Related
The other day I was cruising around amazon looking for an unlocked smartphone. I came across the BLU Studio X, the specs were striking similar to the Moto G 2nd gen with some better assets. With The Same 5.0" HD Display (720 x 1280) 294ppi, 8gb internal storage, 1gb of ram, 8mp primary camera [2mp front], and android lollipop. Also with some better assets like: a 1.3Ghz processor vs the 1.2Ghz processor on the G, expandable storage up to 64gb oppose to the 32gb limit on the G, 1080p video recording vs only 720p on The Moto G, 4G HSPA+ (Not Lte), Wi-Fi Direct, Dual Sim and a slightly lager battery of 2100 mAh for about $125 unlocked. But that's not even the phone I wanted to talk about. The real "game changer" here is the BLU Studio C 2015 Edition. Its pack the exact same punch as the BLU Studio X, but just at $99 Unlocked! Did I forget to mention that the BLU Studio C 2015 has a 3,000 mAh battery ?! It must be bulkier than the G right? Wrong! the BLU Studio C 2015 Is Only 9.4mm thick. 1.6 Thinner than the Moto G. Crazy right ? basically if your purchase this device you'll be getting a not-so-Motorola Moto G 2nd gen with slightly better perks and assests and a huge battery.
What am I losing?: The fact that its a Motorola (moto suite), dual front facing speakers, corning gorilla glass 3*, 1ppi
What am I gaining?: a 0.1 clock speed gain, up to 64gb expandable storage, dual sim, 1080p video recording, 4G HSPA+, Wi-Fi Direct, A 930 mAh battery gain, earphones, micro usb charging unit, free case,*comes with screen protector, phone comes in 6 different colors and $79 less you have to spend. ships with lollipop.note (the studio c 2015 has 293ppi)
Don't get me wrong I love the Moto series, but this phone really does put a road block in front of of the Moto G 2nd Gen.
Product website - http://www.bluproducts.com/index.php/studio-c
Purchase the Studio C 2015 - http://www.amazon.com/BLU-5-0-Inch-...TF8&qid=1432047643&sr=8-1&keywords=B00WN7L4IA
And because of MTK you gain no updates ever.
Also mtk performance is lower than snapdragon.
About SD card I've use my transcend 64gb microsd in the moto g and works fine
Its an MTK device, you only will have luck with MTK if you buy an Android One. also the GPU is pretty bad.
Sent from my Moto G 2014 using XDA Free mobile app
I agree that the qualcomm s4 is better than the MTK
And 64gb sd-cards a well supported by the Moto G. I woudn´t want to change....
It seems to not available here in the Netherlands... Besides Motorola is a much better supported brand!
Sent from my XT1068 using Tapatalk.
Are you sure ? @Lynse. check out the comparison, link - http://system-on-a-chip.specout.com...omm-Snapdragon-400-MSM8226-vs-MediaTek-MT6582
motoinspri said:
Are you sure ? @Lynse. check out the comparison, link - http://system-on-a-chip.specout.com...omm-Snapdragon-400-MSM8226-vs-MediaTek-MT6582
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
If you are talking about the processor, i was not saying that MTK6582 is has a bad performance, i believe it have the same performance as our Snapdragon 400, or close to it, a little less, can be. As for the GPU, Mali-400 is a pretty bad GPU today, if the site is right, its not even a Mali-400MP2 (the GPU used on the Galaxy S3), Mali-400 was the Galaxy S2 GPU, so its a 4 years old GPU. But i believe its a new version of this GPU, if its not, then its really bad.
Sent from my Moto G (2014) using XDA Free mobile app
Everybody disregard this thread. I purchased the Studio C and its absolutely terrible, its a bad phone overall. it feels extremely cheap. the screen touch isn't accurate. you can even see the layers within the display. this phone is a gimmick. it looks absolute great on paper for a budget smartphone, but doesn't meet the expectations at all. the only thing that is impressive is the 3,000 mAh battery. nothing else ... I would rather spend $79 more bucks for a phone inessentially the same specs besides the slightly better chipset than save $79 for a deceiving phone that is terrible. you Moto G owners made a great choice, its the best budget smartphone to date.
