Memory Poll on Pyra

[SNESFAN]

The emmc/microsd/ssd poll appears inconclusive in user preference. I know preference exists between the community, but I doubt it's cut right down the middle like is being shown. I personally feel both options would be acceptable as well, but I fear for the lack of being able to future proof the device. I feel this poll and options will give a better idea on which direction the general population feels about it. I tried my best to give options for everyone, I apologize if I left things out or was too vague with the questions/answers.

Assumptions:

-Final decisions have NOT been made yet on SoC or architecture

-There is no technical limitations on the choices available (>4GB ram on 32 bit system, through PAE or whatever)

-Debian will be the stock OS and in the current testing image takes up 4GB of internal space (can possibly be shrunk or expanded later)

-Parts will be compatible with final hardware decisions

-RAM will not be able to be upgraded without a hardware revision (similar to pandora)

-Internal storage will not be able to be upgraded without a hardware revision (unless chosen in question 5 & 6)

-There will be 1 version of the Pyra for the foreseeable future (not tiered storage like phones/tablets) "one size fits all"

 

[EvilDragon]

Well there's one huge issue in the poll here - and that's missing prices.

Kingston eMMC is like that right now:

4GB about 8 USD

8GB about 18 USD

16GB about 19 USD

32GB about 41 USD

64GB about 100 USD

I think 16GB seems suited best for us.

32GB and 64GB add just too much for the final price, and the price from 8 to 16GB is just not justified.

Oh, and I think you can remove more than 4GB RAM from the first poll, as I seriously have no idea where you want to put that...

 

[Granitehead]

I don't think this poll will lead to better results, it just includes more questions.

It's not possible to decide for speed or capacity or anything without knowing the speeds/capacities of the different solutions. For example speed may be the top priority if the slowest option is way too slow, but if all options are fast enough it would be capacity.

So mostly this poll will just to lead a nice pattern of horizontal bars of differing length, but not much else.

 

[Exophase]

Not voting in this poll because there are too many mandatory fields that I don't care about or I don't think are appropriate.

I think most will agree from ED's list 16GB storage makes the most sense. Those prices should be similar to what other vendors offer. Maybe the size can be upgraded in a future model, if there's a situation where 32GB ends up costing almost the same as 16GB, like 8GB vs 16GB now.

OMAP5432 technically supports 8GB of RAM, but to obtain it you need a staggering 16 4Gbit DRAM chips (8Gbit ones aren't out yet). Even supporting 8 DRAM chips for 4GB would be difficult to fit. More capacity hits power consumption, especially with DDR3L. I don't think > 2GB really makes realistic sense, so it comes down to 1GB vs 2GB, with 2GB being a lot more popular.

 

[moxie]

So mostly this poll will just to lead a nice pattern of horizontal bars of differing length, but not much else.

...like most of the polls on the boards, then?

 

[SNESFAN]

I don't know the price for specific parts, but thanks ED for giving some more detail. There should also be some prices for potential microsd & adapters if that choice is given. That would give user's a better decision of the wide scope of options. The choice for what's affordable / acceptable risk is for certain yours and yours alone, that I feel is the business end of it, what you want as your final price, and what it costs to make. So what is technically possible given the options you end up choosing. If >4GB is not possible due to space requirements, then that's a limitation you will know, but it doesn't change what people would want. The requirement vs the possible is what you have to weigh. The goal of this poll is to gauge end user preference I think. They are users of software, and depending on how they want to use the device, for how long, and to what extent was the intent of the poll.

I chose not to put actual statistics on options as to not force people to choose between 2-3 specific hardware options, that has shown to be inconclusive. If speed is really more important than capacity or upgrade ability that will be shown. That's what I think we should know as a community. The informed decision on what hardware best meets those preferences can be held in consideration based off people's generic preferences. Then if 2 options fall into the same categories that meets the preference requirements then another poll could be made selecting option a or option b. The other current poll throws specific hardware with generic pro's and con's, and leaves the user to understand the statistics and make an informed decision based off how that hardware meets their supposed preference. That I feel is a wrong way of doing it. But I could be wrong.

For example, if you go into it not wanting microsd for the case of argument or bias, you will try to shoehorn that preference into making it meet what you want performance wise. But going at it from the other angle, state what you want to do, THEN find the technology that meets that requirement. Is that a bad way of looking at the situation? That's the first thing I ask people when they ask me to build a computer for them. What do you want to do with the system I'm going to build for you? What is more important doing a or doing b?

 

[Granitehead]

So mostly this poll will just to lead a nice pattern of horizontal bars of differing length, but not much else.

 ...like most of the polls on the boards, then?

Pretty much.

 

[SNESFAN]

BTW, you can already see what people are valuing and are looking for, but this discussion can be expanded on once more votes are tallied. I don't feel the options are contradictory so the data collected *should* have value unless people try to intentionally contradict the poll to ruin the results.

 

[Granitehead]

BTW, you can already see what people are valuing and are looking for, but this discussion can be expanded on once more votes are tallied. I don't feel the options are contradictory so the data collected *should* have value unless people try to intentionally contradict the poll to ruin the results.

I've already given an example of something which this poll fails to consider.

 

[Grench]

Well there's one huge issue in the poll here - and that's missing prices.

Kingston eMMC is like that right now:

4GB about 8 USD

8GB about 18 USD

16GB about 19 USD

32GB about 41 USD

64GB about 100 USD

I think 16GB seems suited best for us.

32GB and 64GB add just too much for the final price, and the price from 8 to 16GB is just not justified.

Oh, and I think you can remove more than 4GB RAM from the first poll, as I seriously have no idea where you want to put that...

Is the possible use of a microSD card & slot instead of eMMC off the table then?

