh boot, around 750MB free at idle, and If i do a task killer it will jump up to 830MB temporarily. I can only think it's becuase of the Tegra3 CPU. Regardless it's nice to see a tab with so much free RAM.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Huge amounts of free RAM is not something nice to see; it's a pointless waste. I guess that misunderstanding is still pervasive in the "OMG tasks are in RAM MUST KILL THEM" community ...

nightwulf said:
Huge amounts of free RAM is not something nice to see; it's a pointless waste. I guess that misunderstanding is still pervasive in the "OMG tasks are in RAM MUST KILL THEM" community ...
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Huge amounts of free RAM on a fresh boot is a GREAT thing. It means that the OS is lightweight and not loading tons of bloatware into memory. Now after using the tablet and opening tons of apps the free RAM should go down, if not then yes it is wasting RAM by dumping stuff out of memory.
But besides that the topic at hand is total RAM. more total RAM means more apps can stay in the background which means better multitasking.

They all actually have 1GB of RAM. The difference is simply that some chips separate the video RAM and the system RAM, where others are able to use a shared memory space and dynamically allocate RAM to video as necessary.
Most likely, devices with higher memory bandwidth will be able to use dynamically allocation because the extra bandwidth provides the overhead necessary to minimize performance impacts should the GPU need to pull more memory from the system on the fly.
On Tegra2 devices which were limited to 1 channel of 32bit ddr2, there is much less memory bandwidth than on tegra3 with ddr3 (or dual channel ddr2 like ipad). In this instance, it would cause a performance hit to have to free up extra memory from background tasks and then reallocate it to the gpu - so the solution is to just partition the entire memory into two sections each of which are generally large enough for both their respective duties: video ram and system ram.

EvoXOhio said:
Yeah DDR3 means it's faster and has more bandwidth, but that wouldn't affect whether the system has dedicated or shared video RAM.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
current reviews & memory benchmarks have shown the 300 ddr3 ram shows no Performance improvement over Prime ddr2. developers here can probably make the most it though.
Finally you all have your own section. CONGRATS!
---------- Post added at 10:33 AM ---------- Previous post was at 10:25 AM ----------
a.mcdear said:
They all actually have 1GB of RAM. The difference is simply that some chips separate the video RAM and the system RAM, where others are able to use a shared memory space and dynamically allocate RAM to video as necessary.
Most likely, devices with higher memory bandwidth will be able to use dynamically allocation because the extra bandwidth provides the overhead necessary to minimize performance impacts should the GPU need to pull more memory from the system on the fly.
On Tegra2 devices which were limited to 1 channel of 32bit ddr2, there is much less memory bandwidth than on tegra3 with ddr3 (or dual channel ddr2 like ipad). In this instance, it would cause a performance hit to have to free up extra memory from background tasks and then reallocate it to the gpu - so the solution is to just partition the entire memory into two sections each of which are generally large enough for both their respective duties: video ram and system ram.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
he makes a great point. although no memory improvements shown in benchmarking, what he is saying could be seen as an improvement though. good info.
300 is not the only Tegra3 kid on the block with new DDR3 ram. Toshiba just released their Tegra3 Excite 10.1 in. tablet. it has gorilla glass, 1280x800 display, and 1gb DDR3 ram. available in 16 or 32gb. you can also order a 64gb.

demandarin said:
current reviews & memory benchmarks have shown the 300 ddr3 ram shows no Performance improvement over Prime ddr2. developers here can probably make the most it though.
Finally you all have your own section. CONGRATS!
---------- Post added at 10:33 AM ---------- Previous post was at 10:25 AM ----------
he makes a great point. although no memory improvements shown in benchmarking, what he is saying could be seen as an improvement though. good info.
300 is not the only Tegra3 kid on the block with new DDR3 ram. Toshiba just released their Tegra3 Excite 10.1 in. tablet. it has gorilla glass, 1280x800 display, and 1gb DDR3 ram. available in 16 or 32gb. you can also order a 64gb.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
500 bucks for a 32gig.... No sir.
Sent from my SPH-D710 using xda premium

In the spec section Amazon lists the TF300 as having 2GB of RAM...I'm sure its a mistype though.
http://www.amazon.com/Transformer-TF300-T-B1-BL-10-1-Inch-Tablet/dp/B007P4YAPK

Running 2.6 Kernel mine shows 983,2 MB of Total RAM.
After installing some nec. apps it drops down from ~850 MB to ~630 of
available RAM. After removal of most BW it shows ~820 MB of free RAM.
It's normal behaviour. It just acts like the Prime. Open it und you'll see a Prime with some faster MemoryChips & an optimized board design
I just hated my Prime for many reasons, but I really love this one
They've improved very much here

Galaxy S6 vs. iPhone 6 vs. HTC One M9 real life speed test

http://bgr.com/2015/04/28/galaxy-s6-vs-iphone-6-vs-htc-one-m9-comparison-speed-test/
Watch until the end!
:good::highfive::victory:

TouchWiz eats too much RAM requiring each apps to reload. Check out the Free RAM available on the S6 threads and you'll see that it barely has free RAM.

according to this, i should have gotten a iphone 6 (something that falls in between). Guess I'll have to chunk this M9 DevEd in the garbage and learn to like IOS ?

theveterans said:
TouchWiz eats too much RAM requiring each apps to reload. Check out the Free RAM available on the S6 threads and you'll see that it barely has free RAM.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Free ram is wasted ram. I highly doubt touchwiz is using so much memory it's causing other apps to be killed. It's more likely that Samsung got a little happy with killing apps in the background trying to save battery.
Probably will be fixed in a update...
Hoping HTC is able to optimize for the s810 as well, as it seems very poorly optimized atm

xxquicksh0txx said:
Free ram is wasted ram. I highly doubt touchwiz is using so much memory it's causing other apps to be killed. It's more likely that Samsung got a little happy with killing apps in the background trying to save battery.
Probably will be fixed in a update...
Hoping HTC is able to optimize for the s810 as well, as it seems very poorly optimized atm
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Well, if the RAM is taken over by just the UI and System, it's a wasted RAM. How come M9 usually has over 1 GB of Free RAM yet it can load all of the apps that are cached in RAM while S6 has about 200 MB Free yet it reloads apps EVEN IF those are supposed to be CACHED. I suspect a memory bloat where there's little RAM available for APPS to cache properly.

all that this video show is the following:
- persistent software issues on the Samsungs like hangs and needless killing apps out of RAM
- the s810 / DDR4 / 3GB combo on the M9 quality software really shines when it comes to multitasking
- Apple's high IPC from just two cores should be a big a lesson to anyone building Android SoCs