Mips And Gflops

[Kangal]

Your! YOUR! :angry:
Now you're saying "You are move Fox", which I don't understand. You probably wanted to imply that it is Fox's move, in which case you use the form "your".

Sorry. I've seen too many of these lately, and just snapped at this one. Nothing personal.

Ha, Touch'e
+1

 

[sebt3]

So what do we have here...

"MIPS" stands for "millions of instructions per second." .....

Exophase explaining that the chosen benchmark indicator (MIPS, FLOP) are nowhere near being usefull to compare hardware architecture.
For common mortal : MIPS and FLOP observe the CPU power but not how the full system will perform.
BTW : Thanks for the insights.

:unsure:
...

JayFoxRox explaining that any system performance will depend on how the software use the hardware.

Any still there are some debating to know if the pandora is or not more powerfull than the PS2, WII or else...

In the enterprise world, we use tpc-c as benchmark tools. It mesure the number of transaction an application (may it be an Oracle db, sqlserver or else) on a given hardware. So you can take 2 repport using the same software and try to compare...
Even using the same software the TPC-C indicator is still flawed as hell : what are these transactions ? what is the clients ? how the network is configured ? and the SAN ?
Still, there are *millions* spent each year to collecte theres TPC-C numbers and there are *billions* spent based on these flawed numbers....

phoronix is a team that try to bench gaming performance on linux systems. Their tests actually use FPS in games to compare system. This indicator is still flawed (distro, background tasks...), but less than most (compare same apps, same arch).

So if you realy want to compare the best thing to do is :
1) pick a game that's ressource intensive (to eliminate minesweeper ) and portable. Let's say Quake3 (most portable and ressource intensive game I know)
2) Optimise it on each plateform you want to compare (Use DSP and NEON on the pandora, same kind of work on each plateform)
3) run scenario on each and collect FPS. Do it many times.
4) Finaly compare average and you'll get :
How these system can compare running this game... But not an other....

So please stop comparing e-penis. There is no way that is simple, cheap and accurate. In gaming world the hardware differ so much from one system to one other that performance of any app depend highly on the will and knowledge of this app developper.

EDIT :
All you've to know is :
1) the pandora hardware have been chose based on performance/watt for long run
2) the best coders of the handheld gaming world are on board

 

[droneb]

@TylerAW

SEE thats what happens when you start asking what piece of tech is harder/better/faster/stronger.

(i dont know why i keep talking about cars)

you cant put your cooper or smart to do the job of a plow (because it doesnt have the hardware to)

but then, wich one is better?

what would i do with a smart on a hardterrain? nearly useless.
and what would i do with a plow in the middle of a caribean city? (no snow to push).

and on the end yoou ask wich one is a better car? looking at the size of the engine? the fuel tank? the number of units sold along the world?.

and when you start talking of wich gaming device is better for gaming, well this is still hard, because consoles are usually having splitted hardware with slower processors, and gaming computers usually just have one intensive CPU and GPU.

even if you figured out FLOPS DMIPS and Mhz, something i believe only usefull for standard computing (and comparing between same family of devices)
you now still have to talk about parallel tasks done either by pipelines, or actual split hardware, and the monster of all of this,
"special graphics instructions" wich could save you O(n^2) or more in computing complexity order instructions, down to the O(n) space.

 

[1magus]

Wow what a bloodbath ... (this is a dangerous place for a Medic to tread)

PS More RAM in my book means extra performance than less RAM

True, but past a certain point it just means its no longer the bottleneck.
Remember you are only as fast as your slowest component (or was it "as strong as your weakest link"?)

On the other hand, memory size, past a certain point, matters much less than speed and latency

Just confirms what I just said before.

this is like counting cars horsepower comparing with the size of the fuel tank

Haha lol. The analogy is actually true (backed by an example: Wii)

did you understand what i am saying?

I actually do. It is impossible to compare the "power" of various different CPU's ACCURATELY without knowing what to define and how to define it.

you all keep saying comparing is impossible

And they're right, but so are you. I got the feeling you were seeking the power of various systems to accomplish 3D graphics, am I right?
(no you idiot not like Avatar 3D)
They're right because you can't use Mips & Gflops to compare what you perceive as a powerful system.
But you're right as some systems are more powerful than others at certain tasks
(and sometimes at all tasks ie; my laptop can emulate GBA games 300% fullspeed something the GBA cannot)


Voila!

