All the specs everywhere on websites are pointing out this device runs on "3GB", "3,072GB" RAM memory. Yet I only see 2500 MB available on my N9005, why is this?
Ive googled and searched the forums but couldnt find anything apart from few websites saying it comes with 2.5gb ram, if this is true why is it wrongly advertised everywhere
Apologies if the answer is something obvious that I should've known.
At the same time I'm surprised by the fact that Android 4.3 takes up at least 1GB but lets leave that discussion for another time.
So whats up.. Am I a boon, or is it a legit 'mind-blowing' question?
Rohitpenace said:
All the specs everywhere on websites are pointing out this device runs on "3GB", "3,072GB" RAM memory. Yet I only see 2500 MB available on my N9005, why is this?
Ive googled and searched the forums but couldnt find anything apart from few websites saying it comes with 2.5gb ram, if this is true why is it wrongly advertised everywhere
Apologies if the answer is something obvious that I should've known.
At the same time I'm surprised by the fact that Android 4.3 takes up at least 1GB but lets leave that discussion for another time.
So whats up.. Am I a boon, or is it a legit 'mind-blowing' question?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
0.5 of ram is for system
Related
What is the actual RAM in the device?
The X1 has 384 MB RAM but you'll note that the device information screen says 256MB. This is because the X1 also has an additional 128MB RAM that's only accessible to the CPU/3D chip. There isn't really anyway way to know this apart from taking SE's work although HTC also confirm this but we're looking for a way for end users to verify for themselves
source:
http://www.tracyandmatt.co.uk/blogs/index.php/2008/10/13/sony-ericsson-xperia-x1-answers
already discussed, this thread is duplicated
and if you read the full answer, you will find:
"There isn't really anyway way to know this apart from taking SE's work although HTC also confirm this but we're looking for a way for end users to verify for themselves."
So, performance seems confirm the presence of 128mb of vram, but for now we cannot be sure of that
guap said:
already discussed, this thread is duplicated
and if you read the full answer, you will find:
"There isn't really anyway way to know this apart from taking SE's work although HTC also confirm this but we're looking for a way for end users to verify for themselves."
So, performance seems confirm the presence of 128mb of vram, but for now we cannot be sure of that
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
well, just posted this to notify you all, one of my relatives (wifes cousin) is a developer at SE in sweden, and he say's it got it, but hey he could be wrong...
and the other thread was about it NOT having that much ram...
So, performance seems confirm the presence of 128mb of vram
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
uh, how so?
seeing is believing
got to be sceptical,
if it's not stated anywhere than it's not there.....
if one believe it that it has 384 RAM,
might as well assume that the x1 also had swiss knife build in, 2Ghz dual core processor, nuclear powered, what ever one can imagine.....
well, now i see how experia is the ultimate machine,
as it is really up to your imagination.
xcesspda said:
got to be sceptical,
if it's not stated anywhere than it's not there.....
if one believe it that it has 384 RAM,
might as well assume that the x1 also had swiss knife build in, 2Ghz dual core processor, nuclear powered, what ever one can imagine.....
well, now i see how experia is the ultimate machine,
as it is really up to your imagination.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Very funny
xcesspda said:
the x1 also had swiss knife build in, 2Ghz dual core processor, nuclear powered, what ever one can imagine.....
well, now i see how experia is the ultimate machine,
as it is really up to your imagination.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Are you willing to repeat that in front of [insert famous/important/very important persons name]?
Anyway, fu** this, my notebook has 128mb vram and I play fu****g Tom Clancy first person shooters! WTF is wrong with those fu****s putting 128mb vram in a fu****g cellphone! Geeeez I'm so fu****g male but I think I seriously gonna get my period very soon over that device and what gets speculated about it...!
(is writing fu** ok btw?)
Ok I've read countless post about the lack of memery on the g2 that was promised has any one contacted t-mobile to get an official response or answer as to why so much of the 4gb memory is missing I'm waiting til the 6th to get mine but all the talk of memory missing has me second guessing
Sent from my HTC Dream using XDA App
T-Mobile's response is that it is not missing, but allocated 1GB to system, 1GB to OTA, and 2GB to user. They cannot explain why the system only shows 2.1GiB, but insist that 4GB are there even if we cannot see it, access it, or even find it with root.
there are indications the "missing 2GB" are there - just not recognized or reported by 2.2
see my post in the other memory thread for the links
Hi,
We are able to unlock the bootloader ...
