{
"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"
}
What does this mean for us? Possible that we only have 384 megs of ram?
and this is a dev issue how? it belongs in the Q&A section.
Since a lot of people here are trying to figure out how to free up ram up to the 512 limit ( or even close to it) it could belong here.
This has been discussed at length how much ram ourphones have. Posting a picture of a vzw ad does not helped dev's do anything with freeing up our ram.
Sent from my SAMSUNG-SGH-I897 using XDA App
Hmm, just checked gsmarena and there is nothing on the ram of the fascinate, so this might just be true. O.O On gsmarena, it shows as all the other galaxy s phones with 512 mb of ram.
if it is, that kinda sucks, even though you get camera flash, i would gladly take the extra 130mb~ or so of ram :/
Can I just make a quick point here without stepping on anyone's feet?
When you buy a computer advertised to have 4gb of ram, do you actually get to use all 4gb of that ram? No. Your computer takes some of it and divides it up for other purposes. Some is strictly for the OS, some goes and get dedicated to your GPU, and the rest you get to use. The story is the same for our phones. There is a 512mb chip in there for ram. You will only get to use ~380mb of it.
Same for a hard drive. As I've said once before...
Miztaken1312 said:
Sure you buy a 1TB hard drive, but you actually only get to use around 850GB of it due to formatting and whatnot.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
It's all there, you just won't ever get to use it all for yourself.
miztaken1312 said:
Can I just make a quick point here without stepping on anyone's feet?
When you buy a computer advertised to have 4gb of ram, do you actually get to use all 4gb of that ram? No. Your computer takes some of it and divides it up for other purposes. Some is strictly for the OS, some goes and get dedicated to your GPU, and the rest you get to use. The story is the same for our phones. There is a 512mb chip in there for ram. You will only get to use ~380mb of it.
Same for a hard drive. As I've said once before...
It's all there, you just won't ever get to use it all for yourself.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
That is cuz how microsoft's file system, NTFS, which counts 1024 kb = 1 mb. That is why it is off. This has nothing to do with NTFS. This is most likely that the ram isnt there. If what you said is the case, that would mean all of the galaxy s phones would be advertised as 304 mb, cuz that is all the is usable at stock.
And your hard drive comparison, thats because for 1 TB to show up in windows, it would have to be 1024 GB instead of the normal 1000 GB just because NTFS has a different way of counting bytes.
miztaken1312 said:
Can I just make a quick point here without stepping on anyone's feet?
When you buy a computer advertised to have 4gb of ram, do you actually get to use all 4gb of that ram? No. Your computer takes some of it and divides it up for other purposes. Some is strictly for the OS, some goes and get dedicated to your GPU, and the rest you get to use. The story is the same for our phones. There is a 512mb chip in there for ram. You will only get to use ~380mb of it.
Same for a hard drive. As I've said once before...
It's all there, you just won't ever get to use it all for yourself.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
No, that is a really terrible analogy. You buy a 1TB hard drive. You get 1TB, counted in decimal. Just because you don't comprehend the difference between binary and decimal doesn't mean you're suddenly losing space. IT IS THE SAME AMOUNT OF SPACE.
Pretend I point to a can of paint and say it is navy blue. Some other guy comes along and says it is actually 000080 in RGB Hex value. You return your can of pain to the store and yell at the manager that you didn't get navy blue.
That's pretty much what you're saying about hard drives. You are not losing anything at all. Period. End of discussion. A computer simply interprets bits in a different numbering system than what we are used to (binary vs. decimal). There is no magic. There is no loss.
Likewise, your 4GB of RAM analogy is also incredibly flawed. When I buy 4GB of RAM, do I get 4GB? Yes, absolutely. There is exactly 4096KB of RAM there. I can have it sitting on my desk and there is 4GB there. I can install it in my machine and there is 4GB there. What it is used for is irrelevant. It is still 4GB that I paid for. I know that for a fact.
For our phones, we do not know for sure that there is exactly 512MB of RAM and, even if we did, we do not know if there is exactly 208MB of RAM being used for system processes or dedicated to the GPU. It could just be reserved for absolutely no purpose or it could not exist at all (after all, 208MB of RAM is an absurdly large amount of RAM to use for the system when we're still using EVEN MORE for android processes we can clearly see in any decent task manager). You don't know and neither do I.
It has nothing to do with the NTFS file system. It has to do with how the OS counts (megabyte vs mebibyte - base 10 vs base 2).
In regards to RAM, PC manufacturers do state if the GPU is using shared memory. Other than a non-discrete GPU, RAM in a computer isn't typically statically reserved.
The Galaxy S has never had 384~ MB available to the user. The most that can be squeezed out at present, and still have a fully functional phone, is 340~ MB.
So perhaps a developer has more to say about this... since they DEVELOP? It is awful lot of RAM to be used for unknown stuff
Eh, he still has a point. There's 512 there, just some of it is used for the system. I forgive Samsung for this since all android phones (heck, all OS's) suffer this phenomena.
I read somewhere that Samsung chose to statically allocate it rather than dynamically, just to really increase stability. So the cappy may be worse but still you always see this in some form
Sent from my SAMSUNG-SGH-I897 using XDA App
Then why Galaxy Tab shows 444 of available RAM?
Because that's a tablet?
Sent from my SAMSUNG-SGH-I897 using XDA App
The specs of the Galaxy S and Galaxy Tab are the same, apart from the screen resolution.. Even the Quadrant scores are the same.
DirtySoul said:
The specs of the Galaxy S and Galaxy Tab are the same, apart from the screen resolution.. Even the Quadrant scores are the same.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
You just said the RAM was different.
Anyways, that doesn't change my point that some RAM is always taken by the system OS. Android is a little unique in that each hardware distributor is allowed to tweak the OS so the level of system RAM reserved changes but its still there always
Sent from my SAMSUNG-SGH-I897 using XDA App
fatttire said:
You just said the RAM was different.
Anyways, that doesn't change my point that some RAM is always taken by the system OS. Android is a little unique in that each hardware distributor is allowed to tweak the OS so the level of system RAM reserved changes but its still there always
Sent from my SAMSUNG-SGH-I897 using XDA App
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
They said the amount of *AVAILABLE* RAM shows differently. Insinuating that when two pieces of hardware that are identical show different amounts of available RAM (available, not physically present) that there is something else going on that we the user aren't aware of.
Unknowns like this lead to people asking questions. People asking questions lead to answers. Answers lead to optimizations by brilliant XDA developers. Brilliant XDA developers making optimizations lead to terribly happy users like myself.