I've tried out similar devices. The lack of support due to the closed source chip sets is depressing. Always choose a device with open source and good support
Sent from my Moto G 2014 using XDA Free mobile app
@motoinspri
if you need better phone for the same price, look on Amazon Fire Phone ($179 on sale)
http://forum.xda-developers.com/fire-phone
Gorilla glass 3 alone is worth the extra $ of the Moto G 2014, imo.
well if put like this,then there are a lot of phones with higher specs and low prices than moto
but the thing is that primarily we do not get any good support in lieu of software
build quality is mostly low and even problematic with hardware
So to say I'm happy with my little moto,its quality and devs here:good:
Avoid BLU!
I fell for a Blu phone, it was a Studio 5 I think. It was riddled with bugs and in a year there was not one update. Everyone was clamoring for the kit-kat update they had promised for the phone. The date came and went. Finally, the president of Blu said in an interview that if you want an update just buy a new phone. I bought the moto g and recycled the blu.
Mediatek?
No, thanks...
Sent from my Moto G 2014 using XDA Free mobile app
I went for a Blu Studio 5.5 last year to replace my windows work phone, support sucked never got the promised Kitkat update, replaced it with a moto g 2014 and never looked back and was one of the first devices to get lollipop.
You want an alternative to a moto G 2014? Buy an asus zenfone 2 for $199 and get way better specs than your blu phone and the moto g 2014 combined nuff said.
Sent from my SAMSUNG-SM-N900A using XDA Free mobile app
By rivals, I mean devices (1) in the same size category (~5") and (2) in the same market class and/or spec range, such as:
Nexus 5X
HTC One A9
Motorola Moto G
Samsung Z3/J5/E5
What else?
In this thread, I'd like to avoid discussing larger phones (~5.5") or flagship devices that cost upwards of $400 (The HTC One A9 just squeaks in).
Speaking in broad strokes, given the specs and price it looks like the One X mops them all up in the spirit of the OnePlus One. The Motorola and the Samsungs are similarly priced but seriously lacking in specs. The Nexus 5X and HTC One A9 have equal or better specs, but cost quite a bit more. I'm trying to think of anything close to the value proposition of the X and I'm not coming up with much.
What say ye?
I think that Xiaomi Mi4C is pretty good competitor. Dimensions are almost the same. Mi4C has a bigger battery, a bit faster processor (SD808), usb type-C and IR blaster. However, OnePlus X has Amoled screen and sd-card slot (and 800Mhz LTE for EU users). I think that OnePlus X has also better OS and perharps longer update support.
Does it have to be a 2015 release? Expanding the base:
LG G2/Nexus 5: very similiar size + NFC + 32GB base but lacking sd expansion.
Xperia Z3 Compact: smaller screen + body with mostly similiar specs.
Galaxy S5 - ugly but is an otherwise functional phone at a good price
CafeKampuchia said:
By rivals, I mean devices (1) in the same size category (~5") and (2) in the same market class and/or spec range, such as:
Nexus 5X
HTC One A9
Motorola Moto G
Samsung Z3/J5/E5
What else?
In this thread, I'd like to avoid discussing larger phones (~5.5") or flagship devices that cost upwards of $400 (The HTC One A9 just squeaks in).
Speaking in broad strokes, given the specs and price it looks like the One X mops them all up in the spirit of the OnePlus One. The Motorola and the Samsungs are similarly priced but seriously lacking in specs. The Nexus 5X and HTC One A9 have equal or better specs, but cost quite a bit more. I'm trying to think of anything close to the value proposition of the X and I'm not coming up with much.
What say ye?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
rp3 said:
Does it have to be a 2015 release? Expanding the base:
LG G2/Nexus 5: very similiar size + NFC + 32GB base but lacking sd expansion.
Xperia Z3 Compact: smaller screen + body with mostly similiar specs.
Galaxy S5 - ugly but is an otherwise functional phone at a good price
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
+1 I think former flagships are a great alternative, since most of them continue on to become great mid-range phones.
Unfortunately, the Nexus 5 isn't available new anymore, except for the occasional eBay auction.
The Xperia Z3 Compact clearly isn't a ~5" device.
LG G2/G3 can be considered as rivals too !