We got root ...
My question, is it possible to repartition the storage?
For example: Right now, there is only 1GB space for internal storage.
Is it possible to create 2GB?
And if it is possible, will it be a problem if Google have another OS update?
I meant, does Android OS update will check the "original" storage "layout"?
Thanks
excellent question.
I'd like to know as well, as i already have 1.5 GB of apps & games installed on my SGS that i plan to restore to the Nexus S when it arrives
meaning i'm already over the limit, and i've not even started yet
The answer is probably no. The same question was raised on the MT4G/G2 forums regarding their internal storage and it was determined that the eMMC/storage/whatever it's called chip can only be flashed one time. After that, it is physically impossible to change how it's partitioned in any way.
Now, granted, this is a Samsung device and, thus, they may use different chips. I find it unlikely, though, that it will be any different.
there might be a chance if Nexus S is indeed another breed of the Galaxy S family.
if it's fixed size and not changeable, then it's a good news for us, we will not see the corruption problems we found on many SGS when people repeatedly formatted their Internal SD to try different things
but on the other hand, it will kinda suck, as that will really limit the amount of Apps we can install in the device.
which will put a very heavy enphasis on using App2SD even more
AllGamer said:
there might be a chance if Nexus S is indeed another breed of the Galaxy S family.
if it's fixed size and not changeable, then it's a good news for us, we will not see the corruption problems we found on many SGS when people repeatedly formatted their Internal SD to try different things
but on the other hand, it will kinda suck, as that will really limit the amount of Apps we can install in the device.
which will put a very heavy enphasis on using App2SD even more
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
You know, a gigabyte for apps goes a very long way. I had 130 apps on my i9000, lots of big ones like CoPilot and some games. I never even got over the 500mb mark on using up my app storage.
Never say never, of course, but I can't imagine worrying about app space on my phone. I'm sure I'll have a new one with much better specs by next summer, which, if apps start growing in size, will have more memory.
How do you have 1.5GB of apps? I have over 150 installed, and they're only like 300MB. Granted, I don't have a ton of games, but I still think it would be hard to get that many apps.
Sent from my Nexus S using Tapatalk
Good afternoon,
I posted this question on another droid tablet related forum, but I have been unable to find an answer, so either I am really dense and asking a really dumb question (hooray for me then) or no one knows the answer... yet!
I am hoping this is an I D 10 T error on the users part because I already had one defective Transformer and am not looking forward to a second return, but here goes me hoping for an answer!
When I pull up running apps on my tf101 under settings, it shows I only have a total of 562 megs of ram. It usually fluctuates at about 112 megs being used and 450 free adding up to well below 1 gig of ram. Doesn't the tf101come with 1 gig of ram? Is part of the ram locked down for future updates, or am I in possession of a defective tablet?
Thanks in advance.
I should mention I have the 16 gig version with a 16 gig mini memory card plugged into the unit (PNY brand I believe if it matters). I have upgraded to Honeycomb 3.1, and show no available updates from ASUS (I also have not rooted my tablet it is running stock OS no funny business here!).
There is 1G of ram TOTAL, but this is shared with the video carveout, framebuffers, and probably a few other things that need shared system memory.
raypou said:
There is 1G of ram TOTAL, but this is shared with the video carveout, framebuffers, and probably a few other things that need shared system memory.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Thank you, I was kinda assuming that it was just ram being locked down for other processes and unusable, but thought I better ask some experts since I had some terrible luck with my first tf101.
Thanks again for your quick response.
Grumsh said:
Good afternoon,
I posted this question on another droid tablet related forum, but I have been unable to find an answer, so either I am really dense and asking a really dumb question (hooray for me then) or no one knows the answer... yet!
I am hoping this is an I D 10 T error on the users part because I already had one defective Transformer and am not looking forward to a second return, but here goes me hoping for an answer!
When I pull up running apps on my tf101 under settings, it shows I only have a total of 562 megs of ram. It usually fluctuates at about 112 megs being used and 450 free adding up to well below 1 gig of ram. Doesn't the tf101come with 1 gig of ram? Is part of the ram locked down for future updates, or am I in possession of a defective tablet?