So it's in the interest of everyone posting in these forums to ask questions and try to come up with possible answers besides "No".
Yes, we know OSes use RAM and allocates it to various things. I think the issue as stated by others already is that we don't know how MUCH RAM is being used by the OS in our case.
If one device says we have 340 MB RAM available, and another almost identical device says 444 MB RAM available then that means it's POSSIBLE that our brilliant XDA developers could discover how to free up another 100 MB RAM to do fascinating things with.
It's NOT possible for them to discover that if people asking questions and helpful suggestions are shut down by negative people simply stating "NO".
https://github.com/cmsgs/android_device_samsung_galaxys/blob/master/config
you can go here and check out the reserved memory allocation. See line 766 and 1394 under "reserved memory config." the reserved mem adds up to approx. 140 mb. give or take a few. That would put us pretty close to 512. Some of that can be freed up as has been done on the i9000 forum. They have successfully freed up 40-50 mb to be used as free ram, although freeing up too much from certain locations can have negative results such as hindering 720p playback. See speedmod froyo in the i9000 forum for details. [KERNEL] SpeedMod Froyo 340MB RAM Optimized + Sharpness fix by Hardcore. I also think sztupy, developer of z4mod (I believe) had something to do with it.
Just a matter of time and hopefully we will have the same.
I know they're both advertised as having 512MB, but the Tab has more physical RAM than the phone. You can find a post somewhere in the forum talking about the memory chip configuration. The Tab has 128MB more than the phone. That's the primary reason the Tab has so much more available memory.
crazililazn said:
That is cuz how microsoft's file system, NTFS, which counts 1024 kb = 1 mb. That is why it is off. This has nothing to do with NTFS. This is most likely that the ram isnt there. If what you said is the case, that would mean all of the galaxy s phones would be advertised as 304 mb, cuz that is all the is usable at stock.
And your hard drive comparison, thats because for 1 TB to show up in windows, it would have to be 1024 GB instead of the normal 1000 GB just because NTFS has a different way of counting bytes.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I just had to chime in - to satisfy the MS/HDD argument, an even better analogy: You purchase a Dell computer that is advertised to have a 500gb HDD. It arrives at your door only for you to find that (GASP!) the Windows install took 10gb, leaving you with only 490gb.
I believe that most if not all mobile handset manufacturers do this to some extemt. My Droid Incredible had 16gb of onboard storage advertised. They didn't mention that 4gb of that was reserved for the actual Android OS. It honestly never crossed my mind to feel swindled - it's just how it is.
That being said, I grow tired of this thread popping up as bumped when I check the Dev Forums for updates. While this discussion certainly has merit, it's nothing new to developers, nor does it have merit for them in particular.
Mods, can we get this thread locked or moved?
Z4mod is from Z4ziggy
tiger4j said:
https://github.com/cmsgs/android_device_samsung_galaxys/blob/master/config
you can go here and check out the reserved memory allocation. See line 766 and 1394 under "reserved memory config." the reserved mem adds up to approx. 140 mb. give or take a few. That would put us pretty close to 512. Some of that can be freed up as has been done on the i9000 forum. They have successfully freed up 40-50 mb to be used as free ram, although freeing up too much from certain locations can have negative results such as hindering 720p playback. See speedmod froyo in the i9000 forum for details. [KERNEL] SpeedMod Froyo 340MB RAM Optimized + Sharpness fix by Hardcore. I also think sztupy, developer of z4mod (I believe) had something to do with it.
Just a matter of time and hopefully we will have the same.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Related
I just installed the JM2 firmware, and was surprised to see a new Samsung widget task manager (which is actually really good! =O).
However, once I opened the task manager and went to the 'Summary' tab, the RAM information lists it out of 326mb. For example, at the moment it's showing 258mb out of 326mb used...
Is there some separate ram locked away? As I thought the Galaxy S had 512mb...
So anyone know what the deal is with the 326mb listed instead of 512mb?
Need Froyo to address 512mb.
Next time, please use the search button. It's startin to be a pain to write this over and over again (and not just me.)
The device was taken apart to bits countless times, it does contain 512MB RAM.
Why can't you see it all? the software doesn't show it. YET. Remember that the original JF3 firmware only showd 256.
Pika007 said:
Next time, please use the search button. It's startin to be a pain to write this over and over again (and not just me.)
The device was taken apart to bits countless times, it does contain 512MB RAM.
Why can't you see it all? the software doesn't show it. YET. Remember that the original JF3 firmware only showd 256.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Ah, apologies.
So does that mean currently the Galaxy S isn't actually using all its RAM due to the firmware not allowing it? Kind of strange, didn't know there was anything preventing the use of it at all since the Desire and Nexus One were happy enough with 512mb on Eclair.
Two queries though in relation to Pikas post -
I believe that this issue was uncovered over on GSM Arena. I think Samsung at the time assured everybody that the odd RAM results was just a firmware bug that would be resolved on release products.
So we have a release product where there are still problems with the memory and GPS.
Secondly, I thought it was the kernel that limits the memory to 256 through a Himem flag? Why is then that people are now seeing 326 and not 256? Is it a half way fix? Has the kernel changed?
Your question is not dumb at all.
No phone depends on Froyo to use more than 256mb of RAM.
Even if our phone have 512MB of Ram, we probably won't have so much available.
Many phone always have some ram used by the radio hardware.
I don't know if Samsung will be able to reduce radio (GSM, 3G etc) memory usage.
326MB is maybe the maximum we will get.
I bet we'll see 386-400~ after froyo.
The system is more memory efficient.
If it says 512 it should display 512.
The problem is that when you open the task manager it displays 258/386. I thought it was using the remaining RAM for VIDEO. If its not, then we should see a 512 no matter how much the OS consume. It can even be 500/512 but it should say 512.
I hope Samsung fixes this soon as they sold me a phone with no working LEDs and less RAM??!!
darcjrt said:
I hope Samsung fixes this soon as they sold me a phone with no working LEDs and less RAM??!!
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
My sgs has working LEDs. The screen and the menu/back buttons. If yours are not working, the phone is broken.
Sent with my Personal Dis-organizer GT-I9000
What's wrong with 326mb ram my hero at most shows around 110 and I'm on froyo not to forget
MacaronyMax said:
What's wrong with 326mb ram my hero at most shows around 110 and I'm on froyo not to forget
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
That's not the prob. In Samsung's task manager it's showing the entire phone has a MAXIMUM of 326mb RAM, and obviously much less free.