No LTE in USA!, fingerprint scanner, nfc, ois....what is oneplus thinking? With this trend of lacking necessary features and increasing prices, it's doubtful oneplus will ever be more than a small player.
i would say Mi 4C would be the main competitor, with SD808, Wifi AC, bigger battery, and IR Blaster in its favour
OPX has AMOLED, Metal build, and MicroSD in its favour though
i would say the bigger battery and Wifi AC will hurt the OPX more than the chipset difference, apparently SD808 and SD801 CPU performance is about the same, though Adreno 418 is about 20% better than 330, even though Adreno 330 is "enough" for 1080p screens (quotation bcz enough is very subjective)
I'm having a real struggle here :/
Mi4c is missing band 20 LTE which rules out O2 in the UK
Sent from my One using Tapatalk
It's missing the LTE bands 12 and 17, which means it's a lousy phone for 4G networks in USA. At this point, it's still a better deal overall to just get the old OPO in the USA.
Akopps said:
It's missing the LTE bands 12 and 17, which means it's a lousy phone for 4G networks in USA. At this point, it's still a better deal overall to just get the old OPO in the USA.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Which is missing bands 2 & 12, so pick your poison.
LTE Bands: 1/3/4/7/17/38/40
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Source. OnePlus.net
What should I pick between one plus x and Moto x play, the price is almost the same. For performance the one plus should be better but the battery life on the x play should be amazing.. I don't know what to chose.
Sent from my XT1032 using Tapatalk
gabling23 said:
What should I pick between one plus x and Moto x play, the price is almost the same. For performance the one plus should be better but the battery life on the x play should be amazing.. I don't know what to chose.
Sent from my XT1032 using Tapatalk
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Plus x has SAMOLED , which is a strong point in itself. Also, SAMOLED means more battery life.
Sent from my 2014818 using Tapatalk
CafeKampuchia said:
Which is missing bands 2 & 12, so pick your poison.
Source. OnePlus.net
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Oh that's right. However, I am on AT&T network, so I care only about the band 17 right now, which OnePlus One supports. Anyways, with crippled LTE band support, the X is kind of a lousy proposition IMHO.
---------- Post added at 08:13 AM ---------- Previous post was at 08:03 AM ----------
CafeKampuchia said:
Which is missing bands 2 & 12, so pick your poison.
Source. OnePlus.net
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
CafeKampuchia said:
By rivals, I mean devices (1) in the same size category (~5") and (2) in the same market class and/or spec range, such as:
Nexus 5X
HTC One A9
Motorola Moto G
Samsung Z3/J5/E5
What else?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
In my opinion, the Asus Zenfone 2 and its derivatives is definitely a rival. My understanding is that the Intel-based Asus Zenfone 2 has very good SoC performance, probably above the Snapdragon 801, but below average battery life, screen brightness, and camera software. The Snapdragon 615 based Asus Zenfone 2 Laser has average SoC performance, but better battery life and better camera (screen is the same). Considering that both Zenfones start at $200 and have proper LTE support, they're definitely in the game. Moto G falls approximately into the same performance bracket at Zenfone 2 laser (actually slower a bit), but has class leading battery performance.
Another possibility, why not consider some of the discontinued Snapdragon 800/801 based smartphones? Considering the Snapdragon 808/810 fiasco, I think those are well worth checking out. For example you can find on eBay NEW and unlocked LG G2 (SD 800, no sd card) for around $160, Nexus 5 (SD800, no SD) for $180-200, LG G3 (SD 801, sd card) for $230, or Samsung Galaxy S5 (SD801, sd card) for just under $300. All of these roughly fall into the same performance bracket at OnePlus One/X, but offer specific versions with the LTE Band 17 used by AT&T in USA that the OnePlus X lacks.
And finally, speaking of Nexus 5X, early reviews suggest it's not all that great or the kind of a diamond in rough that Nexus 5 or OnePlus One used to be, in part thanks the slow storage performance because of the new encryption scheme and once again thanks to the SD808. Considering the price of the base Nexus 5X, I think you could do better with buying a OnePlus 2, which has all the same specs but more memory and slightly faster SoC.
Anandtech has a very thorough review of 5X:
http://anandtech.com/show/9742/the-google-nexus-5x-review
Akopps said:
The Asus Zenfone 2 Laser has average SoC performance, but better battery life and better camera (screen is the same).