Thanks in advance.
I should mention I have the 16 gig version with a 16 gig mini memory card plugged into the unit (PNY brand I believe if it matters). I have upgraded to Honeycomb 3.1, and show no available updates from ASUS (I also have not rooted my tablet it is running stock OS no funny business here!).
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
The 562 M bytes of RAM you refer to (Actually a 562MB portion of 16 Gb SD flash) is allocated for app storage, the remainder for app data ,music, photos etc. The 1gb RAM you mention is used for program execution,display etc. In addition Android 3.1 does some strange and undocumented dynamic Flash allocation for app stotage. get free disk usage app for detailed memory usage
Rumbleweed said:
The 562 M bytes of RAM (Actually portion of 16 Gb SDRAM ) is allocated for app storage, the remainder for app data ,music, photos etc. The 1gb you mention is used for program execution,display etc. In addition Android 3.1 does some strange and undocumented dynamic SDRAM allocation for app stotage. get free disk usage app for detailed memory usage
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Well, actually, there's 1GB of RAM, and then 16GB of flash storage. They're not the same.
Sent from my Transformer TF101 using Tapatalk
wynand32 said:
Well, actually, there's 1GB of RAM, and then 16GB of flash storage. They're not the same.
Sent from my Transformer TF101 using Tapatalk
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Thats what I said but flash would have been a more excepted word vs SDRam .Edited original post to clarify.
msm8916 a.k.a. snapdragon 410 which is there on the LTE versions of Moto E. I wonder if we can get this up and running on our phones.
Link - "www(.)codeaurora(.)org/xwiki/bin/QAEP/release"
Check the October 9 releases with tag 'LA.BR.1.2.6-00110-8x16.0' and chipset 'msm8916_64'
BUMP!
*If it could be ported to Moto-E so we can get Marshmallow then yeah cool.
I have no clue about that stuff but i will keep an eye out for this topic.
Since we have only 1 GB of RAM, 64-bit is pretty much useless to us. This is a popular SoC among low end to low mid range phones though, so I expect us to easily get 6.0 in some form if Motorola won't do it. It helps that we're on stock android with little modifications already.
64bits demands more RAM to run system, apps that are developed on 32bits don't get any performance gain running on a 64bits system.
i have ported a LOT of x86 'c' code to 64 bit since 2001 roughly and there is far more to it than that..
understanding data types is your first step.. the x86 memory size limit is only part of the equation.
i have hard that as an excuse for dev's to not update their programs for a decade or two though..
you here the same old myth's about the x64 architecture.
..from people who don't code.
One example of the contradiction..
Years ago i got the source code for Cudaminer (crypto currency miner program)
And i compiled it by making slight changes to make sure it compiled in Visual Studio / MingW
And when i launched the 64bit build it was way faster than the 32bit build.
The dev of the cudaminer program said he was never going to do 64bit
because it was not any faster.. i proved crystal clear that yes indeed it WAS much faster
and not long after that he started doing his own 64bit build LOL
I also have run that test on various other miners for crypto coins and every single time the 64 bit was faster.
then years before that i had done other conversions such as eMule
I was one of the very first guys to make and share a 64bit build of eMule on the web.
it used a LOT of 3rd party libs and it had a massive code base.. it was no easy task.
64bit gives no performance gains is a myth.
All i was trying to say is this myth should not be perpetuated but rather we should look
at each case independently and see if this allegation holds true.
Some may benefit and others will not.. best way to see is do it and benchmark etc.
The internet is full of people who spout off and don't know what their talking about and i have made a career out of proving them wrong.
For example i was the only guy to crack/unlock a series of LG cell phones.
I was told by everyone on the web it can't be done because of DRM.
They were wrong and.. it had nothing to do with DRM either.
I wrote a program with a GUI (available in both x86 and x64 windows formats)
posted them online at Howard forums (nobody else ever have)
I don't listen to people on the web ..i go check for myself.
Usually when people say can't they are wrong.
Such as cloning the MEID on 2 of my old phones.. every where i looked i was told no.. "can't"
Well.. LOL
When i finished cloning them i showed some people what i did and laughed..