*snip...Highest being better at graphics than the lower ones.
1. i7 Gaming Computer
2. PS3
3. Xbox 360
4. Xbox
5. Wii
6. Gamecube
7. PS2
8. iPod Touch/3GS
9. Pandora
10. PSP
11. Dreamcast (maybe it stays about here or maybe its better than Pandora)
12. Nintendo 64
13. PSOne
-------------------------
14. DSi (afaik)
15. SNES (afaik)
16. Sega Genesis (afaik)
17. Commodore 64 (afaik)
18. Atari (afaik)


CCCUUUTT!!!
This is off-topic.
I think what OP (original poster and openpandora) wanted to know was:
How can we determine the "power" aspects of different CPU systems?

SO couldn't we compare consoles like Pandora and Dreamcast by technical specs one by one?

Not by technical specs (too difficult and mostly guess work) but by actual testing more accurate "point system" may be better alternative.
SO What does that mean = benchmarking. (3D benchmarking tools and WinSAT! anyone?)
Now to device a benchmarking system that can be applied to a wide range of devices ... (near impossible)
So if we don't have a benchmark, how can we even compare it?
We use technical details of the systems, the type of task/app we want tested, observe them in action... then add in common sense!


It is not just about power but also about who has the better software that takes advantage of this.

Sorry I was trying to compare in terms of emulation power. Also the iPhone 3GS might have a SGX 535 with 40Mhz on the Pandora but that means nothing when Apps are limited to how much ram they are allowed to use (32MB I believe is the limit).
Let's take Home computers out of this question, they will automatically be better at everything, they also use Out of Order Execution which not even the PS3 and 360 use (XBOX 1 does but 64MB of RAM vs 256+ does not mean faster machine).

 

[Exophase]

It's already been said but you don't seem to listen. RAM size usually has little to do with performance and is more of a threshold of what you can and cannot do. For emulation, much more overhead is needed in computational resources than memory. A very fast Saturn emulator might require a 1GHz x86 but only a few MB of memory. You're also confusing program/data size with memory footprint - just because Apple apps are limited in distribution size doesn't mean the apps can't use most of the 3GS's 256MB when loaded - for a predominantly single-tasking platform that'd make no sense.

Throwing more RAM at a problem to try to make it faster probably won't help you - any huge LUTs that actually use all that memory uniformly would exhibit poor cache performance and if you just need the address space the CPU's MMU can provide it. The only exception is when avoiding disk swap thrashing, but most consoles don't even use disk swapping.

 

[1magus]

It's already been said but you don't seem to listen. RAM size usually has little to do with performance and is more of a threshold of what you can and cannot do. For emulation, much more overhead is needed in computational resources than memory. A very fast Saturn emulator might require a 1GHz x86 but only a few MB of memory. You're also confusing program/data size with memory footprint - just because Apple apps are limited in distribution size doesn't mean the apps can't use most of the 3GS's 256MB when loaded - for a predominantly single-tasking platform that'd make no sense.

Throwing more RAM at a problem to try to make it faster probably won't help you - any huge LUTs that actually use all that memory uniformly would exhibit poor cache performance and if you just need the address space the CPU's MMU can provide it. The only exception is when avoiding disk swap thrashing, but most consoles don't even use disk swapping.

I did not mean they are limited in distribution size I mean Apps made on the App store are limited to 32MB of RAM, the rest is taken up by iPhone OS, at least that's what I heard last sure most programs running on that thing would not need it but 3D ones might.

And fine more ram does not mean more performance fine. But more RAM certainly helps 3D related tasks. So what is RAM needed for on Pandora? I'm trying to listen.

 

[Exophase]

I did not mean they are limited in distribution size I mean Apps made on the App store are limited to 32MB of RAM, the rest is taken up by iPhone OS.

That doesn't make any sense and I doubt it's true. iPhone 3GS even has 128MB more RAM than iPhone 3G's - what exactly does the OS do on 3GS and not on 3G to warrant taking all that extra RAM?

 

[1magus]

I did not mean they are limited in distribution size I mean Apps made on the App store are limited to 32MB of RAM, the rest is taken up by iPhone OS.

That doesn't make any sense and I doubt it's true. iPhone 3GS even has 128MB more RAM than iPhone 3G's - what exactly does the OS do on 3GS and not on 3G to warrant taking all that extra RAM?

