Apple's A8 SoC likely carrying new 6-core PowerVR GPU, clocked at 1.4GHz with 1GB RAM

1235714

Comments

  • Reply 81 of 269

    brlawyer:

     

    Is your comment - "Currently, 1GB of RAM DOES impact ..." based on the fact that you have an iPhone 6 running iOS 8?

     

    If so, we want to know how you got one ahead of everyone else.

     

    If not, then your comment cannot be leveled against the iPhone 6 until you have it in your hand.

  • Reply 82 of 269
    froodfrood Posts: 771member
    Quote:

    Originally Posted by brlawyer View Post

     

     

    Of course it needs more RAM - I am tired of seeing Safari reloading EVERY SINGLE open tab whenever I use it.

     

    Unless we are supposed to install this again:

     

    http://tidbits.com/article/837


     But that makes Apple web usage statistics go way up because all the ads count as 'hits' again

  • Reply 83 of 269
    wizard69wizard69 Posts: 13,377member
    I really don't think you understand what RAM is and what it does in a computer.
    wmsfo wrote: »
    IFC the M8 chip is being used to separately process tasks.  Perhaps 1GB system RAM is sufficient in that case.
    M8 does nothing to lessen the need for more RAM.
    If that is the case, why add more system RAM? Just to say that you did - that make no sense.  Perhaps there is a power consumption issue with more system RAM?  Perhaps there is a heat issue with more system RAM? Is a 2GB RAM chip larger than a 1 GB RAM chip?
    RAM directly impact the performance of Apples iOS devices, that is the only concern Apple should have.
    Would someone please research and write about the task handling/processing between the system RAM, A8, M8, and iOS 8? - without violating your NDA of course.
    Why? Beyond that why not educate yourself, you can download XCode and the documentation yourself. Beyond that RAM has the same impact in iOS as it does in any other operating system.
    Is iOS 8 very efficient in handing off tasks to processors that excel at processing them - i.e. graphics, motion sensing, etc.? If that is the case - it would make sense that Apple would to the best balance - cost, user experience, battery consumption, heat, etc. - in term of system RAM. Perhaps 1 GB system RAM is the best balance ...
    IOS is very very good at using specialized processors but that has nothing to do with the need for more RAM.
    Until we understand the relationship between all the processors and system RAM everyone complaining about 1GB system RAM is just complaining about a number.
    Nope!!!! There seems to be two groups of people here. Those that don't understand how computers work claim that we don't need more RAM. Those that understand how computers work claim that we do need more RAM. See the problem here?
    If you have more information on why you think 1 GB system RAM is insufficient - I look for to your written explaination

    Not to be an ass but you wouldn't understand the explanation. I'm not trying to be a pain here but the forum is just not the place to get into this. Rather you need to do some research on computer architectures and what RAM is actually used for in a computer system. Once you understand this you can better understand why people want more RAM and hopefully with it better multitasking / app usage.
  • Reply 84 of 269
    Quote:

    Originally Posted by melgross View Post

     
    Quote:

    Originally Posted by digitalclips View Post



    Thanks for the info.



    I always recall that Steve had a secret team running Mac OS on Intel in parallel to the Power PC years before it was known. I can't help wonder if there might be a skunk works team deep underground already running OS X on an secret new Apple chip as we speak.




    I would be very surprised if Apple hasn't had OS X running on their ARM chips since the A5x. But running, and running usefully are two different things. I would love to see a lower priced, lower weight, longer battery life Macbook Air, of some sort. It possibly wouldn't need a fan, and the fan uses appreciable battery power, even if it only comes on occasionally. It also takes up a fair amount of space.



    I agree. I'd be shocked at the small cost of keeping a team around to make that happen. I am sure that they are running OS X on some sort of AppleARM chip, probably others too. I doubt the performance would be very tolerable and trying to run something like VMware or Parallels would probably be out of the question since they take a pretty good hit just having to emulate all the services and micro-core used on the PC clones (for lack of a better name) and they are already running on an x86 instruction set.

