Not really. No in use examples exist that extend the
@TrashyMG 2GB RAM on OMAP example. Processor has problem keeping up with a mixed active apps load prior to running out of RAM. If you have a counter example, please present it.
Simple: The counter-example is that the device supports up to 8 GB of RAM. Full stop.
This isn't "the device can't support it and we're trying to hack it to do such." This isn't some kind of weird OS screwing that they have to do to make it support the device. If the device supports 8 GB of RAM - and it
DOES - then it supports 8 GB of RAM. Period.
It's up to the OS
HOW that RAM is used - the device gets no control over it, because all it can do is say "Hey, I can keep track of this many bytes." The operating system is the one who actually tells it what bytes to keep track of. The fact is, it's supported by both the device itself, and Debian, so you can't just keep going "anything more than 2 GB is a waste" because both of those both support more than 2 GB of RAM! You're not going to sit there and tell me all modern Linux desktop PCs only have 2 GB of RAM and never any higher, are you?
I also presented you two examples (conveniently ignored here, I noted) where TI had, on their own wiki, development boards with 4 GB of RAM!
You cannot cherry-pick statements and use one person as sole and incontrovertible proof that it's impossible. You cannot go "Well
@TrashyMG couldn't get it to 2 GB, so anything more than that is pointless." We don't even have a working 4 GB unit yet aside from one, so how the hell
COULD you know that it's pointless?
You can't! You don't have a working 4 GB Pyra devboard, so until someone does and can test it out, let's not prematurely sing the funeral dirge.
The OS supports more than 4 GB of RAM, and the device itself does as well. Maybe it's pointless to
you, but I'm damn well sure someone out there who bought a 4 GB Pyra will find a way to use more than 2 GB of the device's RAM - it's just a matter of time. How one person uses it is not how every person will use it, and simply put, 1100 people is a better sample size than one.
Thank you for your concern. My butt is doing fine. The 4GB of RAM was an extraneous spec on the OMAP5. Those who understood this are fewer in number than those chasing specs and those who try to use windows usage models that don't apply well.
Regardless of OS, RAM is RAM. It holds some kind of data for rapid-retrieval usage. RAM that's sitting empty is wasted RAM, so most OSes try to use as much of that RAM as possible - whether it's actively holding data or merely a quick cache.
Is the guy who just wants to play some emulators or homebrew going to even whiff at that 4 GB? Of course not, they'll probably have enough at 2 GB.
But the people who might want to play Minecraft, for example, could benefit, or those who try to compile huge projects from source code. notaz may also do more of his static recompilations, and those could certainly begin eating up memory of their own, especially when we get into early-2000s level stuff. By 2004-2005 it wasn't unheard of for a PC-quality game to chew a gig of RAM all on its own. (I remember UT2004 doing about 750-900 MB.)
I do have a bigger stake than most, but not a controlling one by any stretch. People ordered the most expensive one considering it to be the 'best'. That is natural.
Not quite, as the "best" one actually is the mobile edition that has extra functionality and a markedly higher price point. The difference between 2 GB and 4 GB of RAM being only about 30 Euros is what made lots of people go "Ehh, why not?"
Nobody is going into this thinking 4 GB of RAM is a massive spec upgrade. Hell, the sorts of people that are interested in the Pyra - much less willing to plonk down a sizable chunk of change to buy one - know damn well that doubling the RAM isn't going to make it run twice as fast, twice as powerful, or any of that.
They know all they're getting is double the RAM. Same processor, same GPU, same overall innards.
It just may make it a little less clunky if they do push past where a 2 GB unit would have to begin swapping to pagefile, and it may, however, be somewhat more futureproof, unless ED does a new CPU board where this OMAP5 just completely gets its ass whooped.
I wonder what you'll be saying then. Hopefully not "We don't need this 8 GB of RAM."
Not quite, but close. Algorithms are the same, but I can't keep up on the permutations they can. I run Debian Stretch on all 4 of my workststions, and it can run a supercomputer. In both cases the RAM size is appropriate to the processing capabilities though.
And that, obviously, is what you designed them to do. But that is exactly my point - they are better at some specific things. You wouldn't build a workstation if all you needed was a general internet-capable device, because you can go and buy a smartphone or a cheap PC for about the same price and there's your ticket.
Theoretically any computer can run any program it's capable of understanding and running (i.e; no trying to run EXEs on Linux or SOs on Windows). Some are simply better at some aspects of it than others, and when it comes to mobile devices, the priority tends to be power consumption first, cooling second, processing capability a distant third.
