Ram & eMMC costs / power drain

[comradekingu]

Even if you cant understand your own current need for >2GB ram, you and everyone else _will_ run into such a need in the future.
Because software continually use more memory. And even though you might be perfectly OK with a static use-case, that is limiting, ie. _not_ future-proof.

Luckily DDR3 prices have tanked in major fashion, so the monetary cost upfront makes little impact.

Other than capability, what does make a huge difference, after the fact, is _perceived value_. If you think this is irrelevant, you misunderstand market dynamics, to the point where the arbitrary 2GB limit becomes counterproductive.

 

[fusion_power]

So,the number of RAM chips has an impact on the power drain, also the size? So does 4x 512MB modules need more power than a single 2GB Module for example?

 

[levi]

Theoretically, not really, but in practice those 512MB chips will likely have been fabbed on an older process which suffers from more static load than a newer process used to make bigger chips. Whether that's true for the sort of chips ED is likely to be using is arguable though.

 

[Swordfish II]

Even if you cant understand your own current need for >2GB ram, you and everyone else _will_ run into such a need in the future.
Because software continually use more memory. And even though you might be perfectly OK with a static use-case, that is limiting, ie. _not_ future-proof.

Luckily DDR3 prices have tanked in major fashion, so the monetary cost upfront makes little impact.

Other than capability, what does make a huge difference, after the fact, is _perceived value_. If you think this is irrelevant, you misunderstand market dynamics, to the point where the arbitrary 2GB limit becomes counterproductive.

But how much further in the "future?" The Pandora is still ticking along quite well with 512mb. I would hazard that by the time 4GB is needed for the Pyra, the Pyra will probably be long gone.

Also it seems the discussion is moot as the RAM is also populated with the CPU, so a board upgrade could easily meet increased needs with more ram.

 

[comradekingu]

There is a need for 4GB on the pyra now. The 512MB limit is very real for people now.

What you are doing is constructing a exclusionist argument, when you could be making an inclusive one.

More memory is the only solution to make everyone happy. You arent excluding anyone with the detriments, but you are excluding people by limiting them.

Whatever the ability to change with CPU-upgrades, it doesnt warrant an initial limit that is set too low. Estimating current needs by pointing to possible future upgrades is arbitrary.

Edit: Generally more chips for more concurrent bandwidth (faster I/O)

 

[levi]

My Pandora does quite often complain it's low on memory when I run some of Ptitseb's newer ports, but in practice most of the time they do actually run. On my x86 pcs the most memory I have on any individual machine is 2GB, and that handles all of my photo editing and audio transcoding tasks just fine, but that's just my experience.

 

[Swordfish II]

There is a need for 4GB on the pyra now. The 512MB limit is very real for people now.

What you are doing is constructing a exclusionist argument, when you could be making an inclusive one.

More memory is the only solution to make everyone happy. You arent excluding anyone with the detriments, but you are excluding people by limiting them.

Whatever the ability to change with CPU-upgrades, it doesnt warrant an initial limit that is set too low. Estimating current needs by pointing to possible future upgrades is arbitrary.

Edit: Generally more chips for more concurrent bandwidth (faster I/O)

Actually i would not be happy if battery life decreases, and everything ED has posted shows how ridiculous you have to be to use up 2GB of ram let alone 4GB.

 

[EvilDragon]

Actually, I doubt any image or video editing solution that needs more than 2GB RAM would run pleasantly with the CPU we have.
That stuff is not only memory but also CPU hungry, and not (yet) suited for any mobile processors IMO.

 

[Grench]

Actually, I doubt any image or video editing solution that needs more than 2GB RAM would run pleasantly with the CPU we have.
That stuff is not only memory but also CPU hungry, and not (yet) suited for any mobile processors IMO.

Exactly. Use the right tool for the right job.

Yes, the Pyra will be powerful and flexible, for a handheld computing device. It will be able to do quite a lot of productivity tasks. Any expectations that it can fulfill on-device the same roles that a $2K laptop or a $20K+ professional graphics & video editing workstation can do is silliness.

Now, what it CAN do is provide you with a remote desktop connection to your graphics & video editing workstation from anywhere with WiFi or a 4G/3G connection.