 

[SNESFAN]

 

BTW, you can already see what people are valuing and are looking for, but this discussion can be expanded on once more votes are tallied. I don't feel the options are contradictory so the data collected *should* have value unless people try to intentionally contradict the poll to ruin the results.

I've already given an example of something which this poll fails to consider.

which is why you probably chose first speed then capacity, your example was already considered, that's why I asked what you value 1st and 2nd

EDIT: if the majority wants faster ram over capacity, and the choice falls between 16 and 32 as being split, choose the faster of the two. That's where the data become valuable.

If people hold capacity at a high regard but the majority wishes to have space of a lesser value, then hitting that mark as a minimum would be important.

There's plenty of scenarios in which this could be correctly interpreted.

 

[_wb_]

Well there's one huge issue in the poll here - and that's missing prices.


Kingston eMMC is like that right now:


4GB about 8 USD


8GB about 18 USD


16GB about 19 USD


32GB about 41 USD


64GB about 100 USD


I think 16GB seems suited best for us.


32GB and 64GB add just too much for the final price, and the price from 8 to 16GB is just not justified.


Oh, and I think you can remove more than 4GB RAM from the first poll, as I seriously have no idea where you want to put that...

If the internal storage is eMMC + µSD, then a 4GB eMMC (and no µSd card shipped) would be enough for me. If the internal storage is µSD only, then of course it can be shipped with various sizes of µSD cards at various prices. If the internal storage is eMMC only (an option I don't like), then I would want 64GB or 128GB to be as future-proof as possible. Sure, 16GB may seem like more than enough for anyone, but in fact it is not even enough to install 10% of the current Debian ARM software repository, and you can only install .deb's on the internal storage.

 

[SNESFAN]

^for your example, please choose your space requirement, not the endstate hardware on how to get there or the shipping capacity. If you want to be able to have 128GB then that's your choice. What hardware it takes to get there can be decided depending on how many people agree with your use case. If people want 8GB, their need will be met if 16GB is chosen. Opinions are too varied/split too much on specific technology/hardware to gauge what people want. The question needs asked in a different way to get something important out of it.

If the majority of the people are going to have an extravagant amount of internal space requirements, the cheapest/effective way to get there would be removable storage. But don't choose those options because you want removeable storage, choose it because you have a larger space requirement on your internal. If you have no need for that much space, but you just want it to be removable for the sake of durability / upgrade ability there's options for that as well. The same applies for those in favor of emmc, choose based off your requirement, not based off your hardware end state preference.

 

[Granitehead]

BTW, you can already see what people are valuing and are looking for, but this discussion can be expanded on once more votes are tallied. I don't feel the options are contradictory so the data collected *should* have value unless people try to intentionally contradict the poll to ruin the results.

I've already given an example of something which this poll fails to consider.

which is why you probably chose first speed then capacity, your example was already considered, that's why I asked what you value 1st and 2nd

I didn't vote that way and that's exactly my point.

 

[SNESFAN]

BTW, you can already see what people are valuing and are looking for, but this discussion can be expanded on once more votes are tallied. I don't feel the options are contradictory so the data collected *should* have value unless people try to intentionally contradict the poll to ruin the results.

I've already given an example of something which this poll fails to consider.

which is why you probably chose first speed then capacity, your example was already considered, that's why I asked what you value 1st and 2nd

I didn't vote that way and that's exactly my point.

you may have chose incorrectly then. If you want the fastest ram possible, but if all options are fast enough your next preference would be capacity and you chose something other than speed first then capacity then I don't know why you would have chosen anything other than that.

 

[TrashyMG]

@_wb_, I can fit pretty much all of the needed software development tools and supporting libraries and such under 3GBs with Debian Wheezy armhf setup I have on the omap5432 EVM board. I know there are some other things that I'll need down the road, but I don't think it would fill it up much more.. I feel that 16GB is fine.. I do run my Desktop on a 16GB partition.

 

[Askarus]

Well there's one huge issue in the poll here - and that's missing prices.


Kingston eMMC is like that right now:


4GB about 8 USD


8GB about 18 USD


16GB about 19 USD


32GB about 41 USD


64GB about 100 USD


I think 16GB seems suited best for us.


32GB and 64GB add just too much for the final price, and the price from 8 to 16GB is just not justified.


Oh, and I think you can remove more than 4GB RAM from the first poll, as I seriously have no idea where you want to put that...

If the internal storage is eMMC + µSD, then a 4GB eMMC (and no µSd card shipped) would be enough for me. If the internal storage is µSD only, then of course it can be shipped with various sizes of µSD cards at various prices. If the internal storage is eMMC only (an option I don't like), then I would want 64GB or 128GB to be as future-proof as possible. Sure, 16GB may seem like more than enough for anyone, but in fact it is not even enough to install 10% of the current Debian ARM software repository, and you can only install .deb's on the internal storage.

4 is too less I think.

Even with uSD and eMMC.

If only eMMC isused I think we should take 32GB. With uSD 16 is fine.

 

[EvilDragon]

32GB... so it seems you want the Pyra to cost 900 USD in the end?

It only sounds like little things you all want to add, but these add up in the end.

 

[SNESFAN]

^if 32gb is the requirement from the people that's cost effective over performance.... there's an option for that... just saying

 

[Askarus]

32GB... so it seems you want the Pyra to cost 900 USD in the end?


It only sounds like little things you all want to add, but these add up in the end.

Ok, Go for 16GB and it'll cost 875$ .

Take the micro SD and eMMc and we're all happy.

Maybe the Allwinner or Snapdragon will be available to us and be better than OMAP (and maybe offer 5 SDIO connections) and we're all happy.

As long as the SoC is not set, everyhting can change in some weeks I think.