128mb Of Ram...

[jdh2550]

I'm sold on p&|a and hope to be lucky enough to pick up one of the first 100.

The one spec that disappoints me the most is the 128MB of RAM. I know that's a lot for the console class of machine however, it's a shame that it's not more - because, as can be seen, the p&|a can do a lot more than only games.

For example, It would be fun for me to be able to experiment with the likes of http://www.ubuntu.com/products/mobile (256MB minimum and 512MB recommended). Note that I'm not suggesting that such a heavyweight GUI is suited for the mainstream use of this device - just that it would be fun for tinkerers like me to be able to have that as an option (yes, I know there's no ARM version yet - this is just an example of what we'll likely miss out with 128MB RAM).

So, I wonder if MWeston, Craig or ED could comment on the decision behind 128MB RAM?

I can't believe it's based on cost (RAM is so cheap) or size (RAM is so small) or processor limitation (surely the addressable space of the OMAP is measured in GB).

So, you guys had a reason - what was it? Will there be a chance for a user installed upgrade (I doubt it), or a "next gen" version with more memory?

The p&|a is so darn versatile I just wonder why you kept the RAM figure so low?

 

[ldesnogu]

So, I wonder if MWeston, Craig or ED could comment on the decision behind 128MB RAM?

I can't believe it's based on cost (RAM is so cheap) or size (RAM is so small) or processor limitation (surely the addressable space of the OMAP is measured in GB).

Even though I am not any of the guys you talk to, here are some thoughts:

- do you know the price of Mobile DDR?
- do you know RAM power consumption?
- do you know how much RAM OMAP3430 can address? (I know it's at least 256 MB)

 

[atomicthumbs]

It's hard to address more than 128MB with ARM

 

[C B Felterbush]

I am also curious as the why the 128, it isn't that it is way low, just that it could be twice that without much issue. I wonder mostly, will it be upgradeable in that dept. ?

 

[ldesnogu]

It's hard to address more than 128MB with ARM

What makes you think so? h34r:
"Modern" ARM cores (that is at the very since the inception of ARM6, which dates back to around '93) can address 32 bit, that is 4 GB.
The most recent one could go even further if needed.

 

[Exophase]

This isn't a UMPC (ignore marketing that says otherwise), it isn't meant to run typical heavy weight desktop/laptop stuff written with x86's in mind.

128MB is plenty. Compare to devices suited for similar things:

Nokia N800/N810: 128MB
GP2X: 64MB
PSP: 32/64MB

Looks like it's right at home.

Laurent: What ARMs can address > 4GB, and how does it work?

 

[ldesnogu]

To make it clearer:

PS3: 256MB
Nokia N800/N810: 128MB
GP2X: 64MB
PSP: 32/64MB

 

[christo930]

I'm sold on p&|a and hope to be lucky enough to pick up one of the first 100.

The one spec that disappoints me the most is the 128MB of RAM. I know that's a lot for the console class of machine however, it's a shame that it's not more - because, as can be seen, the p&|a can do a lot more than only games.

For example, It would be fun for me to be able to experiment with the likes of http://www.ubuntu.com/products/mobile (256MB minimum and 512MB recommended). Note that I'm not suggesting that such a heavyweight GUI is suited for the mainstream use of this device - just that it would be fun for tinkerers like me to be able to have that as an option (yes, I know there's no ARM version yet - this is just an example of what we'll likely miss out with 128MB RAM).

So, I wonder if MWeston, Craig or ED could comment on the decision behind 128MB RAM?

I can't believe it's based on cost (RAM is so cheap) or size (RAM is so small) or processor limitation (surely the addressable space of the OMAP is measured in GB).

So, you guys had a reason - what was it? Will there be a chance for a user installed upgrade (I doubt it), or a "next gen" version with more memory?

The p&|a is so darn versatile I just wonder why you kept the RAM figure so low?



It seems to me that this thinking could be taken really far. Why stop at 256 or 512? Why not go with the faster processor? This item is already fairly expensive for a handheld gameing system and it's quite possible (though I don't know) that upgrading the ram would have meant a change is some other chip with increased cost and design complexity which means increased cost. I think that as a gaming system, it's pretty well decked out and will perform quite well. I think that Sony proved very well that there is a price point that should be honored and that having the best tech but at a greatly inflated price reduces market share. So to increase the price so that some folks could mess around with pc software probably would have been a mistake.

Chris

 

[jdh2550]

This isn't a UMPC (ignore marketing that says otherwise), it isn't meant to run typical heavy weight desktop/laptop stuff written with x86's in mind.