  • Reply 85 of 269
    wizard69wizard69 Posts: 13,377member
    If you follow my posts on this matter you will know I'm a big proponent of more RAM, especially in the larger iOS devices. This would however not solve all of Safaris problems though, I just need to point that out because more RAM doesn't fix bugs or intended behavior. That said Sadari is better in the iOS betas, but better is a long ways from not frustrating.

    brlawyer wrote: »
    Currently, 1GB of RAM DOES impact user experience across the board; particularly when using Safari, whose always-reloading behavior when visiting even basic websites is completely unacceptable. Unless the "geniuses" in this forum still want us to believe that this is NOT due to insufficient RAM, of course...

    Honestly I'm not even sure why people still argue more RAM wouldn't help. It is as if they don't have a clue as to how computers work and have never done anything remotely involved with two or more apps on iOS. For this go around I would have taken 2GB of RAM over the faster SoC we are getting.

    The other thing that people don't seem to realize here is that 2GB is a huge increase in available RAM to apps. Much of the current allotment of RAM is used for video, system and other tasks already running. Adding 1GB would be huge.
  • Reply 86 of 269
    Originally Posted by CanukStorm View Post

    The specs on this page list the iPhone 6 Plus as having 2GB of RAM.  Anybody comment on the validity of this?

     

    http://gpucpu.com/iphone-6-plus-detailed-processor-gpu-specificatios/


     

    Of course not. No one has one yet.

     

    Having said that, I hope it’s true.

  • Reply 87 of 269
    wizard69wizard69 Posts: 13,377member
    Oh please can we not be rational here? It is well known what RAM does for a system be it an RaspberryPI, some big iron Linux system, or a Mac running Mac OS/X. It is no different with iOS
    If the iPhone is merely the sum of its specs. This is the reductionist philosophy that years of commodity PC parts and "intel inside" have infected the tech world with. I'm not impressed.

    It isn't about specs it is about functionality. Honestly I'm not impressed with somebody that would post here and so try to dismiss the importance of RAM in a modern computer.
  • Reply 88 of 269
    wizard69wizard69 Posts: 13,377member
    If true it is a good thing for those that want to carry a brick around with them in their pocket. The same site though says that the 6 has only 1GB. If so that is prett discussing. But hey at least this is an indication that Apple at least understands the importance of RAM.
    canukstorm wrote: »
    The specs on this page list the iPhone 6 Plus as having 2GB of RAM.  Anybody comment on the validity of this?

    http://gpucpu.com/iphone-6-plus-detailed-processor-gpu-specificatios/
  • Reply 89 of 269
    melgross wrote: »
    I would be very surprised if Apple hasn't had OS X running on their ARM chips since the A5x. But running, and running usefully are two different things. I would love to see a lower priced, lower weight, longer battery life Macbook Air, of some sort. It possibly wouldn't need a fan, and the fan uses appreciable battery power, even if it only comes on occasionally. It also takes up a fair amount of space.
    Wasn't there something that the same proccesor on iPhone 1 (in a much larger then iPad device) was running OS X?

    The 1 gb ram is disappointing, the iPhone 6 and 6+ have same 1 gb, a 1.5 or 2 gb upgrade would have helped. Surely the new iPads need upgrade to.
  • Reply 90 of 269
    wizard69wizard69 Posts: 13,377member
    indymac wrote: »
    99% of iPhone owners don't know or care how much RAM it has.

    Nor should the majority care! The problem isn't RAM the number, but how it impacts usage and performance of the ipHones. These things all of those people care about.
  • Reply 91 of 269
    wizard69wizard69 Posts: 13,377member
    Why are you so defensive of Apples designs?

    It isn't unreasonable to expect better performance out of the hardware we buy from Apple year after year.
    wmsfo wrote: »
    Fuzzypaws:

    Are you an Apple Stockholder?

    If so, are you saying that Apple should forgo a potential 200M USD this quarter (based on your cost of 10 USD x 20M phones sold in the quarter - high range of estimates) just because you think the iPhone 6 should have 2GB system RAM?