On Advanced Task Killer I usually have between 70-140mb free, not that much different from my old Hero.
As has been pointed out this may be due to the Galaxy S's use of 2 different types of RAM, with 128mb OneRAM. I can only assume this is dedicated to video.
This would then make sense for the 326mb RAM listed in most applications, with the extra 60mb or so locked away for Android (326mb + 128mb + Android reserved = 512mb).
Still kind of weird how Samsung has made the phone...I was trying my friend's new desire and it listed in Advanced Task Killer as usually having about 240mb free while mine had 100mb free.
I posted originally at [Q] Amount of RAM? under Galaxy S I9000 Q&A , but I guess its relevant to this post as well.
There is new information to indicate that perhaps Galaxy S doesn't have 512MB of RAM after all. Click on the above link .
Samsung Open-Source may hold the key..
Samsung have released the kernel source code for the GT-I9000, and it helps a little bit with trying to decipher what's going on.
From what I can tell, based on specs and previous posts, the SGS has 384MB of -normal- RAM, and 128MB of "OneDRAM".
OneDRAM is a dual-port memory, which means that multiple chips can be connected to it, and using it at the same time. For example, the phone main CPU and a graphics co-processor could both be sharing this memory and using it to communicate with each other. For more details on what OneDRAM is, I recommend trying google.
From what I can tell, the OneDRAM is used for a few things such as video memory, shared communication buffers with the phone hardware etc.
There are a few places that hint at where this memory may be going, the first of which is the kernel configuration:
CONFIG_ANDROID_PMEM_MEMSIZE_PMEM = 16384
CONFIG_ANDROID_PMEM_MEMSIZE_PMEM_GPU1=8192
CONFIG_ANDROID_PMEM_MEMSIZE_PMEM_ADSP=1800
CONFIG_VIDEO_SAMSUNG_MEMSIZE_FIMC0=12288
CONFIG_VIDEO_SAMSUNG_MEMSIZE_FIMC1=1024
CONFIG_VIDEO_SAMSUNG_MEMSIZE_FIMC2=12288
CONFIG_VIDEO_SAMSUNG_MEMSIZE_MFC0=32768
CONFIG_VIDEO_SAMSUNG_MEMSIZE_MFC1=32768
CONFIG_VIDEO_SAMSUNG_MEMSIZE_TEXSTREAM=10240
=> These parameters describe approx 128MB of space that is being reserved at boot time for the GPU, DSP, Camera(s), and communicating with the phone hardware.
I'm not sure yet whether all of that memory comes out of OneDRAM or not (I haven't spent too long looking into it, and I'm not really much of a kernel guy).. however, it seems that linux-2.6.29/arch/arm/plat-s5pc11x/bootmem.c might offer a few more hints as to where it goes, if anybody's keen to look.
I seem to have gotten a little bit off-track, but basically, it seems that yes, the phone does have 512MB of RAM. It's just that some of it appears to be "locked away" for special use before anything else can get at it. This is probably because the coprocessor(s?) require blocks of contiguous physical memory, and achieving that would not be able to be guaranteed if standard memory allocation techniques were used. Maybe someone with more of a clue than I can help fill in some more of the blanks with the above...
Regardless, I don't think that the apparent discrepancy is anything to worry about. The SGS is an awesome phone, and that will remain the case whatever the amount of RAM it tells you is "free" (well, within reason I guess). Go and and enjoy it for what it is
Intratech said:
Need Froyo to address 512mb.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
False.
With Froyo you'll be getting a total RAM of 304Mb.
You do know that basing a statement from what you see in pre-alpha/alpha firmwares is a really bad idea, right?
gundyman said:
Samsung have released the kernel source code for the GT-I9000, and it helps a little bit with trying to decipher what's going on.
From what I can tell, based on specs and previous posts, the SGS has 384MB of -normal- RAM, and 128MB of "OneDRAM".
OneDRAM is a dual-port memory, which means that multiple chips can be connected to it, and using it at the same time. For example, the phone main CPU and a graphics co-processor could both be sharing this memory and using it to communicate with each other. For more details on what OneDRAM is, I recommend trying google.
From what I can tell, the OneDRAM is used for a few things such as video memory, shared communication buffers with the phone hardware etc.
There are a few places that hint at where this memory may be going, the first of which is the kernel configuration:
CONFIG_ANDROID_PMEM_MEMSIZE_PMEM = 16384
CONFIG_ANDROID_PMEM_MEMSIZE_PMEM_GPU1=8192
CONFIG_ANDROID_PMEM_MEMSIZE_PMEM_ADSP=1800
CONFIG_VIDEO_SAMSUNG_MEMSIZE_FIMC0=12288
CONFIG_VIDEO_SAMSUNG_MEMSIZE_FIMC1=1024
CONFIG_VIDEO_SAMSUNG_MEMSIZE_FIMC2=12288
CONFIG_VIDEO_SAMSUNG_MEMSIZE_MFC0=32768
CONFIG_VIDEO_SAMSUNG_MEMSIZE_MFC1=32768
CONFIG_VIDEO_SAMSUNG_MEMSIZE_TEXSTREAM=10240
=> These parameters describe approx 128MB of space that is being reserved at boot time for the GPU, DSP, Camera(s), and communicating with the phone hardware.
I'm not sure yet whether all of that memory comes out of OneDRAM or not (I haven't spent too long looking into it, and I'm not really much of a kernel guy).. however, it seems that linux-2.6.29/arch/arm/plat-s5pc11x/bootmem.c might offer a few more hints as to where it goes, if anybody's keen to look.
I seem to have gotten a little bit off-track, but basically, it seems that yes, the phone does have 512MB of RAM. It's just that some of it appears to be "locked away" for special use before anything else can get at it. This is probably because the coprocessor(s?) require blocks of contiguous physical memory, and achieving that would not be able to be guaranteed if standard memory allocation techniques were used. Maybe someone with more of a clue than I can help fill in some more of the blanks with the above...
Regardless, I don't think that the apparent discrepancy is anything to worry about. The SGS is an awesome phone, and that will remain the case whatever the amount of RAM it tells you is "free" (well, within reason I guess). Go and and enjoy it for what it is
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
But, has anyone ACTUALLY confirmed we don't have 512MB of physical ram.. I've seen lots of guessing, but I haven't actually seen any proof yet. So has someone confirmed it by actually checking the hardware..
andrewluecke said:
But, has anyone ACTUALLY confirmed we don't have 512MB of physical ram.. I've seen lots of guessing, but I haven't actually seen any proof yet. So has someone confirmed it by actually checking the hardware..