I had (back in '08) one LG phone and one Samsung phone (running different systems)
and i had my friend call me and text me.. both phones started ringing at once
and both received the text msg at the same time.
You don't believe everything you hear on the web
so why there is no 64 bit roms for this device and why every other sd410 phone with 1gb of ram is 32bit too?
jeez you guys really want to start with me..
look i give up, you all know more than me about 64bit code.
i give up LOL
can we get back to the main topic (the porting of Marshmallow to the phone)
you guys can keep quoting me saying you don't understand what i said (but you know i am wrong) LOL
that make sense ?
64bit is a debate all over the web.. if you have enough experience you have seen the matter argued before.
it's a hot topic so if someone brings it up don't be surprised to see some conflict.
it's sort of like saying the new versions of windows are ugly or not.. it's going to start some arguing.
the difference is i can post proof backing up my mouth (if i had to)
showing how people were wrong about 64bit being slower.
but about Android ? i never claimed to know.. all i said is let's not assume and check.
does that warrant an avalanche of mouthy replies ?
I simply said let's not jump to conclusions.
blame the guy saying that who didn't prove claims.. not me.
edit:
by the way since you guys seem so interested in replying back to me ?
how about answering one of the many topics were i asked for help ?
seems you guys know sooooo much about this yet i am still waiting like a week later to flash my phone LOL
Yes 64bit or not.... i still think Marshmallow would be interesting for our phone.
I know almost nothing about that update though so i have no idea if it's going to work
very well for our low spec phone.
which is why i came to hear from you guys that DO know this stuff
Honestly I have it (Marshmallow) on my N5 and its pretty decent. Certainly not worth a bump to 6.0 IMHO maybe 5.3??? Its just a very polished version of lollipop as far as I can see...
Sent from my XT1526 using Tapatalk
Thread cleaned of the stupidity and childish bickering... Back on-topic now thanks guys.
so what MameTozhio said is fact then ?
oh ok then..
well i change my mind then i see no point in getting this update my phone only has one gig of ram
and 64bit is only for devices with lots of ram..
childish bickering ?
or some guy making bold claims that no on is allowed to refute ?
edit:
By the way i proved it (and mods deleted it)
but for giggles i google'd it and hit no. 1
http://www.osnews.com/story/5768/Are_64-bit_Binaries_Really_Slower_than_32-bit_Binaries_
seems i am not the only one who actually checked LOL
and i quote the guy..
I wondered if it would be best to compile my applications in 32-bit mode or 64-bit mode. The modern dogma is that 32-bit applications are faster, and that 64-bit imposes a performance penalty. Time and time again I found people making the assertion that 64-bit binaries were slower, but I found no benchmarks to back that up. It seemed it could be another case of rumor taken as fact.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
xpmule said:
so what MameTozhio said is fact then ?
oh ok then..
well i change my mind then i see no point in getting this update my phone only has one gig of ram
and 64bit is only for devices with lots of ram..
childish bickering ?
or some guy making bold claims that no on is allowed to refute ?
edit:
By the way i proved it (and mods deleted it)
but for giggles i google'd it and hit no. 1
http://www.osnews.com/story/5768/Are_64-bit_Binaries_Really_Slower_than_32-bit_Binaries_
seems i am not the only one who actually checked LOL
and i quote the guy..
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Perhaps you should read more carefully...
I said that I had cleaned the thread of the stupidity and childish bickering.
Do you see your posts removed or are they still visible?
Clearly then, I wasn't referring to you.
i support you @xpmule, too many people talking everywhere without a proper knowledge
well i was saying that guy posted it should be slower pretty much and i thought hey you know what ?
Let's not jump to conclusions and wait and see.. Let's actually check.
And i tried to post some example about how 64bit myths are spread.
It's really up to each program out there as to whether it will benefit or not.
And if you listened to that guy earlier many of you would probably just oh well i don't want that update then.
With out even checking.. to see if it was better etc.
64bit vs 32bit touches a nerve on the web and i didn't want to stir up some drama for you guys here.
If i did then you all have my apologies
i say let's check it out and maybe do some benchmarks etc and see how it goes.
PS:
I am trying to leave this topic alone i don't want to agitate the mods (more than i prob have already)