I read the i9000 cpu c111A datasheet,
c111A include 4Gb NAND + 3Gb DDR + 1Gb OneNAND.
it's means 384M ddr + 128M OneNAND.
why everyone says:512M RAM?
what's the OneNand?
Samsung says 512MB RAM. Where'd you hear it has OneNand?
I doubt Samsung would confuse Nand and RAM.
from here:
/attachment.php?attachmentid=403851&stc=1&thumb=1&d=1284870007
There are already few threads about this issue. No one really knows exactly how much actual RAM there is for programs. There are conflicting reports, for example Samsung themselves say there is 384MB of RAM in Fascinate (Galaxy S for Verizon US), and then in some of their other Galaxy S variants they say 512MB of RAM. For me it seems like 384MB is what is actually available for programs (since Android OS is reporting 384MB, and so far no firmware has reported anything above that), rest is either used by the system or hardware devices (GPU perhaps ??).
It has 512mb of ram. 128mb is set aside for ram disk purposes (Lord knows why). The other 64~ is probably reserved for telephony.
I think a major portion of the ram is dedicated for video ram. and of course dma buffers for camera and other hardware sensors or components (GPS, radio etc)
so...we can at the most expect around 360megs available at most in any rom to come.
It's advertised with 512mb of RAM so why not? The rest of the RAM you don't get to use it probably reserved by the system. What would be the point in having a phone that doesn't phone someone cause your low on RAM.
sionyboy said:
It has 512mb of ram. 128mb is set aside for ram disk purposes (Lord knows why). The other 64~ is probably reserved for telephony.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
THat's the rumor on the epic 4G, but did anyone actually determine it was the same on the galaxy S?
Yeah, there was a thread on the development board where RyanZA and others went through some of the code and found some similarities between the two.
Related
Is there a massive diiference in performance between a phone with 576 mb ram e.g htc desire and a phone with 512mb ram eg. the google nexus one?
thanks
Cpt.Curry said:
Is there a massive diiference in performance between a phone with 576 mb ram e.g htc desire and a phone with 512mb ram eg. the google nexus one?
thanks
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
The only difference is that you get 64MB more RAM to hold a handful more applications in the background. The performance difference is only going to be appreciable if the applications that are being let go in that 64MB "buffer" take a long time to load up.
I've read before that they are identical, just reported differently.
512Mb RAM + 64Mb baseband.
Pretty sure I read it on here, but could be wrong.
Dont matter as the current kernels wont see more than appox 400 MB
Rusty! said:
I've read before that they are identical, just reported differently.
512Mb RAM + 64Mb baseband.
Pretty sure I read it on here, but could be wrong.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
+1, and it's written in many places.
Yeah, the Desire doesn't have any more memory than the Nexus One. They just report it differently.
I just installed the JM2 firmware, and was surprised to see a new Samsung widget task manager (which is actually really good! =O).
However, once I opened the task manager and went to the 'Summary' tab, the RAM information lists it out of 326mb. For example, at the moment it's showing 258mb out of 326mb used...
Is there some separate ram locked away? As I thought the Galaxy S had 512mb...
So anyone know what the deal is with the 326mb listed instead of 512mb?
Need Froyo to address 512mb.
Next time, please use the search button. It's startin to be a pain to write this over and over again (and not just me.)
The device was taken apart to bits countless times, it does contain 512MB RAM.
Why can't you see it all? the software doesn't show it. YET. Remember that the original JF3 firmware only showd 256.
Pika007 said:
Next time, please use the search button. It's startin to be a pain to write this over and over again (and not just me.)
The device was taken apart to bits countless times, it does contain 512MB RAM.
Why can't you see it all? the software doesn't show it. YET. Remember that the original JF3 firmware only showd 256.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Ah, apologies.
So does that mean currently the Galaxy S isn't actually using all its RAM due to the firmware not allowing it? Kind of strange, didn't know there was anything preventing the use of it at all since the Desire and Nexus One were happy enough with 512mb on Eclair.