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Has anyone actually confirmed that we DO have 512MB ?? I am yet to see any firmware reaching over 384MB, and all the evidence out there suggest otherwise . Samsung says it has 512MB RAM, but they never said all of that memory is available for Applications. So it could very well be 384MB regular RAM (available for Apps and system) while rest is reserved for specialized hardware. Technically that is still 512MB *RAM*, given that manufacturers have a tendency to overstate numbers and specs, I'm not going to take Samsung's word for it...
I hope at least some of that is being used by the OS.
PhoenixFx said:
Has anyone actually confirmed that we DO have 512MB ?? I am yet to see any firmware reaching over 384MB, and all the evidence out there suggest otherwise . Samsung says it has 512MB RAM, but they never said all of that memory is available for Applications. So it could very well be 384MB regular RAM (available for Apps and system) while rest is reserved for specialized hardware. Technically that is still 512MB *RAM*, given that manufacturers have a tendency to overstate numbers and specs, I'm not going to take Samsung's word for it...
I hope at least some of that is being used by the OS.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I've never read where Samsung says they've used 512MB RAM, I've only read where people claim they've said (aka nothing official). So, we aren't even taking Samsung's word, we are taking a 3rd party's on the manufacturer's non-binding, private word is.
@
It's just that some of it appears to be "locked away" for special use before anything else can get at it.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Obviously, I'd prefer 512MB plus this 128 locked away separate, but this sounds like an elegant solution if correct. Also, it goes a long way to explain how the SGS can be pretty snappy in areas like gaming while maybe keeping other vital parts open and smooth like the 3G radio.
*EDIT* I'm reading now that new pressers have released more official information on newer Galaxy S models, still I've googled for them and even gone to Samsung site, still haven't viewed anything with my own eyes from Samsung.
Well, that's my point.. The problem I'm seeing is that I've seen quotes for OneNand and OneDRAM in many places, but it is based on random diagrams for other phones, or rumors... I'm simply interested in knowing the truth, but am growing increasingly concerned by the growing number of claims about this phone, which are being repeated, but after some research, many I've found seem to be based on information which isn't actually proof (and often, seems to be based on stuff such as "I heard the SGS has...".
As I said, SEMC was running around claiming it was OneNand (which isn't even RAM), using claims which I've never seen proven. OneDRAM seems more likely, and it would mean we basically have 512MB of RAM (oneDRAM seems as though it would be usable for normal RAM too), but I'd still like to know for sure..
alovell83 said:
I've never read where Samsung says they've used 512MB RAM, I've only read where people claim they've said (aka nothing official). So, we aren't even taking Samsung's word, we are taking a 3rd party's on the manufacturer's non-binding, private word is.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Samsung Captivate (scroll down to Memory section), is that enough proof for Samsung's claim ??
I thought in read in the specs before buying this phone that it had 512 MB of RAM.
When I check in my task manager it says I only have 326 MB of RAM total..
Don't tell me we (Canadians) have less ram than everyone else??
it is not just the Canada version
all SGS phones have 512 of RAM but only 326 available for end users the rest are used by the phone services
Isn't it a 2.1 thing?
Sent from my GT-I9000 using Tapatalk
The kernel supports up to 326MB RAM. Newer versions support full 512MB.
I guess when Froyo is out officially we will have full 512MB support.
Its sounds to me this phone was made for frayo and 2.1 is just each what they had to go with the Iphone 4 would have gotten alot of sgs customers If the galaxy didn't release when it did
Sent from my GT-I9000M using XDA App
phandroid.com has a couple of shots of a Leaked Samsung Fascinate Equipment Guide . The second photo is quite interesting, it says
Onboard memory : 512MB Flash/384MB RAM
What does that mean ?? We have 384MB of RAM after all ??
{
"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"
}
PhoenixFx said:
phandroid.com has a couple of shots of a Leaked Samsung Fascinate Equipment Guide . The second photo is quite interesting, it says
Onboard memory : 512MB Flash/384MB RAM
What does that mean ?? We have 384MB of RAM after all ??
That's another phone.. Doesn't mean much.
Our official news/press release said we have 512MB, so we have 512MB. Don't get too worried. Samsung may have decided simply to put the RAM to better use for now (to speed up other areas). Apparently, the epic uses a RAM disk to speed things up, so it's possible ours has a 160MB Ramdisk too
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Ok that's it, I'm selling my phone now.
Well, let's hope Froyo shows us the light.
andrewluecke said:
That's another phone.. Doesn't mean much.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I am relatively new to android, but from what I have read on the internet Fascinate is simply another Galaxy S variant customized to Verizon, just like Captivate, Vibrant and Epic 4G, isnt it ?? Why would they mess around with the core components just for one carrier ?
andrewluecke said:
Our official news/press release said we have 512MB, so we have 512MB. Don't get too worried. Samsung may have decided simply to put the RAM to better use for now (to speed up other areas). Apparently, the epic uses a RAM disk to speed things up, so it's possible ours has a 160MB Ramdisk too
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I would like to believe that too , My only concern is Gingerbread compatibility. I know even if we have 512MB Gingerbread is not guaranteed. But 384MB means a definite no go , right ??
PhoenixFx said:
I am relatively new to android, but from what I have read on the internet Fascinate is simply another Galaxy S variant customized to Verizon, just like Captivate, Vibrant and Epic 4G, isnt it ?? Why would they mess around with the core components just for one carrier ?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
They added a flash for one... It might be to save money for the carrier. But, this variant uses EVDO which I believe is US only, and its possible they need more space on the circuit board too, for other features they add. Either way, our phone is advertised as 512MB.
PhoenixFx said:
, My only concern is Gingerbread compatibility. I know even if we have 512MB Gingerbread is not guaranteed. But 384MB means a definite no go , right ??
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Nobody knows. In the rumour world, there is a crapload of BS. Don't believe anything you hear unless Google says it directly (and publicly). Remember, Kevin Rose told us he SAW the iPhone before it was released, and it had multiple batteries. And that guy constantly says rumors (the only ones I see him ever get right are obvious ones or ones which have proof already if you know where to look). If rumors by idiots like him consume the the internet in hours, its easy for anyone else to do the same.
To the best of my knowledge, Google has never stated the RAM required.. That being said, the epic 4g apparently uses a 160GB RAMdisk to speed it up. It's possible our phone does the same (which explains the memory gap). But I have seen nobody prove or disprove whether we have 512MB of RAM which can be accessed by the OS. All I know is that Samsung have stated we do and haven't retracted it..