Trying to claim that it "can't be a 100% device" if it has 4 GB of RAM is just ridiculous. All that's changing is the RAM amount, not the processing capability, speed, or so on. If anything, having more RAM will make it
SUPERIOR in terms of processing capability, because if you're building workstation-level systems as you claim you are, you know damn well that in the end, it does come down to specs - and you're not going to sell me on that the Pyra is somehow "less" capable in its 4 GB form than its 2 GB one.
My desktops have nothing to fear from servers of their same age, though I often treat them as servers, they're technically desktop workstations (HP Professional Workstation towers Xeon & Opteron, hardware RAID, etc). Server class hardware stuff.
Okay, so then like I said above - you know it comes down to specs. If you don't have enough memory to do a certain calculation, you've got to split the work up into multiple segments, which takes more computational processing time, memory processing time, and so on than if you have enough memory to just lay it all out in one chunk into RAM.
So how is Pyra harmed by having a supposedly "useless" 4 GB spec compared to a 2 GB one again? Because all I can see is that you're mad that it's holding up 2 GB units from being made.
Would you even be complaining about this as much as you are if the 4 GB RAM was just as ready-to-go as the 2 GB one? I somehow doubt it.
OK, so you get the concept of scaling cooling to the total heat generated by a system. I can work a mixed analogy from there.
Consider the OMAP5's processing capability as being your system heat. 2 GB of RAM (cooling in analogy) is enough to saturate and cool it. The other two GB of RAM (cooling in analogy) never leave the firetruck. But, the fire engine, suspension, tank, and fuel capacity needs are all higher cost just to haul around all that cooling that generally never gets used.
Now, there can be cases where it makes sense. Where RAM is loaded but then accessed infrequently. A VM sitting idle for example.
Which, obviously, is what the bulk of it will be - a cache, especially in Linux where stuff tends to run leaner and meaner than Windows.
That analogy of yours is pretty ridiculous, since Pyra isn't exactly "hauling" cooling that never gets used - whether it's 2 GB or 4 GB, the main difference is maybe a miniscule increase in power consumption due to the extra RAM chip (and that itself is moot if it's one 4 GB chip - then it's down to basically statistically insignificant amounts of difference).
Plus, if you know computers as well as you say you do, you know in the computer world, too much of something is almost always better than too little. A cooler made to dissipate a 130W TDP CPU but that can work fine on this 95W TDP CPU isn't "wasted" cooling - it's simply extra headroom, and if anything, might let you push the CPU that much higher than normal. Yes, if you want maximum efficiency, you get one made to cool up to 95W and possibly save some coin, but then you lose out on potentially being able to push things harder, because the 95W cooler is at its design limit but the 130W cooler has headroom to spare. That's precisely the difference between 2 GB and 4 GB of RAM here - 4 GB is simply more headroom.
Unless your hardware is made for a very fixed, very set, single purpose, going for the lowest possible spec risks it being obsolete and almost useless. A good example with the Pandora is how little on-board flash they had - you literally almost needed an SD card to do just about anything with it, and while that's not a huge problem, it also introduces a point of failure - if you somehow lose the SD card, you lose pretty much everything but the OS. Pyra's 32 GB of onboard storage is a much nicer option this go-around - it's thus far more robust, and even very
USEABLE, whether you have an SD card or not.
The analogy also fails because, again, RAM is made to be utilized, and not only that, the more RAM a device has, the more it will use. As good as
@TrashyMG has with his video, one of the first things he says is "the 2 GB of memory on the OMAP5 Devboard." It ends with 1.5 GB out of 2 GB used.
Any smart OS is going to try hard to keep at least a chunk of its maximum memory free/accessible. My PC at this moment is using about half its RAM (8.3 GB out of 16), and about half its total pagefile (15.9 GB out of 32). Obviously if this were limited to 2 GB, it'd still function fine, but it'd need to swap like all hell and back (especially as it's Windows).
Basically, you can toot your horn about how that "4 GB won't ever be used" all you want. Until I see a fully-functioning 4 GB unit still only using 1.5 GB of memory itself, though, regardless of any sort of possible combination of things thrown at it, and never venturing close to using over 2 GB, your view is misguided at best, and downright incorrect at worst. I'd imagine using Pyra as a Minecraft Server would quite quickly kill that 4 GB of RAM - much less two.
Time will tell which of us is right or wrong, but I'm pretty convinced that you're guilty of celebrating what you think is the winning home run you just blasted out of the ballpark with your bat - but then running off the field without touching all four bases.