Two queries though in relation to Pikas post -
I believe that this issue was uncovered over on GSM Arena. I think Samsung at the time assured everybody that the odd RAM results was just a firmware bug that would be resolved on release products.
So we have a release product where there are still problems with the memory and GPS.
Secondly, I thought it was the kernel that limits the memory to 256 through a Himem flag? Why is then that people are now seeing 326 and not 256? Is it a half way fix? Has the kernel changed?
Your question is not dumb at all.
No phone depends on Froyo to use more than 256mb of RAM.
Even if our phone have 512MB of Ram, we probably won't have so much available.
Many phone always have some ram used by the radio hardware.
I don't know if Samsung will be able to reduce radio (GSM, 3G etc) memory usage.
326MB is maybe the maximum we will get.
I bet we'll see 386-400~ after froyo.
The system is more memory efficient.
If it says 512 it should display 512.
The problem is that when you open the task manager it displays 258/386. I thought it was using the remaining RAM for VIDEO. If its not, then we should see a 512 no matter how much the OS consume. It can even be 500/512 but it should say 512.
I hope Samsung fixes this soon as they sold me a phone with no working LEDs and less RAM??!!
darcjrt said:
I hope Samsung fixes this soon as they sold me a phone with no working LEDs and less RAM??!!
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
My sgs has working LEDs. The screen and the menu/back buttons. If yours are not working, the phone is broken.
Sent with my Personal Dis-organizer GT-I9000
What's wrong with 326mb ram my hero at most shows around 110 and I'm on froyo not to forget
MacaronyMax said:
What's wrong with 326mb ram my hero at most shows around 110 and I'm on froyo not to forget
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
That's not the prob. In Samsung's task manager it's showing the entire phone has a MAXIMUM of 326mb RAM, and obviously much less free.
On Advanced Task Killer I usually have between 70-140mb free, not that much different from my old Hero.
As has been pointed out this may be due to the Galaxy S's use of 2 different types of RAM, with 128mb OneRAM. I can only assume this is dedicated to video.
This would then make sense for the 326mb RAM listed in most applications, with the extra 60mb or so locked away for Android (326mb + 128mb + Android reserved = 512mb).
Still kind of weird how Samsung has made the phone...I was trying my friend's new desire and it listed in Advanced Task Killer as usually having about 240mb free while mine had 100mb free.
I posted originally at [Q] Amount of RAM? under Galaxy S I9000 Q&A , but I guess its relevant to this post as well.
There is new information to indicate that perhaps Galaxy S doesn't have 512MB of RAM after all. Click on the above link .
Samsung Open-Source may hold the key..
Samsung have released the kernel source code for the GT-I9000, and it helps a little bit with trying to decipher what's going on.
From what I can tell, based on specs and previous posts, the SGS has 384MB of -normal- RAM, and 128MB of "OneDRAM".
OneDRAM is a dual-port memory, which means that multiple chips can be connected to it, and using it at the same time. For example, the phone main CPU and a graphics co-processor could both be sharing this memory and using it to communicate with each other. For more details on what OneDRAM is, I recommend trying google.
From what I can tell, the OneDRAM is used for a few things such as video memory, shared communication buffers with the phone hardware etc.
There are a few places that hint at where this memory may be going, the first of which is the kernel configuration:
CONFIG_ANDROID_PMEM_MEMSIZE_PMEM = 16384
CONFIG_ANDROID_PMEM_MEMSIZE_PMEM_GPU1=8192
CONFIG_ANDROID_PMEM_MEMSIZE_PMEM_ADSP=1800
CONFIG_VIDEO_SAMSUNG_MEMSIZE_FIMC0=12288
CONFIG_VIDEO_SAMSUNG_MEMSIZE_FIMC1=1024
CONFIG_VIDEO_SAMSUNG_MEMSIZE_FIMC2=12288
CONFIG_VIDEO_SAMSUNG_MEMSIZE_MFC0=32768
CONFIG_VIDEO_SAMSUNG_MEMSIZE_MFC1=32768
CONFIG_VIDEO_SAMSUNG_MEMSIZE_TEXSTREAM=10240
=> These parameters describe approx 128MB of space that is being reserved at boot time for the GPU, DSP, Camera(s), and communicating with the phone hardware.