The extra RAM in 3GS is used for faster web browser and sometimes 3D related tasks. I know for a fact some 3D games have shadows you can turn on when running it on 3GS, you can also turn them on in non 3GS iPhones but decreases performance a lot. I have no idea what is loaded but I know the iPhone OS uses 70MB of RAM once started so
1st + 2nd GEN Free RAM: 58MB
3GS FREE RAM: 186MB
Now the limit is for the sake of the first and 2nd gen I believe. I mean if an App is made and can only run on 3GS than Apple loses out on sales. The limited memory is due to the Phone aspect, Apple DOES NOT want the Phone on the devices to be turned off at any time. I know it seems like I have been misinformed when it comes to everything computer wise but I KNOW for a fact Apples little device has quite a few limitations . I'm trying to get any misinformed any inforormation out of my head from computers however, so yes I have been misinformed when it comes to quite a few things but not everything.

 

[sebt3]

It's already been said but you don't seem to listen. RAM size usually has little to do with performance and is more of a threshold of what you can and cannot do. For emulation, much more overhead is needed in computational resources than memory. A very fast Saturn emulator might require a 1GHz x86 but only a few MB of memory. You're also confusing program/data size with memory footprint - just because Apple apps are limited in distribution size doesn't mean the apps can't use most of the 3GS's 256MB when loaded - for a predominantly single-tasking platform that'd make no sense.

Throwing more RAM at a problem to try to make it faster probably won't help you - any huge LUTs that actually use all that memory uniformly would exhibit poor cache performance and if you just need the address space the CPU's MMU can provide it. The only exception is when avoiding disk swap thrashing, but most consoles don't even use disk swapping.

Exo... You should just stop doing this.
I mean, you're just just giving insight on how thing works. And this is real insight and I love to read them.
But your argument while to the point and fully valid, are too technical to be understand by common mortal.
Your previous post in this thread saw 3-4 attempts to translate it to non-techy people. But finally none of theses posts got understood by OP.
With 10 years in IT, I sometimes need translation and/or google to understand every single part of your posts.

In the dev section, fine. it's there just for this and mere mortal shouldn't lurk there anyway (yes, I know this is not respected but still).
But the general section should be more accessible to anyone.

When someone try to educate an old child on drinking wine, he don't serve his best bottle first : the kid will just don't get it.

I, for one, would prefere the kind of answer you gave in the last thread about the "DS screens problem" as it show the OT how wrong he is in a way he could understand it (even if this could, and have hurt sensibility).
At least you had fun typing it, you get the same or better result and you don't get the impression of teaching relativity to a stone.

@TylerAW : don't get me wrong, I don't want to hurt your susceptibility or anything else. These question have been asked too many time. Exophase keep trying to educate anyone. But these questions start all over again every 2 months, and the answer is always the same : When comparing orange to peach, using banannas metrics won't help much

 

[trooper]

@TylerAW : don't get me wrong, I don't want to hurt your susceptibility or anything else. These question have been asked too many time. Exophase keep trying to educate anyone. But these questions start all over again every 2 months, and the answer is always the same : When comparing orange to peach, using banannas metrics won't help much

Who stole the apples ?.

Oh, And fruit salad anyone ?.

Trooper

 

[1magus]

Ok so I was wrong it's 58MB for Applications: IPhone Memory

 

[Exophase]

The extra RAM in 3GS is used for faster web browser and sometimes 3D related tasks. I know for a fact some 3D games have shadows you can turn on when running it on 3GS, you can also turn them on in non 3GS iPhones but decreases performance a lot. I have no idea what is loaded but I know the iPhone OS uses 70MB of RAM once started so
1st + 2nd GEN Free RAM: 58MB
3GS FREE RAM: 186MB
Now the limit is for the sake of the first and 2nd gen I believe. I mean if an App is made and can only run on 3GS than Apple loses out on sales. The limited memory is due to the Phone aspect, Apple DOES NOT want the Phone on the devices to be turned off at any time. I know it seems like I have been misinformed when it comes to everything computer wise but I KNOW for a fact Apples little device has quite a few limitations . I'm trying to get any misinformed any inforormation out of my head from computers however, so yes I have been misinformed when it comes to quite a few things but not everything.