@andrewluecke: Come oon man must you QOUTE a big picture and the write some words as a comment?? WTF we are not stupid we now that you answered to the post abowe!!!
omaga said:
@andrewluecke: Come oon man must you QOUTE a big picture and the write some words as a comment?? WTF we are not stupid we now that you answered to the post abowe!!!
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Don't blame me, I didn't even notice.. These forums should be thumbnailing the pics anyway
The photo is in line with previous speculation that the galaxy s has 384mb ddr(?) ram and 128mb onedram(fast ram dedicated to graphics??) / onenand(not actually ram??? 0_0) .. its all a bit confusing.
EDIT: found the relevant topics
http://ip208-100-42-21.static.xda-developers.com/showthread.php?t=742244
http://forum.xda-developers.com/showthread.php?p=7642223
EDIT2: at first I was a little concerned, but after reading the other topics, I'm fairly reassured that the "ram issue" isn't really a bit issue at all, once compared to nexus one, desire etc.
SEMC seems to run a Sony Ericsson blog. And his post is mainly guesses, as with the others. Nobody has actually proven anything. However, the arguments against 512MB of ram are that 128MB is flash, and that Samsung don't know the difference between RAM and flash (which doesn't make too much sense, as they clearly differentiate between the two elsewhere).
Until proven otherwise, there is no reason to believe that we don't have 512MB of physical RAM.
oswade said:
EDIT2: at first I was a little concerned, but after reading the other topics, I'm fairly reassured that the "ram issue" isn't really a bit issue at all, once compared to nexus one, desire etc.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I checked it as well, the Desire has 576 mb but it shows only 400 mb,
my old X10 has 384 but only shows 270 mb, it might be the kernel, but Ive read on a unreliable website that the rest was dedicated to the GPU just like a shared videocard on a Laptop...
Yeah, it's likely some is dedicated towards GPU and such, and it's likely to be OneDRAM. But, there doesn't seem to be any definitive proof..
iam sure its the kernel guys.. my old desire after flash mod kernel can get full 512mb and free memory up to 300mb using advanced task manager..
How much RAM does the Captivate really have? Reason I ask is my friend's Droid Incredible constantly has about 270-280MB free, even when he was on 2.1. My Captivate has about 150MB free after doing a task kill. I thought these were supposed to have 512MB of RAM, but this post says that the new Samsung Continuum has the same 336MB as the Samsung Fascinate. So, who knows for sure, with rock solid concrete proof that these phones have 512MB??
"The device looks to have the exact same 1 GHz Hummingbird processor, 336 MB of RAM, and Super AMOLED display as the already released Fascinate (we assume the camera and battery are going to be the same as well). "
http://www.boygeniusreport.com/2010/09/30/new-hi-res-images-info-on-verizons-samsung-continuum/
From what I have read. The cappy has 512 but can't use all of it till froyo. 2.1 can't see all 512.
Sent from my SAMSUNG-SGH-I897 using XDA App
derek4484 said:
How much RAM does the Captivate really have? Reason I ask is my friend's Droid Incredible constantly has about 270-280MB free, even when he was on 2.1. My Captivate has about 150MB free after doing a task kill. I thought these were supposed to have 512MB of RAM, but this post says that the new Samsung Continuum has the same 336MB as the Samsung Fascinate. So, who knows for sure, with rock solid concrete proof that these phones have 512MB??
"The device looks to have the exact same 1 GHz Hummingbird processor, 336 MB of RAM, and Super AMOLED display as the already released Fascinate (we assume the camera and battery are going to be the same as well). "
http://www.boygeniusreport.com/2010/09/30/new-hi-res-images-info-on-verizons-samsung-continuum/
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
You are trying to hard.
Check out the official specs on samsungs web site:
http://www.samsung.com/us/mobile/cell-phones/SGH-I897ZKAATT-features
If you don't believe that, then i don't know what to tell you.
alphadog00 said:
You are trying to hard.
Check out the official specs on samsungs web site:
http://www.samsung.com/us/mobile/cell-phones/SGH-I897ZKAATT-features
If you don't believe that, then i don't know what to tell you.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Ok, so it says 512MB of RAM. Well why cant we access the whole 512MB?? People were just saying "well 2.1 cant access all of it", which was garbage. My friend's droid incredible on 2.1 accessed all 512MB of its RAM. Now that Froyo is out for Captivate, its own built in task manager says it only has 304MB of RAM.
So, how am I trying hard? And what am I trying hard to do? I'm just wanting to know a solid answer. Where the EFF is the rest of the 512MB of RAM that these phones supposedly have? I regret buying a samjunk phone every day. Should have never wasted a dime on Samjunk.
Take it back; sell it; get rid of it then.
No one forced you to buy it or keep it.
The spec sheet says it has 512MB of RAM - some speculate that some of it used as video memory; other mentions say there is a RAM disk taking up space.
I have many apps open and running and i have not had a problem with running out of memory - so I am not to worried about what is available.
The initramfs uses a few MB - not much, single digits. The stock kernels also include ramdisk support and set up 8 8KiB ramdisks iirc. None of this accounts for the amount "missing", but space reserved for two or three screen-sized buffers, and for texture memory, etc might explain it. I have no idea where people get this idea that eclair kernels can't support 512MB.
Sent from my SAMSUNG-SGH-I897 using XDA App
Unhelpful said:
The initramfs uses a few MB - not much, single digits. The stock kernels also include ramdisk support and set up 8 8KiB ramdisks iirc. None of this accounts for the amount "missing", but space reserved for two or three screen-sized buffers, and for texture memory, etc might explain it. I have no idea where people get this idea that eclair kernels can't support 512MB.
Sent from my SAMSUNG-SGH-I897 using XDA App
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Thank you. Educated answer. I know it has a 512MB chip in it, I dont think anybody is disputing that. What I was wanting to know or figure out is where is the missing RAM? From 512 to 304 is a good bit missing. So out of the 304MB the OS takes up about 160-180, that leaves us with about 120-140ish for program memory. To me, it doesnt make much sense to put 512 in a phone then hide almost half of it from programs. I demo'ed a Moto Droid last November for a month and it came with 256MB and after doing a task kill it would have about the same as these Galaxy S phones do. My guess is that some of the system ram is being reserved for video ram, or other's have speculated that there is a ram disk in there. Maybe a combination of both, vram and ram disk. I think its wrong for samsung to advertise "512MB RAM" to compete with the likes of N1, Droid incredible, EVO 4G, all of which have a true 512MB, but our phones have a large portion of that 512, thats not accessible. It'd be a lot more honest if they advertised 304MB.