I'm not sure yet whether all of that memory comes out of OneDRAM or not (I haven't spent too long looking into it, and I'm not really much of a kernel guy).. however, it seems that linux-2.6.29/arch/arm/plat-s5pc11x/bootmem.c might offer a few more hints as to where it goes, if anybody's keen to look.
I seem to have gotten a little bit off-track, but basically, it seems that yes, the phone does have 512MB of RAM. It's just that some of it appears to be "locked away" for special use before anything else can get at it. This is probably because the coprocessor(s?) require blocks of contiguous physical memory, and achieving that would not be able to be guaranteed if standard memory allocation techniques were used. Maybe someone with more of a clue than I can help fill in some more of the blanks with the above...
Regardless, I don't think that the apparent discrepancy is anything to worry about. The SGS is an awesome phone, and that will remain the case whatever the amount of RAM it tells you is "free" (well, within reason I guess). Go and and enjoy it for what it is
Intratech said:
Need Froyo to address 512mb.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
False.
With Froyo you'll be getting a total RAM of 304Mb.
You do know that basing a statement from what you see in pre-alpha/alpha firmwares is a really bad idea, right?
gundyman said:
Samsung have released the kernel source code for the GT-I9000, and it helps a little bit with trying to decipher what's going on.
From what I can tell, based on specs and previous posts, the SGS has 384MB of -normal- RAM, and 128MB of "OneDRAM".
OneDRAM is a dual-port memory, which means that multiple chips can be connected to it, and using it at the same time. For example, the phone main CPU and a graphics co-processor could both be sharing this memory and using it to communicate with each other. For more details on what OneDRAM is, I recommend trying google.
From what I can tell, the OneDRAM is used for a few things such as video memory, shared communication buffers with the phone hardware etc.
There are a few places that hint at where this memory may be going, the first of which is the kernel configuration:
CONFIG_ANDROID_PMEM_MEMSIZE_PMEM = 16384
CONFIG_ANDROID_PMEM_MEMSIZE_PMEM_GPU1=8192
CONFIG_ANDROID_PMEM_MEMSIZE_PMEM_ADSP=1800
CONFIG_VIDEO_SAMSUNG_MEMSIZE_FIMC0=12288
CONFIG_VIDEO_SAMSUNG_MEMSIZE_FIMC1=1024
CONFIG_VIDEO_SAMSUNG_MEMSIZE_FIMC2=12288
CONFIG_VIDEO_SAMSUNG_MEMSIZE_MFC0=32768
CONFIG_VIDEO_SAMSUNG_MEMSIZE_MFC1=32768
CONFIG_VIDEO_SAMSUNG_MEMSIZE_TEXSTREAM=10240
=> These parameters describe approx 128MB of space that is being reserved at boot time for the GPU, DSP, Camera(s), and communicating with the phone hardware.
I'm not sure yet whether all of that memory comes out of OneDRAM or not (I haven't spent too long looking into it, and I'm not really much of a kernel guy).. however, it seems that linux-2.6.29/arch/arm/plat-s5pc11x/bootmem.c might offer a few more hints as to where it goes, if anybody's keen to look.
I seem to have gotten a little bit off-track, but basically, it seems that yes, the phone does have 512MB of RAM. It's just that some of it appears to be "locked away" for special use before anything else can get at it. This is probably because the coprocessor(s?) require blocks of contiguous physical memory, and achieving that would not be able to be guaranteed if standard memory allocation techniques were used. Maybe someone with more of a clue than I can help fill in some more of the blanks with the above...