So 3GS ships with extra memory that nothing is allowed to access? I think apps are within their own discretion if they want to require 3GS. Look at free apps - Apple makes nothing on them but they're still allowed. We also know that making apps that require 3GS must be an option by virtue of Apple's inclusion of OpenGL ES 2 which is not supported on 3G. Apple has written developer documents on how to best use OGL ES 2 - do you think they wrote these while not allowing any apps to use it?

I'm trying to find some mention of this limit and all I'm finding is that apps themselves must be under 2GB. Maybe you have a source for it. 32MB is such a drastic limit that I imagine it'd be pretty common news if it's true.

Shadows being faster on 3GS has nothing to do with its extra RAM but is entirely because of its better graphics chip - probably has something to do with SGX having a stencil buffer which MBX lacks.

EDIT: That link shows that 58MB is left over on 3G phones (fairly believable), not that 58MB is a mandated limit for 3GS capable apps.

 

[1magus]

The extra RAM in 3GS is used for faster web browser and sometimes 3D related tasks. I know for a fact some 3D games have shadows you can turn on when running it on 3GS, you can also turn them on in non 3GS iPhones but decreases performance a lot. I have no idea what is loaded but I know the iPhone OS uses 70MB of RAM once started so
1st + 2nd GEN Free RAM: 58MB
3GS FREE RAM: 186MB
Now the limit is for the sake of the first and 2nd gen I believe. I mean if an App is made and can only run on 3GS than Apple loses out on sales. The limited memory is due to the Phone aspect, Apple DOES NOT want the Phone on the devices to be turned off at any time. I know it seems like I have been misinformed when it comes to everything computer wise but I KNOW for a fact Apples little device has quite a few limitations . I'm trying to get any misinformed any inforormation out of my head from computers however, so yes I have been misinformed when it comes to quite a few things but not everything.

So 3GS ships with extra memory that nothing is allowed to access? I think apps are within their own discretion if they want to require 3GS. Look at free apps - Apple makes nothing on them but they're still allowed. We also know that making apps that require 3GS must be an option by virtue of Apple's inclusion of OpenGL ES 2 which is not supported on 3G. Apple has written developer documents on how to best use OGL ES 2 - do you think they wrote these while not allowing any apps to use it?

I'm trying to find some mention of this limit and all I'm finding is that apps themselves must be under 2GB. Maybe you have a source for it. 32MB is such a drastic limit that I imagine it'd be pretty common news if it's true.

Shadows being faster on 3GS has nothing to do with its extra RAM but is entirely because of its better graphics chip - probably has something to do with SGX having a stencil buffer which MBX lacks.

EDIT: That link shows that 58MB is left over on 3G phones (fairly believable), not that 58MB is a mandated limit for 3GS capable apps.

I meant shadows sorry, I know a 3D RPG that has self shadows you can enable in game menu. Anyway maybe some Apps are 3GS only but most aren't going to be, especially games. Apple knows that not all of it's 70 million user base wants to buy the next iPhone/ touch right away or ever. I have no idea what the mandated limit is on 3GS apps but I know that extra 128MB must be used for some tasks in iPhone OS. Maybe some games look better automatically when rendered on 3GS due to some OpenGL 2.0 code, but like you all keep saying adding tons of extra RAM does not make games look nicer or run faster, so why should games use ALL of that 128?

 

[Exophase]

I meant shadows sorry, I know a 3D RPG that has self shadows you can enable in game menu. Anyway maybe some Apps are 3GS only but most aren't going to be, especially games. Apple knows that not all of it's 70 million user base wants to buy the next iPhone/ touch right away or ever. I have no idea what the mandated limit is on 3GS apps but I know that extra 128MB must be used for some tasks in iPhone OS. Maybe some games look better automatically when rendered on 3GS due to some OpenGL 2.0 code, but like you all keep saying adding tons of extra RAM does not make games look nicer or run faster, so why should games use ALL of that 128?

Apple doesn't decide which apps require 3GS and which don't, that's up to the app developers. As far as Apple is concerned, while they will want to keep up software sales for old platforms they also have every incentive to convince people to buy new hardware. I imagine Apple makes even more money on its several hundred dollar per unit hardware sales than it does on the App Store.

I never said more RAM can't be made to make a game look nicer - more RAM = higher resolution textures, bigger worlds, more kinds of enemies, more loaded/better quality sound effects, *cough*sloppier coding*cough*..