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I can attest to the Zenfone 2 Laser's battery life. It has an insane capacity! One of my friends just bought the ZF2 Laser, and he constantly gets around 9-10 hrs SoT. And it's not even as if he keeps the screen on doing nothing, he puts it through light to moderate usage - playing light games, browsing, whatsapp, etc with wi-fi on the whole day, but the damn thing just keeps on going!
As far as the performance is concerned, the SD410 is doing a very satisfactory job. So far I've not seen any slowdowns/lags/stuttering whatsoever. So its going pretty smooth as of now.
What about the Huawei Honor 7? It has similar specs and also the price is almost the same (at least in Europe - 270 EUR vs. 300 EUR).
While we compare, what is the software update record of Asus, Huawei, Acer etc? I think Oneplus is going to support their devices for longer than any of those
Currently have a Nexus 5, not sure if it was right to "upgrade". Damn I am gonna miss wireless charging
it is not "upgrade". it is a "sidegrade"
The yu yutopia when it releases with SD 810 at the price of ₹21,000 32gb
Stop suggesting 5.5 phablets. This thread is about 5 in Phones.
Hi,
Im looking to buy a new phone but im worried which to choose lg g4 h818 (no bootloader) or the oneplus 2 (chinese variant) btw i live in KSA.
Lg g4 pros:
Curved QHD screen
Removable battery
Leather back
Awesome camera
Cons:
No bootloader unlock
No fingerprint
3gb ram rather than 4 gb
Oneplus 2
Pros:
4gb ram
Fingerprint sensor
Loads of roms
Cons:
Chinese version
Full hd screen rather than qhd
Has been rumored of heating issues
Pls help me out
Well you seem to know both pro's and con's of both these devices... Now it's entirely up to you to decide which one will suit you better
Sent from my A0001 using Tapatalk
I was between the same devices.
I choose the op2 because of this:
-Full HD screen : more battery and less GPU demanding
-SoC: 810 vs 808. That means ram lpddr3 vs lpddr4, adreno 418 (qHD) vs adreno 430 (FHD).
About heating, because of the rumors oneplus throttle the devices too fast, if you edited the thermal file with boeffla kernel you could have awesome performance, for more info about throttle pm me.
-Fingerprint.
-XDA community, not too much for no but it will grow up. Oneplus is contacting devs from XDA, that must be a good thing [emoji4] .
-Capacitive buttons, so it does not take space from the screen
-Alert slider is useful, but lg g4 volume buttons are very nice too.
-4gb vs 3gb, its not a real life difference but maybe it will be.
EDIT:- Better battery life. 3300mah vs 3000mah, also fhd vs qhd must make a difference.
About nfc, for almost 2 years i never use it on my nexus 5, so its not a problem for me.
Happy new year! Hope you can make the best decision, cheers.
Sent from my ONE A2005 using Tapatalk
Best stock experience g4
If you're not afraid of tweaking then go for op2
Sent from my ONE A2005 using Tapatalk
I sent an LGG4 back and bought a Oneplus Two and although the LG was a nice enough phone battery life was abysmal and don't worry about Qhd v Fhd I actually preferred the Fhd and you get much better battery life
Sent from my ONE A2003 using Tapatalk
Ok I just two days ago buy a brand new Moto X Style, my beloved MotoG3 who was root and run with Tesla rom + FireKernel who have a smaller and older battery is consumed so less battery ! It's just insane.
Moto X Style is heating battery like nothing.
I usually wait at least 2 month to be sure the phone I buy don't have trouble, but right now I just want to unlock it and install a real rom....
What do you think ?!
@Vink67 from what I've heard stock moto ROM offers better battery life than any custom.
aakashverma0007 said:
@Vink67 from what I've heard stock moto ROM offers better battery life than any custom.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
But I don't understand, battery gone like crazy !! Why ?!
Vink67 said:
But I don't understand, battery gone like crazy !! Why ?!
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Thanks to the QuadHD 5.7" display and 64bit processor. Moto X style do have a mediocre battery. But the TurboPower charger makes up for it.
Apart from battery, am sure you gonna love this phone.
I have a Moto G3 was well, it is very efficient with battery life. You do have to think though, you are going from a Snapdragon 410 to an 808 with a larger, higher resolution display.