Regardless, I don't think that the apparent discrepancy is anything to worry about. The SGS is an awesome phone, and that will remain the case whatever the amount of RAM it tells you is "free" (well, within reason I guess). Go and and enjoy it for what it is
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
But, has anyone ACTUALLY confirmed we don't have 512MB of physical ram.. I've seen lots of guessing, but I haven't actually seen any proof yet. So has someone confirmed it by actually checking the hardware..
andrewluecke said:
But, has anyone ACTUALLY confirmed we don't have 512MB of physical ram.. I've seen lots of guessing, but I haven't actually seen any proof yet. So has someone confirmed it by actually checking the hardware..
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Has anyone actually confirmed that we DO have 512MB ?? I am yet to see any firmware reaching over 384MB, and all the evidence out there suggest otherwise . Samsung says it has 512MB RAM, but they never said all of that memory is available for Applications. So it could very well be 384MB regular RAM (available for Apps and system) while rest is reserved for specialized hardware. Technically that is still 512MB *RAM*, given that manufacturers have a tendency to overstate numbers and specs, I'm not going to take Samsung's word for it...
I hope at least some of that is being used by the OS.
PhoenixFx said:
Has anyone actually confirmed that we DO have 512MB ?? I am yet to see any firmware reaching over 384MB, and all the evidence out there suggest otherwise . Samsung says it has 512MB RAM, but they never said all of that memory is available for Applications. So it could very well be 384MB regular RAM (available for Apps and system) while rest is reserved for specialized hardware. Technically that is still 512MB *RAM*, given that manufacturers have a tendency to overstate numbers and specs, I'm not going to take Samsung's word for it...
I hope at least some of that is being used by the OS.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I've never read where Samsung says they've used 512MB RAM, I've only read where people claim they've said (aka nothing official). So, we aren't even taking Samsung's word, we are taking a 3rd party's on the manufacturer's non-binding, private word is.
@
It's just that some of it appears to be "locked away" for special use before anything else can get at it.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Obviously, I'd prefer 512MB plus this 128 locked away separate, but this sounds like an elegant solution if correct. Also, it goes a long way to explain how the SGS can be pretty snappy in areas like gaming while maybe keeping other vital parts open and smooth like the 3G radio.
*EDIT* I'm reading now that new pressers have released more official information on newer Galaxy S models, still I've googled for them and even gone to Samsung site, still haven't viewed anything with my own eyes from Samsung.
Well, that's my point.. The problem I'm seeing is that I've seen quotes for OneNand and OneDRAM in many places, but it is based on random diagrams for other phones, or rumors... I'm simply interested in knowing the truth, but am growing increasingly concerned by the growing number of claims about this phone, which are being repeated, but after some research, many I've found seem to be based on information which isn't actually proof (and often, seems to be based on stuff such as "I heard the SGS has...".
As I said, SEMC was running around claiming it was OneNand (which isn't even RAM), using claims which I've never seen proven. OneDRAM seems more likely, and it would mean we basically have 512MB of RAM (oneDRAM seems as though it would be usable for normal RAM too), but I'd still like to know for sure..
alovell83 said:
I've never read where Samsung says they've used 512MB RAM, I've only read where people claim they've said (aka nothing official). So, we aren't even taking Samsung's word, we are taking a 3rd party's on the manufacturer's non-binding, private word is.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Samsung Captivate (scroll down to Memory section), is that enough proof for Samsung's claim ??
Using the program 'Android System' I noticed the dashboard shows a MAX of 325MB with X amount FREE. I understand there is some overhead for Video etc but 187MB?! I don’t think so... My next thought was that 2.1 only supports X amount of RAM and that when 2.2 comes out we will see closer to the full 512MB. Does anyone know if this is the case? Thanks in advance!
It has 512, but the phone is unable to use it all at present. The 2.2 update will come with a kernal update, which will allow full use of all 512mb. Unless some enterprising developers gets there first with a custom ROM...
It is interesting you report 325mb of RAM. I was fairly certain the 2.6.29 Kernal was limited to 256.
I can only see 199 with all the tools I have tried, but I don't know exactly how much is dedicated to the OS.