Actually 128 MB of the RAM is dedicated to the gpu. I don't know specifics but I'm guess this is part of the reason why the galaxy blows everything else away in gaming. It is a little dissapointing but whatever. I feel the same way bout it as everyone else.
Sent from my SCH-I500 using XDA App
Anybody checked how does it look in i9000 or other GalaxyS-family phones?
Tear-downs have revealed that the phone does have 3 different chips that add up to 512 mb. Unfortunately a sizable portion is reserved for an unknown reason.
Has anybody been able to get a solid answer about where the missing 208MB of RAM is? Is it a ramdisk, is it video ram, is it a little of both? Who knows? Samsung knows but they wont admit that it doesnt have 512MB.
I've emailed samsung customer service several times explaining that my phone system information says 304MB RAM. They just reply, "Captivate does indeed have 512MB of RAM. Thank you for your inquiry.... blah blah blah."
It does have a 512MB chip in it, but what's it being used for, is what I'd like to know. N1 doesnt have this problem. Droid incredible doesnt have this problem. Droid X doesnt, etc. The G2 does, its advertised as 512MB but when you do system info on it, it has 380MB.
I just spoke to samsung level 5, its top secret and they will never disclose the answer! Muahahaha
Sent from my SAMSUNG-SGH-I897 using XDA App
itsjustaphone said:
I just spoke to samsung level 5, its top secret and they will never disclose the answer! Muahahaha
Sent from my SAMSUNG-SGH-I897 using XDA App
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
lol!
As much as I would also like to know where the rest of the ram goes, it doesn't matter so much when we dominate the quadrant scores with a small tweak
EDIT-forgot link: http://smartphonebenchmarks.com/
ThisWasATriumph said:
Tear-downs have revealed that the phone does have 3 different chips that add up to 512 mb. Unfortunately a sizable portion is reserved for an unknown reason.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Could u please elaborate this? Or atleast could u pls link to that site?
I've seen a lot of discussion on various Android/Droid forums on the web over the past month or two about the Bionic, and it having 512MB of RAM. A lot of people don't seem to mind, and some people have even said it doesn't matter because it's DDR2, which is faster than regular DDR.
Well, 512MB of RAM is not enough for a dual-core phone you plan to use for 2 years or more. Here's why, in a rather lengthy post that I also put on MyDroidWorld the other night. I've been on the XDA forums for a long time, though I don't post very frequently and I'm curious to see what people will think of my admittedly long post. So, here is why I think people should think long and hard about whether to buy the Bionic when it does come out, assuming it still ships with 512MB of RAM.
Caching.
Ok - let me explain. The single most important factor in performance of a computer is having enough RAM. When a computer runs out of RAM, it starts to use what's called a page file. It's basically a file on your hard drive that acts as additional RAM. Now, DDR3-1600 speed RAM transfers data at 12.8 gigabytes per second. Phenomenally fast. It also has a reaction time of around 5 nanoseconds, also ridiculously fast. When your operating system has to start using the page file because the physical RAM is full, the performance hit is EXTRAORDINARY. Even the best hard disk drives (not counting SSDs) like the latest Raptor from Western Digital cap out at around 155 megabytes per second for reading and writing, and it has a peak latency of 7 milliseconds for reaction time. 1 nanosecond is 1 million milliseconds, which makes the DDR3 RAM over a MILLION times faster reacting than the hard drive, and the transfer rate of the RAM over 80 times faster than the transfer rate of the hard drive.
In real-world terms, it's like you're talking about an ant versus a Porsche 911 Turbo. Most old computers that have long pauses or hang for several seconds doing even basic tasks, it's because they don't have enough RAM and it's caching stuff between the hard drive and the RAM.
Now, whenever Android runs out of RAM, (same with any operating system) it has to start using its page file, which means it starts using this monstrously slow flash memory as RAM. It's like merging onto a freeway that is gridlocked with traffic when you were going hundreds of miles per hour. The flash memory is a lot slower than the Raptor hard drive for data transfer rates, but it has a read time a lot faster; the best-performing ones are generally under 1 microsecond. 1 microsecond is a thousand times slower than 1 nanosecond. The write times are closer to hard drives, though; generally less than 1 millisecond, so like 10x faster than a hard drive but still 100,000 times slower reaction time to writing data than the RAM is.
What this means is, when your permanent storage is flash-based, it has a much faster reaction time than a hard drive but it's still dog-slow compared to RAM; so when Android runs out of RAM, it caches to the page file on the flash memory, and you'll have the same slowdown effect as you do on an old POS computer, but it's not as noticeable because flash memory reacts faster than disk-based hard drives.
The point of all of this is that, 1GB of DDR1 memory on a phone is FAR better than 512MB of DDR2 memory. The 1GB will prevent you from hitting that metaphorical brick wall of caching data to your flash memory when the 512MB won't. We already use 400MB, or more, of our 512MB of RAM on our existing phones just by turning it on and having a couple of widgets/services in the background above & beyond the stock ones. How do you expect to take advantage significantly higher-end applications and games, which also means (for games, primarily) that they take up more RAM, as well?
You can't have higher-quality graphics without needing more RAM, so when that new version of Angry Birds comes out this fall or something that requires two cores and looks amazing, but uses 250MB of RAM to run instead of the 80MB or whatever the regular one uses now, what do you think has to happen? That's right. Android has to cache that much extra data to your flash memory so it can unload it from the RAM, freeing the necessary space to load Angry Birds HD. This causes more of a delay as it's writing data, and will cause extra choppiness, etc. Another thing to keep in mind is that, as resolutions increase, so do the texture sizes for all applications and widgets that you use, assuming they support the new resolution. More size needed, which takes up more space in RAM.
Don't be fooled. When truly good and proper dual-core benchmarks come out, 1GB RAM dual-core phones will spank their 512MB RAM dual-core brethren for real-world performance in games, and other high-memory applications. Also, excessive caching greatly increases the chance of flash memory going bad. Not a common occurrence if it was fine when shipped, but still something to think about.
So, in summary, even though the performance hit from caching to flash memory isn't as bad as caching to hard disk drives, it's still a tremendous slowdown and it will matter for dual-core phones way more than for single-core ones. The average amount of RAM installed on dual-core desktop computers from Dell/HP/etc. was significantly higher than what the average was for the previous single-core generations were, and there are reasons for that. Primarily, the same reasons I just outlined. In simple terms, faster processors can do more things, which necessarily requires more RAM.