The 808 has 6 cores instead of 4 and a much more powerful GPU. The 808 is also the big.LITTLE configuration. So you have 4 low power A53 cores and 2 powerful (battery consuming) A57 cores. The difference in power between the two chipsets is immense.
quakeaz said:
I have a Moto G3 was well, it is very efficient with battery life. You do have to think though, you are going from a Snapdragon 410 to an 808 with a larger, higher resolution display.
The 808 has 6 cores instead of 4 and a much more powerful GPU. The 808 is also the big.LITTLE configuration. So you have 4 low power A53 cores and 2 powerful (battery consuming) A57 cores. The difference in power between the two chipsets is immense.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Have you trying custom ROM ?
Vink67 said:
Have you trying custom ROM ?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I have used CM (then LineageOS), and AICP. They can offer some improvements in battery, but I am holding out for official Nougat. I don't find any of the custom ROMs to be as fluid and smooth as stock, so that is what I am using.
quakeaz said:
I have used CM (then LineageOS), and AICP. They can offer some improvements in battery, but I am holding out for official Nougat. I don't find any of the custom ROMs to be as fluid and smooth as stock, so that is what I am using.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Ok thx
I went from a Moto G 2015 to a Moto X Pure (North American version of Style) and that is my only real complaint... the battery life easily cut in half or more. Although some of the reasons for it are listed in previous posts, one is missing, the SD808 SOC's radio is a battery hog especially when signal is not optimal, a mediocre connection will kill your battery especially if you actually make or receive calls, but if you have great signal then it sips battery very efficiently.
The main battery drainers are the 5.7 QHD Super LCD display (this display panel is incredibly inefficient, but beautiful), the SD808's radio, the SD808's architecture (2+4 big.LITTLE setup in this chipset is much less efficient than anticipated, probably why the configuration was dropped), and the poor battery size choice (it should have been 20-33% larger) makes this device seem like a terrible "upgrade" to the Moto G, battery-wise at least, and in that regard it is correct.
But the very things that draw battery are it's strengths... the display is gorgeous, it can be seen clearly in full daylight and is incredibly vibrant and sharp, and side-by-side to the Moto G 2015 it makes it's little brother's display look like an old 20" tube TV vs a 55" 4k UltraHD display. The SOC may not be very battery friendly, but it is much more powerful and it's reception is excellent, even with poor signal it will hold service well, at the cost of battery life (note that Moto did NOT implement Jio VoLTE in this device, and will not, a significant letdown since it is working on similar Moto devices of that generation), and the QuickCharge 2.0 will refill the battery very quickly, around 75-90% in an hour if necessary.
It's kind of like comparing a Chevy Cruze to a Corvette, one is simple, reliable, and very fuel friendly, the other is a performance machine which sucks gas like nobodies business... but they are for different purposes entirely.
As far as custom ROMs go, I have not found one that gives better than near equal to stock... After trying a dozen or so ROMs and kernels, I went back to pure, unrooted, stock and haven't looked back in a few months. It isn't ideal, but until I can get a better all around device it will have to do.
It's been 3 days now I test SlimRom 6.0.1 Build 2 Stable version, the official release on SlimRom.org, not the beta one from a developer in XDA.
And I would say for now it's been pretty good, and better than original ROM.
More battery friendly.
Sent from my MotoG3 using XDA Labs
I currently am using a LeEco S3 with 3GB of RAM. I have decided to move on to a Moto G5 Plus since Best Buy has the pre-order deal with the $5 case. It ultimately comes down to how much I am spending. The 2GB version is $229. The 4GB version is $299. I don't want to cheap out yet at the same time I don't want to throw an extra hundred down and not notice a real difference multitasking wise. Would you say that the 2GB is good enough or am I better off spending the extra for the 4GB version? It sucks every review I've seen and read is specifically on the 4GB version.
fatesealer said:
I currently am using a LeEco S3 with 3GB of RAM. I have decided to move on to a Moto G5 Plus since Best Buy has the pre-order deal with the $5 case. It ultimately comes down to how much I am spending. The 2GB version is $229. The 4GB version is $299. I don't want to cheap out yet at the same time I don't want to throw an extra hundred down and not notice a real difference multitasking wise. Would you say that the 2GB is good enough or am I better off spending the extra for the 4GB version? It sucks every review I've seen and read is specifically on the 4GB version.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
2 GB is okay but your system would be using like 1.9 GB on an average.With upgrades to O more ram is likely going to be required.So it's better to go with 4 GB variant than have a lagging phone after updates.