In 2.2 the phone is supposed to be able to use all 512... which means we will probably see 400 max available for programs.
Physically it has 512MB of RAM, but the system doesnt recognize all of it under 2.1
\It will be recognized in 2.2
Thanks for the info guys!
Sent from my SAMSUNG-SGH-I897 using XDA App
Dareoth said:
It is interesting you report 325mb of RAM. I was fairly certain the 2.6.29 Kernal was limited to 256.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
interesting, he reported 325 and joey reported 199
each around 58 lower than what the system would recognize (256 or 384)
so is it possible that the system uses about 58mb and there is some setting or secret firmware allowing him to recognize more?
I have the stock JF6 ROM... Nothing special just a few mods nothing RAM related. I just checked it again; 325MB. Are you guys using the 'Android System Info' app, maybe it/mine is reporting incorrectly!? Any ideas?
Sent from my SAMSUNG-SGH-I897 using XDA App
Since this is a Linux system you can get the real info from /proc/meminfo.
MemTotal ~ 325MB as reported by the 2.6.29 kernel. As others have reported Froyo should see all 512. From http://developer.android.com/sdk/android-2.2-highlights.html
2.6.32 kernel upgrade
HIGHMEM support for RAM >256MB
SDIO scheduling and BT improvements
Code:
# cat /proc/meminfo
cat /proc/meminfo
MemTotal: 333336 kB
MemFree: 3408 kB
Buffers: 372 kB
Cached: 63816 kB
SwapCached: 0 kB
Active: 130364 kB
Inactive: 146516 kB
Active(anon): 106464 kB
Inactive(anon): 106684 kB
Active(file): 23900 kB
Inactive(file): 39832 kB
SwapTotal: 0 kB
SwapFree: 0 kB
Dirty: 0 kB
Writeback: 0 kB
AnonPages: 212704 kB
Mapped: 35116 kB
Slab: 12040 kB
SReclaimable: 2388 kB
SUnreclaim: 9652 kB
PageTables: 14684 kB
NFS_Unstable: 0 kB
Bounce: 0 kB
WritebackTmp: 0 kB
CommitLimit: 166668 kB
Committed_AS: 9151572 kB
VmallocTotal: 286720 kB
VmallocUsed: 88084 kB
VmallocChunk: 178180 kB
ctalbot said:
Since this is a Linux system you can get the real info from /proc/meminfo.
MemTotal ~ 325MB as reported by the 2.6.29 kernel. As others have reported Froyo should see all 512. From http://developer.android.com/sdk/android-2.2-highlights.html
2.6.32 kernel upgrade
HIGHMEM support for RAM >256MB
SDIO scheduling and BT improvements
...
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Ok, I pulled up /proc/meminfo and get 333336 as well...
I wonder why the "running processes" app only shows a total of 199?
Just thought I'd try to resurrect this thread instead of starting another...
I've been doing a little googling, and I found on one of the original Korean teardowns of a GT-i9000 (intl. version of our Galaxy S). Link is here.
It would appear (at least based on their teardown) that the Galaxy S DOES NOT in fact have 512 MB of DDR memory. It does have a total of 512 MB of "RAM", just that 384 MB is DDR RAM, and the last 128 MB is OneNAND memory. Plus an extra 512 MB of non-storage NAND (aka, ROM in the traditional sense).
I have no idea, but if I had to guess, I'd say that the OneNAND is somehow being used for radio and GPU, and the DDR is the "RAM" we see in Android. But it would seem clear from every teardown I could find, that the Galaxy S does not have 512 MB of DDR like we expect it too. Not nessecarily a good or a bad thing, it may just be that Samsung decided to design the Galaxy S a little bit differently than other current smartphones. I'm betting that the OneNAND is assigned and controlled entirely by the radio, and is already being used way before the Android kernel even gets going. Either way, until I see someone actually address all 512 MB of RAM with a kernel, I'm going to assume that there isn't actually 512 MB of DDR RAM in the thing.