128MB is plenty. Compare to devices suited for similar things:

Nokia N800/N810: 128MB
GP2X: 64MB
PSP: 32/64MB

Looks like it's right at home.

Laurent: What ARMs can address > 4GB, and how does it work?

Yeah, this sort of standard line was what I was trying to avoid. One of the reasons they're making this device is for the "open it up and see what it can do" crowd. That's the niche Craig says they're filling, so excuse me if I take his word over yours.

So, instead of telling me what I need (based on no information of what I intend to try) does anyone KNOW (not guess) is their reason?

Yes, I know they have to draw the line in the sand somewhere. They could have cut out a whole lot of stuff - but they didn't.

So, one more time: Craig, MWeston or ED - what was your reason for only 128MB?

(this is not a criticism it's a question to educate myself).

(also, do you still think that no one would ever need more than 640kb?)

 

[Squidge]

To make it clearer:

PS3: 256MB
Nokia N800/N810: 128MB
GP2X: 64MB
PSP: 32/64MB

and clearer still:

Pandora/GP2X Typical Maximum Wattage: 3.5W.
PS3: 200W.

Therefore, the PS3 would last ~10 minutes from a 12V 16Ah lead acid battery (assuming an invertor is used to generate the PS3's required 240V from the 12V battery).

 

[_VWV_]

How will the addition of another 128 megs influence the plug-free work period? How many minutes will be gone? How much will it cost? Just curious to know..

 

[Alex.]

(this is not a criticism it's a question to educate myself).

(also, do you still think that no one would ever need more than 640kb?)

It's hardly not a criticism when you refer to it as 'The one spec that disappoints me the most'

My laptop has 128MB of RAM and it runs Windows XP perfectly fine with multiple applications running (without using virtual memory). The fact that an OS designed for mobile devices needs a minimum of 256MB of RAM and preferably 512 is a sign of inefficiency, which should not be the thing that dictates hardware specs.

 

[Exophase]

Yeah, this sort of standard line was what I was trying to avoid. One of the reasons they're making this device is for the "open it up and see what it can do" crowd. That's the niche Craig says they're filling, so excuse me if I take his word over yours.

Rather, if you take your interpretation of their word over my word. It's the developers (are you a developer?) who will determine what it can be used for even more than the ones doing the hardware will. And I haven't seen developers complain about the lack of RAM.

So, instead of telling me what I need (based on no information of what I intend to try) does anyone KNOW (not guess) is their reason?

I know it's popular to say "don't ask why, ask why not", but I find the statement silly and tend to stick with its original opposite. Instead of asking why they don't want more than 128MB let's ask why they should have more than 128MB, aside from "just because they can." It does cost more money - this is not the usual DDR form factor, it is more expensive than what you would put in a computer. And it does draw more power, on a device where keeping the power as low as possible is a top priority. It also uses more physical space, on a device where keeping the space as small as possible is a top priority.

I don't really think the developers need to defend themselves, or even have a reason at all. The way I see it, more than 128MB just isn't especially useful.

Yes, I know they have to draw the line in the sand somewhere. They could have cut out a whole lot of stuff - but they didn't.

They couldn't have cut out very much at all. All of the SoC features they got when they chose the SoC. The other features they have thorough practical reasons for choosing, some of which are based on what a number of users wanted (also for reasons they justified).

(also, do you still think that no one would ever need more than 640kb?)

.. ah, this would be resorting to using a loaded argument to add weight to what you're saying. A quote popularly taken out of context to try to warn against the evils of arbitrarily restricting things. Only 640KB wasn't an arbitrary restriction (since it was designed around the hardware), it WAS more than enough for anyone in 1981 (much more than what other computers could address), and the main reason why this quote even comes up over and over again is because of Microsoft and the PC world in general being too reluctant to move away from virtual 8086 mode.

No one thinks that 128MB will necessarily be enough in 5, 10, 20, or however many years. Just that for the kind of device Pandora is trying to be right now it's a perfectly suitable amount.

 

[Prophet]

Plain simple answer - IIRC the SOC spec maxes at 128MB.

So there was no choice to have more. When they chose the TI SOC, the overall hardware spec was predetermined.

Instead of looking at it as a negative, let's consider how it compares to other handheld devices. It's twice the RAM of the PSP Lite & GP2X - and they both have some remarkable emulators and games.

As a computer, it isn't much. But let's wait and see what can be done or not. I'm not a Linux user, but from my understanding Linux is great for systems with limited resources.