I am a g4+ user with 3 GB RAM.
Lol I just did the same thing! Returned the S3 for the g5 plus 64gb. The S3 has weird lag even though it's processor is "better" so glad I switch cause this thing flies! Depends on your app usage but the 4gb model is necessary for heavy users and gamers! Casual use then go for the 2gb.
That's funny. I was wondering this but I already ordered the 2 GB one lol. That's me second-guessing myself. Currently using a Nexus 6 with a busted antenna(?).
Hi,
This is my oppion: 2GB of RAM is a joke from Motorola/Lenovo. Forget completly any Android 7 phone with less than 3GB of RAM!
I suffer a 2GB Moto G4 (not plus) for a year with only 2GB or RAM... just a constant lag.
2gb is too slow
I have brazilian version of Moto G5 Plus and for me until now is excellent 2 Gb of RAM
I have the 2GB version and for me it is more than enough. At most I have 3 or 4 apps going and I don't game on my phone. The most I'll tax it is using navigation with a podcast going or making a phone call. But if you're a heavier user then yeah the 4GB would be a better bet.
2 gb is plenty. It works great!
If you look around there are A LOT if articles out there explaining why anything over 2gb is pretty much useless.
Sent from my Moto G (5) Plus using Tapatalk
Developers surely are not targeting over 2GB yet as the vast majority of phones in use are 2GB or less. Maybe if you wanna switch between apps much, have a lot of web tabs open, etc, you will see benefit from more than 2GB? I bought 4GB RAM version because I want to be able to keep the phone for about 3 years, and I already had as my previous phone the OnePlus One, which needed to be replaced as I had used it for 3 years and the edges were starting to crack, battery is old, etc. I didn't want to DOWNGRADE to LESS RAM (not so logical reason, just I didn't feel like my new phone after three years should have less RAM than my old one).
I think I'd be happy with 2GB RAM phone. I kind of wish it had NFC because I think I'd like to be able to use Android Pay (though I never did actually use it when I had OnePlus One for 3 years?!!). I remember forgetting my wallet one time I went out and thinking how nice if I could pay with my phone, which I wouldn't forget.
To go big at the onset will cost you $70. Unless you wait until the phone's price gets under $70 it'll be an expensive upgrade later.
My phone, with four gigs, frequently runs with 1.8 to 2 gigs in use.
Plus the extra onboard storage that comes with the 4gig model is kinda sweet.
I'm not a big spender but the jump to the 300 model was easy for me to justify without me feeling like I was lying to myself as to why I wanted more.
fatesealer said:
I currently am using a LeEco S3 with 3GB of RAM. I have decided to move on to a Moto G5 Plus since Best Buy has the pre-order deal with the $5 case. It ultimately comes down to how much I am spending. The 2GB version is $229. The 4GB version is $299. I don't want to cheap out yet at the same time I don't want to throw an extra hundred down and not notice a real difference multitasking wise. Would you say that the 2GB is good enough or am I better off spending the extra for the 4GB version? It sucks every review I've seen and read is specifically on the 4GB version.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Go with the 4gb varient, you won't regret. [emoji4]
Sent from my Moto G (5) Plus using Tapatalk
Remember those e-machines that have the sticker saying "This machine is never obselete?" Yeah, you know how that turned out. You don't want your phone to be an e-machine saying that. I exchanged my 2GB model for a 4GB model simply because I am a heavy user, I had a lot of reloading apps in multitasking; no regrets there on upgrading. It depends, though: unless you're a heavy user like me (games, mulit window, chrome, youtube, ect memory hungry apps) you won't see a major difference. Still, more is better, and choosing the 4GB of memory over the 2GB would be future proofing for updates, such as the upcoming Android O and Android 7.1 (that is if Lenovo doesn't drop us like it dropped the 2015 Moto G). In general, with more RAM, more apps can stay open, and games, if you play them, will run just a bit better if they are memory heavy. You won't notice anything if an app opens right where you left it, but you will notice if it reloads on you. Nevertheless, even standard issued apps like Chrome and YouTube use a lot of memory. I'd say shoot for the 4GB RAM and 64GB Storage. It's better for the long run, and really you'll want it soon enough.
tl;dr it depends, but futureproofing is a good idea.