Sorry for the wall of text, I tried to be more concise but it kind of got away from me. I'm not buying a Bionic because it has 512MB of RAM. After owning it a year, it'll be having performance issues on top-end dual-core-required games that run just fine on phones like the Atrix.
I'm sorry because I know this is probably going to come across the wrong way, but WOW, you spent a lot of time writing that up, and too much time for me to read it alll, especially considering Motorola has pulled back on the Bionic and it's receiving "enhancements". I guess what I'm saying is why all the speculation/conjecture until we know the revised specs? Maybe it'll land with 8GB of DDR 6 RAM.
I'm hoping Motorola gives Verizon a phone that is higher end than the Atrix. Afterall Verizon has done much more than ATT in the way of supporting Moto..when they needed it. Anxious to see what Big Red winds up with.
Sent from my ERIS using XDA Premium App
I disagree that ram is the single most important factor of performance of a computer.
hard drives are the biggest bottleneck in a computer. this is why I use a vertex 3 ssd.
Sent from my PC36100 using XDA Premium App
gemro311 said:
I'm hoping Motorola gives Verizon a phone that is higher end than the Atrix. Afterall Verizon has done much more than ATT in the way of supporting Moto..when they needed it. Anxious to see what Big Red winds up with.
Sent from my ERIS using XDA Premium App
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I concur, really hope VZW pushes for a premier device
I disagree. Android isn't expanding as an OS at some breakneck pace and 512MB is definitely suitable for the near future. 1GB is absolutely not necessary for great performance in a phone. RAM is a bottleneck, but it is not something that magically allows for better performance if the device isn't hitting the pagefile anyway.
The way that Android manages applications will allow 512MB phones to be relevant for some time. The Bionic will be a solid phone for the next year, but there will always be something bigger and better next year. Phones aren't future-proof.
I was just checking out this thread and wanted to say maybe the reason that the atrix comes with 1gb of ram is because of the extra contraption that you can buy along with. It looks like a netbook but is not very well performing and who would even care to rely on it for anything I don't know.
gemro311 said:
I'm hoping Motorola gives Verizon a phone that is higher end than the Atrix. Afterall Verizon has done much more than ATT in the way of supporting Moto..when they needed it. Anxious to see what Big Red winds up with.
Sent from my ERIS using XDA Premium App
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I certainly hope Motorola makes the required improvements, but you also need to keep in mind Verizon approves and in many if not all cases specs the phones they want. They chose the specs, they had to live with the specs. I think once they saw what was coming they figured it was no longer premiere and wanted changes made.
Regardless of why its been pulled back the fact that it was is good, but if its going to take 4-5 months to get it out the door they should have just scrapped it altogether.
E30kid said:
I disagree. Android isn't expanding as an OS at some breakneck pace and 512MB is definitely suitable for the near future. 1GB is absolutely not necessary for great performance in a phone. RAM is a bottleneck, but it is not something that magically allows for better performance if the device isn't hitting the pagefile anyway.
The way that Android manages applications will allow 512MB phones to be relevant for some time. The Bionic will be a solid phone for the next year, but there will always be something bigger and better next year. Phones aren't future-proof.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Well, wait for Ice Cream and we'll see. Since the future Android version will also run in tablets, it is likely that it will have huge memory requirements.
By the way, my Acer Liquid A1 can't be officially upgraded to Froyo because it only has 256Mb. Later Liquid models with 512Mb are upgradeable. At the time I bought it, 512Mb seemed unnecessary because the Nexus One operating system only supported 256Mb, having the other 256Mb wasted. This was only 12 months ago...
galaxyjeff said:
I was just checking out this thread and wanted to say maybe the reason that the atrix comes with 1gb of ram is because of the extra contraption that you can buy along with. It looks like a netbook but is not very well performing and who would even care to rely on it for anything I don't know.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I think you are on to something here. I think I read somewhere that the atrix only uses 512 mb when not connected to the dock. I have the inspire which has 768 mb, and I came from the captivate which was 512 mb, and I done know if is the ram or what but this phone performs way better than the captivate. Even when I bought the inspire, right out the box stock, preformed much better than a captivate overclocked with an ext4 filesystem kernel. Not that this is empirical evidence, but hey.
Sent from my HTC Desire HD using XDA Premium App
cryptiq said:
I'm sorry because I know this is probably going to come across the wrong way, but WOW, you spent a lot of time writing that up, and too much time for me to read it alll, especially considering Motorola has pulled back on the Bionic and it's receiving "enhancements". I guess what I'm saying is why all the speculation/conjecture until we know the revised specs? Maybe it'll land with 8GB of DDR 6 RAM.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I lol'd. But seriously 512 MB of RAM is more than enough... It's a PHONE not a high end desktop system. I play tons of games on my x2 and with alot of crap in the backround open, and I notice zero performance hits. If you are spending all day monitoring your RAM on your phone and trying to measure FPS loss, load time differences, etc. I suggest that you try to pick up a new hobby ASAP, OCDing will be the end of you. Best of luck!
Edit: I wouldn't worry about it either! Bionic probably won't come out anyways, and if it does, another phone with 1GB to satisfy your OCD probably will be out by then.
As of now, I feel ALL future top tier smart phones need to come equipped with at least 1GB of DDR2. The G2x, for example, will most likely have issues running a custom ice cream rom. And people will be upset.. especially after putting up with all of the other various problems that particular phone has.
OP, I don't agree entirely with your explanation of the use of caching by the OS - for all 3 major computer OSes, no matter how much excess RAM you have, they will start caching data to the hard drive, whether you like it or not. Obviously if you run out of RAM, it has to do so, but it'll even do it long before you've hit that cap - just because it determines an application has gone "inactive". Now I haven't read up on Android enough to know whether this is 100% true for it, too, but considering it's running a linux kernel, I would imagine so. So just like the 8GB of RAM in my desktop doesn't necessarily help for everyday computing needs, 1GB vs 512mb on the Bionic may not make a huge difference.
raptordrew said:
OP, I don't agree entirely with your explanation of the use of caching by the OS - for all 3 major computer OSes, no matter how much excess RAM you have, they will start caching data to the hard drive, whether you like it or not. Obviously if you run out of RAM, it has to do so, but it'll even do it long before you've hit that cap - just because it determines an application has gone "inactive". Now I haven't read up on Android enough to know whether this is 100% true for it, too, but considering it's running a linux kernel, I would imagine so. So just like the 8GB of RAM in my desktop doesn't necessarily help for everyday computing needs, 1GB vs 512mb on the Bionic may not make a huge difference.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
i beg to differ
my captivate; even though its a single core...is still quite capable at most everyday tasks...only thing lacking is the RAM
my phone will slow to a crawl after entering twitter, switching to pulse and then going back to my homescreen....
not to mention my launcher keeps getting killed by android as it keeps running out of RAM
droid_does said:
i beg to differ
my captivate; even though its a single core...is still quite capable at most everyday tasks...only thing lacking is the RAM
my phone will slow to a crawl after entering twitter, switching to pulse and then going back to my homescreen....
not to mention my launcher keeps getting killed by android as it keeps running out of RAM
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I have to lol at this one. Absolutely none of those issues have to do with amount of RAM. In fact the launcher problem has nothing to do with RAM at all.