 

[1magus]

I meant shadows sorry, I know a 3D RPG that has self shadows you can enable in game menu. Anyway maybe some Apps are 3GS only but most aren't going to be, especially games. Apple knows that not all of it's 70 million user base wants to buy the next iPhone/ touch right away or ever. I have no idea what the mandated limit is on 3GS apps but I know that extra 128MB must be used for some tasks in iPhone OS. Maybe some games look better automatically when rendered on 3GS due to some OpenGL 2.0 code, but like you all keep saying adding tons of extra RAM does not make games look nicer or run faster, so why should games use ALL of that 128?

Apple doesn't decide which apps require 3GS and which don't, that's up to the app developers. As far as Apple is concerned, while they will want to keep up software sales for old platforms they also have every incentive to convince people to buy new hardware. I imagine Apple makes even more money on its several hundred dollar per unit hardware sales than it does on the App Store.

I never said more RAM can't be made to make a game look nicer - more RAM = higher resolution textures, bigger worlds, more kinds of enemies, more loaded/better quality sound effects, *cough*sloppier coding*cough*..

Look if Apps actually got to use more than 100MB of RAM I think we would see some spectacular programs and games there but I'm pretty sure unless it's running on the iPad they don't. As for sloppier coding I'm not a programmer so I would not know, I do know that when using higher resolution bitmaps in 3D modeling you get more crashes .

 

[calc84maniac]

Okay, here's a comparison I'd like to make just because I can. TI-84+SE graphing calculator (probably found in a classroom near you) and Nintendo Game Boy.

CPU:
TI-84+SE has a 15MHz z80 processor.
GB has a 4MHz z80-derivative (informally known as GBZ80) with less registers and some added, but many removed, instructions. Also, clock cycles per instruction is always a multiple of 4 unlike z80, so an instruction that takes 7 cycles on z80 will take 8 on GBZ80.

TI-84+SE definitely wins in CPU terms. It will certainly excel more with raw calculations that a GB would.

RAM:
TI-84+SE has 128KB of RAM (though to preserve compatibility with older models only 32KB are normally used).
GB has 8KB of work RAM, 8KB of video RAM, and (depending on the inserted cartridge) 0KB, 8KB, 32KB, or 128KB save ram. 8KB is the most common cartridge RAM size.

They are pretty evenly matched here, but TI-84+SE normally has the advantage (especially considering that the GB's VRAM is typically unusable for data manipulation when the screen is on)

Video:
TI-84+SE: 96x64 black-and-white LCD. Pixel data must be outputted by the CPU, with a ~10 microsecond delay required between each LCD operation (the most common operation is outputting 8 pixels).
GB: 160x144 four-level grayscale LCD. Entire tilemaps and sprites are outputted by the chip at about 60Hz, with CPU interaction only required when changing graphics data, modifying the tilemap, or moving sprites.

Certainly the GB screen looks better due to the higher resolution and grayscale depth (though the TI-84+SE can, with carefully controlled LCD outputs, generate grayscale too). Due to the large amount of CPU operations needed, the TI-84+SE struggles a bit more than the GB with tilemap and sprite display, but the faster CPU helps here. The TI-84+SE is a bit more flexible with its graphics because it outputs raw bitmaps, and with optimized code you can get what you see in my avatar. That sort of 2.5D display would be almost impossible to pull off on the GB.

In conclusion, the speed of these two devices can only be compared depending on the types of software you would want to run. TI-84+SE is great with calculations and flexible display (like graphing equations or running raycasters) and the GB is a bit better at retro-style video games. So you can't really say one is definitively faster or better than the other.

 

[paulguy]

I have a 3GS with a jailbreak and an addon to show the free memory on the status bar. by default the OS leaves about 155-165MB of RAM free on a fresh boot. The apps can use as much of this as they want. If the memory runs out, the biggest users get killed (Though I've had the OS crash and reboot in this case.).

The biggest problem is that everything fucking leaks like crazy, it's nuts. Just colloquy will use almost 100MB in a few hours.

 

[droneb]

I meant shadows sorry, I know a 3D RPG that has self shadows you can enable in game menu. Anyway maybe some Apps are 3GS only but most aren't going to be, especially games. Apple knows that not all of it's 70 million user base wants to buy the next iPhone/ touch right away or ever. I have no idea what the mandated limit is on 3GS apps but I know that extra 128MB must be used for some tasks in iPhone OS. Maybe some games look better automatically when rendered on 3GS due to some OpenGL 2.0 code, but like you all keep saying adding tons of extra RAM does not make games look nicer or run faster, so why should games use ALL of that 128?