And no matter what the specs are on any device, it's ALWAYS the devlopers that really make the difference. Look at what's been done with much less capable hardware - if devs adopt the Pandora, it will thrive and probably surprise us all.

 

[Pickle]

This should answer the question, arguments aside if we need more memory or not:


Thanks Michael,

From your answer it sounds like the SOC can handle 256 MB as is? What
is the actual hardware limt? Usally 32 bit systems are 4GB.
Im assuming you mean the 128 was only one you could buy for the quanity
and price.

It also sounds like you are soldering it direct to the PCB, have you
thought of maybe using a socket for the SIMM, then we could buy are own
chip at later time?

Response:

Hi, I can't discuss specifics of the OMAP hardware, but as you know
32-bit ARM systems have a 4GB memory space. This includes all peripherals
and features inside the chip so no ARM device will natively support 4GB of
RAM.

Take a look at www.ti.com/omap and move your cursor over the OMAP3430
picture. You will see that the memory is stacked on top of the processor
which definitely means it is soldered on and we also don't have any room to
put a socket inside. Pandora will be available in a single configuration
which will also help coders write code that works on all systems.


Michael

 

[Orkie]

The way I see it, more than 128MB just isn't especially useful.

Even if you ignore the rest of what everybody else has said, this is certainly true. My game on the GP2X only uses 6MB RAM and that is with lots of images loaded, sound effects and streaming music and I don't think there are many that are too much worse than that.

Off the top of my head, I think GP2X11 uses a similar amount of memory, with it rising to about 20MB when a complete GPE environment is running (if you used a different window manager, it'd be significantly less and the X server only uses so much memory because everything on GPH's firmware has to be statically linked). I reckon 10MB is a reasonable target for a functional, but minimal X-based environment, and 20MB when running someting like AbiWord.

The only thing I can really see using the full 128MB is an emulator, but even then, how many systems which require that amount of memory to emulate properly will the Pandora have enough processing power to run anyway?

 

[Chip]

It appears that the RAM limitations are TI's doing. There is not much info available, since the 3430 is so new, but it appears that dev boards are only available with 128 or 256MB SDRAM. I suspect more dev board options would be available if TI planned on manufacturing the boards in different configurations. Remember, this SoC is designed to go into high-end cell phones and PDAs, not laptop replacements.

The question still remains - Why 128 instead of 256?

It may be because the 256MB version is significantly more expensive. It may be because the 128MB version will be available sooner in the required quantities. It may be something else entirely. We could speculate all day, but the smart thing to do is wait until someone in a position to actually know the answer speaks up.

 

[Squidge]

I don't know why people think "ARM is 32-bit, so can have upto 4GB of memory attached". ARM is only the logic and has nothing to do with the hardware. The amount of memory that can be attached is left to the confines and limitations of the SoC. For example, If someone built a SoC with a 16-bit external address bus and an ARM core, it would only have a 64KB maximum memory size regardless of ARM's 32-bit nature. Also, don't forget that all the useful bits of the SoC (timers, power management, i/o port, LCD drivers, etc) all need to be mapped into that 32-bit area also. If the soc designed decided to use the MSB to signify accessing a peripheral (rather than memory), this immediately drops the usable memory from 4GB to 2GB. Now lets say the SoC designer allows you to have multiple banks of RAM (ie, DDR+SRAM), to make the address decoding logic easier, they nick another addressing line, leaving you now with 1GB.

After the first piece prototype is built, they find that they can only route 29 of the remaining 30 bits due to interference from high frequency signals. This leaves us with 512MB.

(BTW, This in no part, to my knowledge, releates to TI or OMAP. It's completely fictional.)

 

[javaJake]

We often forget we were lucky to have the OMAP3430 in the first place. The developers of the Pandora were going for something much less powerful than this, but now that we have the OMAP, some want even more.


Also...

Instead of asking why they don't want more than 128MB let's ask why they should have more than 128MB, aside from "just because they can."

I could never have said it better myself.

 

[ldesnogu]

I don't know why people think "ARM is 32-bit, so can have upto 4GB of memory attached".

Before ARMv3, cores were limited to 26 bit of addresses due to using some bits of the PC reg to store some information.
Then ARMv6 came and suddenly you could address 40 bits.

The cores since ARM7 at the very least have 32 bits of address going out the chip. Indeed then the SoC designer can decide to get rid of some bits

Anyway OMAP3430 can at least address 256 MB we know that.

My original answer about 32 bits of address was to correct the claim of atomicthumbs which certainly was wrong.