Sent from my ADR6400L using XDA App
While I appreciate other people who have the same amount of passion for phones as I do, I just have two words to say about anyone saying phones with 512 mb ram will not get Ice Cream Sandwich. Nexus S.
Sent from my ADR6400L using XDA App
mb02 said:
I have to lol at this one. Absolutely none of those issues have to do with amount of RAM. In fact the launcher problem has nothing to do with RAM at all.
Sent from my ADR6400L using XDA App
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
it does as android keeps killing it to free up more RAM to use......
droid_does said:
it does as android keeps killing it to free up more RAM to use......
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Yea the task manager is killing the apps to keep ram freed up, as in stopping unused processes etc. That's just the aggressive working of the management software that would run just the same if you even had 8GB of ram.
Sent from my ADR6400L using XDA App
timothymilla said:
While I appreciate other people who have the same amount of passion for phones as I do, I just have two words to say about anyone saying phones with 512 mb ram will not get Ice Cream Sandwich. Nexus S.
Sent from my ADR6400L using XDA App
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Remember when everyone thought Gingerbread would require a 1GHz processor as a system requirement, which was later debunked?
http://www.talkandroid.com/23041-so...ngerbread-update-due-to-1ghz-cpu-requirement/
Nobody can say what will and will not get updated for sure, although I will venture to say that it's HIGHLY likely the Nexus S will be getting 2.4, you're right.
zetsumeikuro said:
I lol'd. But seriously 512 MB of RAM is more than enough... It's a PHONE not a high end desktop system. I play tons of games on my x2 and with alot of crap in the backround open, and I notice zero performance hits. If you are spending all day monitoring your RAM on your phone and trying to measure FPS loss, load time differences, etc. I suggest that you try to pick up a new hobby ASAP, OCDing will be the end of you. Best of luck!
Edit: I wouldn't worry about it either! Bionic probably won't come out anyways, and if it does, another phone with 1GB to satisfy your OCD probably will be out by then.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
512 mb is not enough for a dual core 4G phone it just isnt. the thunderbolt has 768 mb and its only single core and 4G and let me tell you it would be way faster with the 1024 mb of ram i cant imagine how laggy the bionic would be if you start doing anything with it! the 512 ram will be ate up in no time! i sure hope verizon reconsiders and adds more ram or i probably wont use this device as my daily phone either keep the thunderbolt with more ram which is sad cause it has been out for awhile now and the droid x also has 512 ram and it has been out for a year and they cant make improvements?? and they are going to want $299+++ for this phone ON CONTRACT! it better have more than 512 ram or it aint worth a lick! rip this phone open and put my own ram in it!
i thought the cappy had 512 mb of ram... why do all the roms have like 341? im confused >.< either i looked at 3 faulty spec sheets for the captivate or we arent utilizing the full ram potential for the captivate. would someone explain the truth on this matter to a captivate noob like me?
i could be wrong but i believe the 341 is available to use ram, while the rest is being used by the phone to function.
nehal51086 said:
i could be wrong but i believe the 341 is available to use ram, while the rest is being used by the phone to function.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
that would make sense, but that makes the specs misleading... i traded my HD2 for a cappy because the spec sheet said 512mb of ram and the HD2 only has 411 available to the OS when running android from nand because the rest is dedicated to winmo only (which sucks massively), and i wanted more ram lol, guess i should have looked harder into things, but regardless the captivate is "better" in very many areas, but RAM is literally my deciding factor for so many things lately (like t-mobile with the sensation or sprint with the evo 3d, i would say evo 3d because it has 256mb or so more ram)
This question has been asked and answered several times....
the phone does have 512mb of ram. Like the person above me said the phones os and graphics take up a portion of the ram. All computers and smart phones work the same way.
As a side note android handles ram very well. You don't need to manage it at all by freeing it up. free ram is wasted ram as the os will have to load it back up anyways
Sent from my GT-I9000 using XDA App
crystalhand said:
This question has been asked and answered several times....
the phone does have 512mb of ram. Like the person above me said the phones os and graphics take up a portion of the ram. All computers and smart phones work the same way.
As a side note android handles ram very well. You don't need to manage it at all by freeing it up. free ram is wasted ram as the os will have to load it back up anyways
Sent from my GT-I9000 using XDA App
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
i know this very well, free ram can be considered wasted ram, unless you need 200mb or so free for a tegra class game, but i think android handles ram awesomely to an extent but can be improved by implementing autokiller memory optimizer in a knowledgable and appropriate way that doesnt hurt optimizations android already has in place, zipaligning, increasing the dalvik heap size, etc... can all be done, im not asking about how android handles ram or anything, and im sorry i didnt know the question had been asked several times i am brand new to the captivate today, literally, and was doing not but seeking information i didnt understand or know, thank you for the explaination though i appreciate it, and im glad to know that my new captivate will utilize the left over 171mb of ram for something unlike my HD2 that couldnt access the last 100mb because it was designated to winmo only. i had an idea that was the case and i was just clarifying to myself because i kept reading rom changelogs stating "enabled more ram now 341mb available" or something along the lines of that and thought to myself "there should be more available already" lol
I honestly think 341MB is enough.
341 MB is alot. But something is taking all that up too. On a fresh boot, half of it is used, and I have 140~170 MB. Its even worse on GB. Most ive gotten is 100 MB free.
So if the half of the 341 plus the mysterious 171 MB that is nowhere to be found, I dont get whats using the other 171 that is not part of the 341. Lol confusing
Same happens to me. Who knows, lol
Sent from my GT-I9000 using XDA Premium App
I think its the user interface graphics, like scrolling quality is good because that ram is dedicated to things
like that
Sent from cyanogen mod 7