People can feel free to disagree, but I think this is a reasonable solution for why Samsung claims that the Galaxy S has 512 MB of "RAM", but also why we are seeing significantly less user-addressable RAM from within Android. They are just being slightly deceptive by calling the OneNAND flash memory "RAM".
Thanks for trying to bring this post back! I agree with you, from every teardown and some gathered info; The captivate only has 384MB of OS RAM. (and that RAM may even be shared with the video) Kinda BS if you ask me; its like saying my PC has 9.5GB of RAM. Rather than stating that I have 8GB of OS RAM and 1.5GB of video RAM. Oh well... Please correct me if I am wrong!
Sent from my SAMSUNG-SGH-I897 using XDA App
Question: Why on Earth DOESN'T this device use all 512MB from teh get-go?
PhrProfess said:
Question: Why on Earth DOESN'T this device use all 512MB from teh get-go?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Well that is the question isn't it? Perhaps as time goes by devs will be able to recover (or perhaps reallocate) even more of that RAM towards OS use. Seems sort of unlikely to recover the OneNAND though, as it's probably controlled by mostly proprietary low-level code.
My thoughts are still that the kernels for ALL the galaxy variants are designed to support the 384 megs of ram that the fascinate has. Yes, the fascinate only has 384 megs of ram( as per the Samsung website). We may have 512 physical ram but the cookie cutter kernel is only using 384. This would have saved Samsung some QA time-- or maybe that kernel mad the most stable memory allocation configuration.
ipxnsv said:
My thoughts are still that the kernels for ALL the galaxy variants are designed to support the 384 megs of ram that the fascinate has. Yes, the fascinate only has 384 megs of ram( as per the Samsung website). We may have 512 physical ram but the cookie cutter kernel is only using 384. This would have saved Samsung some QA time-- or maybe that kernel mad the most stable memory allocation configuration.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Yea, probably not though. Why would Samsung design their "cookie cutter kernel" based on one of the least popular design variants? That wouldn't really make much sense from a efficiency standpoint would it?
Either way, I think this has more to do with the physical hardware on board than the way the kernel is addressing it. If anything, I think Verizon didn't want to perpetuate the lie that Samsung has had going with all the other carriers, and just decided to fess up that the Galaxy S only has 384 MB of traditional DDR RAM.
Shammyh said:
Yea, probably not though. Why would Samsung design their "cookie cutter kernel" based on one of the least popular design variants? That wouldn't really make much sense from a efficiency standpoint would it?
Either way, I think this has more to do with the physical hardware on board than the way the kernel is addressing it. If anything, I think Verizon didn't want to perpetuate the lie that Samsung has had going with all the other carriers, and just decided to fess up that the Galaxy S only has 384 MB of traditional DDR RAM.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Because ALL variants have AT-LEAST 384 megs of ram. Easier going down, than up.
Verizon has crippled thier devices in the past; the htc touch pro... The verizon version has 192MB vs 288MB for the ATT version, also the verizon version has no accelerometer. Kinda off subject there but anyways, I still wish we knew more about how the memory is being allocated on the captivate!
Sent from my SAMSUNG-SGH-I897 using XDA App
Shammyh said:
Just thought I'd try to resurrect this thread instead of starting another...
I've been doing a little googling, and I found on one of the original Korean teardowns of a GT-i9000 (intl. version of our Galaxy S). Link is here.
It would appear (at least based on their teardown) that the Galaxy S DOES NOT in fact have 512 MB of DDR memory. It does have a total of 512 MB of "RAM", just that 384 MB is DDR RAM, and the last 128 MB is OneNAND memory. Plus an extra 512 MB of non-storage NAND (aka, ROM in the traditional sense).
I have no idea, but if I had to guess, I'd say that the OneNAND is somehow being used for radio and GPU, and the DDR is the "RAM" we see in Android. But it would seem clear from every teardown I could find, that the Galaxy S does not have 512 MB of DDR like we expect it too. Not nessecarily a good or a bad thing, it may just be that Samsung decided to design the Galaxy S a little bit differently than other current smartphones. I'm betting that the OneNAND is assigned and controlled entirely by the radio, and is already being used way before the Android kernel even gets going. Either way, until I see someone actually address all 512 MB of RAM with a kernel, I'm going to assume that there isn't actually 512 MB of DDR RAM in the thing.