    Can you answer the question on whether there are enough 2GB modules available to Apple so the iPhone 6 can have 2GB system RAM and still introduce in Sept 2014?

    Perhaps there are not enough at a reasonable cost/production rate for Apple to use?

    If there were not enough, are you saying that Apple should have waited to introduce the iPhone 6 until a 2GB module is available at a reasonable cost/production rate?
  • Reply 92 of 269
    Quote:



    Originally Posted by wmsfo View Post

     

    Fuzzypaws:

     

    Are you an Apple Stockholder?

     

    If so, are you saying that Apple should forgo a potential 200M USD this quarter (based on your cost of 10 USD x 20M phones sold in the quarter - high range of estimates) just because you think the iPhone 6 should have 2GB system RAM?

     

    Can you answer the question on whether there are enough 2GB modules available to Apple so the iPhone 6 can have 2GB system RAM and still introduce in Sept 2014?

     

    Perhaps there are not enough at a reasonable cost/production rate for Apple to use?

     

    If there were not enough, are you saying that Apple should have waited to introduce the iPhone 6 until a 2GB module is available at a reasonable cost/production rate?




    Quote:
    Originally Posted by wizard69 View Post



    Why are you so defensive of Apples designs?



    It isn't unreasonable to expect better performance out of the hardware we buy from Apple year after year.


     

    Exactly. We're not poo-pooing the hardware or the phone in general, this is a very specific and important issue. A shareholder should actually prefer long term thinking and brand development, over short term reductionist thinking focused on immediate profits this quarter. If the device becomes frustrating to use due to insufficient RAM, especially after the next version of iOS drops, that reduces resale value and hurts peoples' opinions of the product and the manufacturer. That in turn increases the likelihood that people jump ship for the competition when they Google why their phone is slow and constantly reloading everything in the browser, and see that RAM is the issue and the competition has more of it. The average person frankly doesn't put a lot of thought into how there is this awesome ecosystem and that a solution is likely coming down the line in a future phone, they are going to see how their /current/ phone /now/ has these problems and that's going to sit at the forefront of their mind.

  • Reply 93 of 269
    wizard69wizard69 Posts: 13,377member
    When you post like this all you are doing is displaying to the entire world your ignorance about computer systems.
    wmsfo wrote: »
    brlawyer:

    Is your comment - "Currently, 1GB of RAM DOES impact ..." based on the fact that you have an iPhone 6 running iOS 8?

    If so, we want to know how you got one ahead of everyone else.

    If not, then your comment cannot be leveled against the iPhone 6 until you have it in your hand.

    Sure it can be because RAM's impact remains the same. As long as RAM remains the same size the issues will remain the same. Oh by the way yes some of us are on iOS 8 betas and know very well what works well in those betas and what has been improved. Safari has been improved in many ways actually but still suffers from RAM problems.

    If you had any understanding of computer systems you would realize that even if Apple put a 12GHz CPU in the machine it would still suffer from not having enough RAM. The performance of the various processors in the machine do not make up for the lack of RAM.
  • Reply 94 of 269
    Quote:
    Originally Posted by wizard69 View Post



    If you follow my posts on this matter you will know I'm a big proponent of more RAM, especially in the larger iOS devices. This would however not solve all of Safaris problems though, I just need to point that out because more RAM doesn't fix bugs or intended behavior. That said Sadari is better in the iOS betas, but better is a long ways from not frustrating.

    Honestly I'm not even sure why people still argue more RAM wouldn't help. It is as if they don't have a clue as to how computers work and have never done anything remotely involved with two or more apps on iOS. For this go around I would have taken 2GB of RAM over the faster SoC we are getting.



    The other thing that people don't seem to realize here is that 2GB is a huge increase in available RAM to apps. Much of the current allotment of RAM is used for video, system and other tasks already running. Adding 1GB would be huge.



     

    Quote:

    Originally Posted by wizard69 View Post



    I really don't think you understand what RAM is and what it does in a computer.