Apple doesn't decide which apps require 3GS and which don't, that's up to the app developers. As far as Apple is concerned, while they will want to keep up software sales for old platforms they also have every incentive to convince people to buy new hardware. I imagine Apple makes even more money on its several hundred dollar per unit hardware sales than it does on the App Store.

I never said more RAM can't be made to make a game look nicer - more RAM = higher resolution textures, bigger worlds, more kinds of enemies, more loaded/better quality sound effects, *cough*sloppier coding*cough*..

Look if Apps actually got to use more than 100MB of RAM I think we would see some spectacular programs and games there but I'm pretty sure unless it's running on the iPad they don't. As for sloppier coding I'm not a programmer so I would not know, I do know that when using higher resolution bitmaps in 3D modeling you get more crashes .

if such a mobile device ate 100Mb for just an simple gaming app, i wouldnt say it must have good graphics, but instead is having some serious memleaks. or its very lousy in coding.

i dont expect to everyone be a computer specialist or a programmer, but if you still dont get it about the analogy
then you really need to start reading some basic topics about computers (or maybe cars??? )



@sebt3 men you got me thinking about food, now ill have to make a fruit salad!
(where did i put my apple peeler to peel bananas??)

 

[calc84maniac]

Ooh, I forgot to mention one thing. TI-84+SE wins because of its awesome community. I believe this applies to Pandora, too.

 

[1magus]

I meant shadows sorry, I know a 3D RPG that has self shadows you can enable in game menu. Anyway maybe some Apps are 3GS only but most aren't going to be, especially games. Apple knows that not all of it's 70 million user base wants to buy the next iPhone/ touch right away or ever. I have no idea what the mandated limit is on 3GS apps but I know that extra 128MB must be used for some tasks in iPhone OS. Maybe some games look better automatically when rendered on 3GS due to some OpenGL 2.0 code, but like you all keep saying adding tons of extra RAM does not make games look nicer or run faster, so why should games use ALL of that 128?

Apple doesn't decide which apps require 3GS and which don't, that's up to the app developers. As far as Apple is concerned, while they will want to keep up software sales for old platforms they also have every incentive to convince people to buy new hardware. I imagine Apple makes even more money on its several hundred dollar per unit hardware sales than it does on the App Store.

I never said more RAM can't be made to make a game look nicer - more RAM = higher resolution textures, bigger worlds, more kinds of enemies, more loaded/better quality sound effects, *cough*sloppier coding*cough*..

Look if Apps actually got to use more than 100MB of RAM I think we would see some spectacular programs and games there but I'm pretty sure unless it's running on the iPad they don't. As for sloppier coding I'm not a programmer so I would not know, I do know that when using higher resolution bitmaps in 3D modeling you get more crashes .

if such a mobile device ate 100Mb for just an simple gaming app, i wouldnt say it must have good graphics, but instead is having some serious memleaks. or its very lousy in coding.

i dont expect to everyone be a computer specialist or a programmer, but if you still dont get it about the analogy
then you really need to start reading some basic topics about computers (or maybe cars??? )



@sebt3 men you got me thinking about food, now ill have to make a fruit salad!
(where did i put my apple peeler to peel bananas??)

Now you're just plain insulting me, if you read far back I already replied to another person that I understood what an analogy is and that I know what he meant. Games can utilize 58MB+ for intensive tasks like bigger textures, rather than make simple casual games like Bejeweled. True if Bejeweled used 100+ MB than somebody needs to edit that code and chop some things out . But let's say a MMORPG (Yes they do have MMOs on the iPhone now and no I don't mean Mafia Wars I mean full fledged 3D MMORPGs), if you wanted a real MMORPG with all of the features of the bigger ones on computers than you would need that much more RAM especially if you are loading hundreds of characters at once in a single map. Not all games on the iPhone are simple and if they are in you're world than maybe you are just using the iPhone for simple games which is fine but than why have that extra memory? I just read up on some change logs for v1.1 on Pocket Legends for iPhone and it says Anti Aliasing is disabled by default, if you as a player can enable AA than maybe it would need more than 58MB of RAM?