If you need serious data crunching power with large amounts of RAM, those exist too. Look up the HP Z840 as an example. Most consumers don't even know that equipment like that exists. It is a relatively normal looking desktop friendly tower computer that can house 16 solid state drives, 36 cores of CPU and 1TB or RAM (yes, terabyte). Fully equipped they can get into the $75K+ range for one machine.

Let the device play it's strengths. The Pyra is a highly mobile pocket computer with great battery life and efficiently designed controls suitable for work and fun, and amazing battery life. It will be a super pocket computer. It will not, however, be a pocket super computer. Regardless of the spec, there will always be tasks that can exceed those capabilities. Let ED draw the line at what is reasonable to produce and can maximize the capabilities - which includes battery life - and keeping the components in-line with the capabilities of the rest of the system.

 

[comradekingu]

The only time-critical operation, once you have enough battery, is user-time.
More ram means getting things done within a shorter timeframe of user-time.

So long as you aren't running into the total battery life time, the experience is all that matters.

Its not as if you are crying about the lack of 1GB, or even reducing the amount of memory-chips? But that is the exact same prospect with regards to why you think 2GB is good and 4 isn't.

That is the exact same prospect. I can set up a whole ncurses-DE, and run comfortably within 128MB, but if i have to stay up 40+ hours tapping away to see the benefit, there is none to be had.

Gimp will gladly eat lots of memory all by itself if you run up the tabs. A very real scenario for how I use it.
Same with raw processing. Virtualisation. Where CPU time really comes into it is video editing and games.
The latter two can to some degree be offloaded to desktop hardware.

I closed over 700 FF tabs the other day. All of which don't use a lot of CPU if you just run with the right settings.

TinycoreOS or Qubes may not be mobile operating systems, but they do make use of a lot of ram, for good reasons. The less you have, the uglier defaults.

The pandora doesnt have 512MB btw, it has a baseline of 256MB, and that is _up_ from a planned 128MB. See my point? You would think the lesson was learnt.

Its not so much that I don't understand my main rig is better for a lot of things, Its that I'll try to do it mobile if I can anyhow.

Over 10 years ago my main machine had 2GB of ram and prescott netburst p4. And yes, it ran, albeit OC-ed, n64 games semi-decently.

Anything can be pushed.

 

[ible]

it will be an issue of perception i think.

"old CPU, low RAM, not good enough for me" will be some people's attitudes toward the Pyra, despite the fact that 2 GB for a stripped-down, efficient linux is quite a bit.

hypothetically, there'd be two responses to 4GB:

• "4GB RAM, wow! i can run multiple android instances and run the OS from memory no problem!" (e.g. FatDogArm...)
• "4GB RAM, that's way better than 2GB!" but not really realizing how much you'd need for most of your tasks is < 2GB...

 

[comradekingu]

You are looking at it from the wrong angle. Even if you are correct about mostly < 2, you are still leaving room for a need. And besides you are arguing yourself to ruin.

What you should be asking is how much more of a positive response you get to what it costs to upgrade the hardware from 2GB to 4GB.

Not a whole lot of added cost, but it makes a huge difference in perceived value. I say perceived value, because it is what matters. It is what poeple pay for.

And people are willing to pay a lot more in return for what you put into the upgrade.

Any way you look at it, it goes a long way in legitimizing the total cost of the device.

 

[Swordfish II]

Actually, I doubt any image or video editing solution that needs more than 2GB RAM would run pleasantly with the CPU we have.
That stuff is not only memory but also CPU hungry, and not (yet) suited for any mobile processors IMO.

According to this, there are a a number of video editors that should even run on the Pandora...Granted they are minimum requirement, but look at Blender (300mhz and 128ram). I would be shocked if avidemux didn't work (maybe a bit slowly).

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Comparison_of_video_editing_software
[doublepost=1458600432,1458600155][/doublepost]

Same with raw processing. Virtualisation. Where CPU time really comes into it is video editing and games.
The latter two can to some degree be offloaded to desktop hardware.

I closed over 700 FF tabs the other day. All of which don't use a lot of CPU if you just run with the right settings.

Its not so much that I don't understand my main rig is better for a lot of things, Its that I'll try to do it mobile if I can anyhow.

Over 10 years ago my main machine had 2GB of ram and prescott netburst p4. And yes, it ran, albeit OC-ed, n64 games semi-decently.