    M8 does nothing to lessen the need for more RAM.

    RAM directly impact the performance of Apples iOS devices, that is the only concern Apple should have.

    Why? Beyond that why not educate yourself, you can download XCode and the documentation yourself. Beyond that RAM has the same impact in iOS as it does in any other operating system.

    IOS is very very good at using specialized processors but that has nothing to do with the need for more RAM.

    Nope!!!! There seems to be two groups of people here. Those that don't understand how computers work claim that we don't need more RAM. Those that understand how computers work claim that we do need more RAM. See the problem here?

    Not to be an ass but you wouldn't understand the explanation. I'm not trying to be a pain here but the forum is just not the place to get into this. Rather you need to do some research on computer architectures and what RAM is actually used for in a computer system. Once you understand this you can better understand why people want more RAM and hopefully with it better multitasking / app usage.



    What about the specialized GPU in the A8 chip?  You stated the Apple is very good at using specialized processors.  Why would Apple put a specialized GPU in a device if it did not help them with the "user experience"?

     

    Does it not stand to make a reasonable conclusion that Apple may have evaluated several "points of emphasis" and decided that 1GB system RAM was sufficient for the points it wants to emphasize?

     

    Everyone commenting about the amount of system RAM have not provided specifics where more system RAM would desirable - just saying Safari would work better is NOT a specific. A specific would be "more system RAM allows the CPU retail more system calls without ...".

     

    As you have not given specifics rather a general statement - "RAM directly impact the performance of Apples iOS devices, that is the only concern Apple should have." I will ignore your other comments.

     

    If you have some specifics, please enlighten us.

  • Reply 95 of 269
    MarvinMarvin Posts: 14,872moderator
    foggyhill wrote: »
    It seemingly only impacts Safari in a significant way, which is seemingly a memory hog when opening multiple tabs (though I  myself rarely open more than a few tabs so its no problem to me); maybe they fixed that in IOS 8.

    Was running Firefox on a 512 MB machine with a slow disk last year and had no problem running 10+ tabs. So, I have trouble believe you need that much memory to manage a few web pages.

    Mobile devices don't have swap space like desktops/laptops so once the RAM is out, that's it. A computer with swap has RAM + free drive space for memory. I just think they should use memory compression like they do with OS X. Every time a browser tab moves into the background, they can quickly compress it in RAM and decompress it otherwise. They could try to exclude active media from the compression step like a video playing in the background but most people wouldn't bother about that. If each tab gets its own memory, as soon as it's not active, compress it.
    I always recall that Steve had a secret team running Mac OS on Intel in parallel to the Power PC years before it was known. I can't help wonder if there might be a skunk works team deep underground already running OS X on an secret new Apple chip as we speak.

    Yeah they said Intel OS X was in the works for 5 years before launch. I'm sure they're testing options out. The biggest wins with ARM are price and being able to design the processor to suit. Apple would have much more control over the performance profiles at different price levels. They mentioned that they didn't like this about Intel because they suggest improvements to Intel and they implement the changes but sell the processors to their competitors too.

    The current ARM chips are around the level of 2009/2010 dual-core Macs and the latest GPUs will be around the same as the lower level Intel HD graphics. Intel made a pretty big jump recently though with Broadwell and their Core M processors now rival the ARM chip TDP but perform like the current Airs.

    When you consider Thunderbolt, all the software compatibility and the new performance per watt of Broadwell, ARM is mostly just about price and I'd personally pay the premium just to get the compatibility. I think they should keep it as a backup plan or just a way to keep Intel delivering the goods.
  • Reply 96 of 269
    wizard69wizard69 Posts: 13,377member
    I've noticed that much of this discussion has highlighted the needs of future iOS releases. That is a very real concern but I need to point out that iOS 8 beta actually feels better all around on my iPad 3. Maybe iOS 9 will undo all of that goodness, hard to tell really, but I just wanted to point out that not every OS transition goes backwards.