Defiantly go for the 4gb variant.
Depends on your usage. I tend to use 2-3 apps at a time and close them regularly. Besides, I don't use the phone for gaming.
If you plan on keeping tons of apps in memory and expect them to be there after 2 hours, yeah, 4GB is the way to go.
bornlivedie said:
Depends on your usage. I tend to use 2-3 apps at a time and close them regularly. Besides, I don't use the phone for gaming.
If you plan on keeping tons of apps in memory and expect them to be there after 2 hours, yeah, 4GB is the way to go.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
2GB of RAM is just dandy for any smartphone application. Even games.
There are a few reasons you find more memory on phones; some good, some not-so-much.
RAM is Cheap. Really cheap these days. In the days of 32-bit CPUs, there was no practical value to offering more than 3GB RAM, like my Samsung Note Pro 12.2 tablet here. But with 64-bit processors, 4GB is a few bucks more than 2GB. Naturally, manufacturers don’t want you to know this. After all, even if it’s $2.00 a phone, if you’re Apple, that’s $200 million extra profit in a year.
Marketing Wars. Consumers are a simple people.. they don’t really know how stuff works. So basic numbers sell. A 4GB phone just sounds like twice as much as a 2GB phone. A 20Mpixel camera sounds so much better than a 12Mpixel camera — even though the top phone cameras right now are 12Mpixel cameras (the iPhone 7 is also a 12Mpixel camera, but not on the top, its sensor is too small).
Multitasking. The rule of thumb for Windows, at least, used to be 2GB per CPU core. Which means my PC here ought to have at least 12GB. I have 64GB… no problem. But if you extend this to Smartphones, pretty much no one has 2GB per core (and yeah, there are 8 core Smartphone chips, but most of those are big.LITTLE designs, they only normally use four cores at once). Neither Android nor iOS are as memory-hungry as Windows, and we’re not running a full Photoshop or Altium (my EE CAD software) or AutoPano Giga (the reason I have 64GB on my desktop). A typical Android application can ask for up to 48MB of RAM, no more. But there’s a special way to ask for hundreds of MB of RAM (considered impolite), and native apps can make Linux calls and get all they want. And you can actually have them all runinng at the same time. So if you’re a power user, you may want more than 2GB. But it’s not one app, it’s having a faster system with everything running.
High Density Screens. When I had a smartphone with 256MB RAM, I also had a 640x480 screen. My LG V10 today has 4GB RAM, but it’s also got a 2560x1600 screen. So does a 13x increase in screen resolution need a 16x increase in memory? Not exactly. On Android, your apps have to deal with all kinds of different phones, and most apps don’t need to directly interface with allocating screen bitmaps or anything, any more than a web browser does. But iOS is based on pixels and bitmaps, and also, there were very few models. So every software compamy knew exactly what resource they had. Then the iPhone 6 Plus came out, with the same 1GB as all sorts of other Apple phones. Only, the screen was 1920x1080 resolution. And all screen drawing was actually done in 1242 2208x1242 and then downscaled to 1920x1080. Bottom line: the overhead too enough extra memory over any other 1GB iPhone that some things just broke. Which is why they put 2GB into the iPhone 7.
So if you’re an iPhone user, your only choice is 2GB today in a new model. That’s exactly the right amount, since the memory size will drive software development. And you don’t have the option for more, anyway. For Android, 2GB is a good amount for 2017. I’m not really convinced I need more than that. Then again, I haven’t used up half of the 64GB internal flash on my V10, and the 256GB microSD card is mostly full of photos and music. Not critical, but nice to have.
Sent from my Moto G (5) Plus using Tapatalk
mindmajick said:
2GB of RAM is just dandy for any smartphone application. Even games.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
This is true, any app from the Play Store will run just fine even with 1GB of ram.
But what I was talking about was the fact that most people just leave a ton of apps open and expect them to be that way for long periods of time without redrawing the entire app again.
If you leave open2 games, chrome, whatsapp, messenger spotify, play store, gmail, outlook, evernote, etc... and expect every single of them to be open, you're gonna have a hard time with just 2GB of ram.
That's why 4GB of ram is necessary.
I do not open more than 4-5 apps at a time and tend to close them right after I'm done with them, so 2GB is plenty, even for future versions of Android (if we trust that they will maintain the same line of work for future versions).