Anything can be pushed.

Look at your examples. Seriously, look at them. You can't spout ridiculous examples as a reason why 4GB "is needed NOW." I don't even know how you would pick the right tab out of 700 on the small Pyra screen, and do you REALLY need 700 tabs on it anyways? Maybe I am old, but I forget what is on which tab after 5.

IIRC ED mentioned debian takes up ~ 100mb ram, the demo's have shown you can comfortably run multiple instances of pcsxrearmed and a browser with tabs and some other stuff. I think real world usage is more than covered.

I could see your argument if like the Pandora, it was struggling a bit, but it simply isnt.

 

[WizardStan]

The Pandora is still ticking along quite well with 512mb

The Pandora hasn't been very good with web sites for a few years now, in my opinion. If anything, that's going to be the source of RAM desire. What's 2GB? 10, maybe 15 tabs before you start hitting swap?
[doublepost=1458602348,1458602021][/doublepost]

I closed over 700 FF tabs the other day.

Seriously, how?
I have 8GB of RAM and an 8GB swap and I have run out of both with just 40 tabs.

 

[Grench]

The only time-critical operation, once you have enough battery, is user-time.
More ram means getting things done within a shorter timeframe of user-time.

You and others seem to be failing to understand that there is a logical limit to how much RAM is useful to a given quantity of CPU processing capability. 2GB is already pretty much at that practical limit for the OMAP5 from the testing done on the dev board. More is simply more spec, not necessarily more useful.

 

[comradekingu]

None of my use-case is rediculous. I use a computer for demanding tasks every day. If you dont know about vertical stacking, tab grouping and go-to-tab, then why are you an authority on how much sense it makes? What you think and what I know are two different things. One is a known positive that i dont really understand how you can shrug off by calling something ED does all usecases.

700+ were the ones i didnt need, hence why i closed them.

WZ: I have more than 40 on pinned tabs at all times. 12 GB ram. Used to have 4 and ran out a lot when I wasn't thinking or just on occasion.

about:config and plugins shave the resources down quite considerably.

I would manually solder a moduleboard to have 8GB ram on a pyra. I dont buy hardware often, but when I do, I make sure it lasts.

Edit: Take a look at http://www.kosagi.com/w/index.php?title=Novena_Main_Page slower CPU, ships with 4GB ram as standard.

 

[thatgui]

None of my use-case is rediculous. I use a computer for demanding tasks every day.

Maybe thats the key here, you are applying a desktop usage pattern to a mobile one, which simply makes no sense, yet (maybe a few years down the road).

Simply put (but looses in the english translation): fate of a single person, no concern for the whole project

 

[_jr_]

Larger memory enables more use cases, but given the other constraints I still cannot to see any large difference in the amount of viable usage scenarios between let's say 1G, 2G, or 4G of RAM (e.g. in my experience compiling/linking large C++ applications with optimizations needs more than 4G, while even large C projects will usually be fine with 512M).

 

[comradekingu]

That something is 'mobile' is just as arbitrary a limit as the 2GB barrier.

When I had a nokia e61 I used it for surfing the web, torrents, listening to flac, IRC, SSH etc.
Now that is normal on a phone. N64 emulation was just as demanding on a desktop then as it is on mobile now. Times change.

And its perfectly possible to use a 10 year old machine for desktop. However there are now more demanding tasks, and people expecting to get them done. None of these people care for the distinction between mobile and desktop.

The more people you can sell devices to, the better the fate of the whole project.

Edit: "Maybe a few years down the road" is the whole point. We all have increasing demands, for a device that is meant to last quite a few years. While a 2GB limit is above the pain-treshold for some now, it will certainly be for more people given enough time.

I would rather call it a laptop and apply my appreciation of such a device in smaller form-factor than start making excuses.

 

[Swordfish II]

None of my use-case is rediculous. I use a computer for demanding tasks every day. If you dont know about vertical stacking, tab grouping and go-to-tab, then why are you an authority on how much sense it makes? What you think and what I know are two different things. One is a known positive that i dont really understand how you can shrug off by calling something ED does all usecases.

So instead of covering what most people do and use, we should build a device that purely fits your specs and what you will use it for, ignoring the extra costs involved, and battery drain.

Yeah that makes sense