    fuzzypaws wrote: »
    Exactly. We're not poo-pooing the hardware or the phone in general, this is a very specific and important issue. A shareholder should actually prefer long term thinking and brand development, over short term reductionist thinking focused on immediate profits this quarter. If the device becomes frustrating to use due to insufficient RAM, especially after the next version of iOS drops, that reduces resale value and hurts peoples' opinions of the product and the manufacturer. That in turn increases the likelihood that people jump ship for the competition when they Google why their phone is slow and constantly reloading everything in the browser, and see that RAM is the issue and the competition has more of it. The average person frankly doesn't put a lot of thought into how there is this awesome ecosystem and that a solution is likely coming down the line in a future phone, they are going to see how their /current/ phone /now/ has these problems and that's going to sit at the forefront of their mind.

    For some users I think you grossly underestimate the importance of the ecosystem. That is a different issue than RAM though.
  • Reply 97 of 269
    wizard69wizard69 Posts: 13,377member
    Honestly you need to learn to read for content! There have been multiple explanations from many individuals that should clear this up for you.
    wmsfo wrote: »

    What about the specialized GPU in the A8 chip?  You stated the Apple is very good at using specialized processors.  Why would Apple put a specialized GPU in a device if it did not help them with the "user experience"?
    Special execution units are great for apps that use them. Nobody would argue otherwise. Hiwever they don't have a significant impact on the need for RAM.

    Does it not stand to make a reasonable conclusion that Apple may have evaluated several "points of emphasis" and decided that 1GB system RAM was sufficient for the points it wants to emphasize?
    As far as I know, no body here is in the loop when it comes to Apples decision making. There are all sorts of possibilities here many of which have nothing to do with making customers happy.
    Everyone commenting about the amount of system RAM have not provided specifics where more system RAM would desirable - just saying Safari would work better is NOT a specific. A specific would be "more system RAM allows the CPU retail more system calls without ...".
    Baloney. It has been pointed out again and again that iOS shows signs of running out of RAM when running Safari. Seriously how many times does the constant tab reloading have to be mentioned. By the way I'm the first to say that those reloads aren't always RAM related, sometimes Safari is suppose to reload the pages! The problem is all the page reloads, Safari crashes and other issues that result from the lack of RAM.
    As you have not given specifics rather a general statement - "RAM directly impact the performance of Apples iOS devices, that is the only concern Apple should have." I will ignore your other comments.
    Nice head in the sand approach here.
    If you have some specifics, please enlighten us.

    The problem is this, if you can't understand or grasp what has been already said then getting deeper into the specifics isn't going to help you one bit. If you can't grasp that iOS regularly runs out of RAM, especially with Safari then there is little we can do about the disjunction in your gray matter.
  • Reply 98 of 269
    wmsfo wrote: »
    brlawyer:

    Is your comment - "Currently, 1GB of RAM DOES impact ..." based on the fact that you have an iPhone 6 running iOS 8?

    If so, we want to know how you got one ahead of everyone else.

    If not, then your comment cannot be leveled against the iPhone 6 until you have it in your hand.

    I have an iPhone 5 as well as an iPad Air and BOTH have the same problem. But pray tell: why would it be ANY different (if not actually worse) with the iPhone 6? Or do you think Safari will miraculously use GPU RAM now?
  • Reply 99 of 269
    wizard69 wrote: »
    If true it is a good thing for those that want to carry a brick around with them in their pocket. The same site though says that the 6 has only 1GB. If so that is prett discussing. But hey at least this is an indication that Apple at least understands the importance of RAM.

    Ironically, Safari just had to reload this very page when I switched to the link above...in any case, I am not confident that the iP6 will have 2GB...will believe it when I see it.
  • Reply 100 of 269
    Quote:

    Originally Posted by brlawyer View Post





    Ironically, Safari just had to reload this very page when I switched to the link above...in any case, I am not confident that the iP6 will have 2GB...will believe it when I see it.

    The link you were referring to was referencing the iPhone 6 Plus.  I don't expect the iPhone 6 to get 2GB of RAM.  It would be nice but not banking on it.

Sign In or Register to comment.