People can feel free to disagree, but I think this is a reasonable solution for why Samsung claims that the Galaxy S has 512 MB of "RAM", but also why we are seeing significantly less user-addressable RAM from within Android. They are just being slightly deceptive by calling the OneNAND flash memory "RAM".
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
The Galaxy S has the c111a application processor (hummingbird), which includes... 4Gb NAND + 3Gb DDR + 1Gb OneNAND.
I don't know exactly how that's divvied up, but it does have 512MB there for RAM.
384 sounds like no gingerbread for us
XGX5309 said:
The Galaxy S has the c111a application processor (hummingbird), which includes... 4Gb NAND + 3Gb DDR + 1Gb OneNAND.
I don't know exactly how that's divvied up, but it does have 512MB there for RAM.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
That's my point exactly. 512 MB ROM, 384 MB DDR RAM, and 128 MB OneNAND.
OneNAND != DDR.
I know that we are all still waiting for froyo, and that Samsung will probably not upgrade us to gingerbread. But do our phones fit the minimum hardware specs projected for gingerbread here: http://www.androidpolice.com/2010/0...-aims-for-complete-break-from-android-2-12-2/
The only thing I am curious about is the RAM. I understand that our phones DO have 512mb of RAM, but only around 300mb is accessible to us. So would this be an issue when taking into account the rumored minimum of 512mb RAM needed to run gingerbread?
njd911 said:
I know that we are all still waiting for froyo, and that Samsung will probably not upgrade us to gingerbread. But do our phones fit the minimum hardware specs projected for gingerbread here: http://www.androidpolice.com/2010/0...-aims-for-complete-break-from-android-2-12-2/
The only thing I am curious about is the RAM. I understand that our phones DO have 512mb of RAM, but only around 300mb is accessible to us. So would this be an issue when taking into account the rumored minimum of 512mb RAM needed to run gingerbread?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
If the spec's for Gingerbread is calling for 512 mb's of ram..and the phone has 512 mb's of ram..then what difference does it make if it's accessible to us or not ? It's going to be up to how they configure the OS to work as far as I can see as too what we can actually use or see no matter what they do with it..They did state in your link that it would work with it..only time will tell if that pans out or not.
Mac
on the specs, it says GS1 has 512mb of RAM. I know android OS takes space phone it self blah blah so we only get to use 3xx mb of RAM. but then usually half (if not more) of the 3xx mb of RAM is already filled!
before, (back in eclair & froyo days) android 2.3 will allow us to utilize ALL 512mb but ****, now even more RAM is in use..
also
someone told me Nexus S who has exact same specs as GS, can use ALL 512mb...
so is there a way to use all 512mb of RAM? or at least more than 329mb?
joonair said:
on the specs, it says GS1 has 512mb of RAM. I know android OS takes space phone it self blah blah so we only get to use 3xx mb of RAM. but then usually half (if not more) of the 3xx mb of RAM is already filled!
before, (back in eclair & froyo days) android 2.3 will allow us to utilize ALL 512mb but ****, now even more RAM is in use..
also
someone told me Nexus S who has exact same specs as GS, can use ALL 512mb...
so is there a way to use all 512mb of RAM? or at least more than 329mb?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
You do use all the RAM, Android users shouldn't be worried about RAM as it is good to be used... Now Samsung's excuse for updating the GS1 to ICS is bull. but the reason you get 329 MB of RAM is because that 183 MB of RAM is for the system and cannot be given to the user. There are some kernels that offer like 344 MB of RAM(for Froyo), but that is it. No more, no less. Can't change it! Sorry bud.
Edit- we always are utilizing all 512 MB of RAM always. And when half of it is filled, that is always going to be there if the phone is turned on as some none system apps and system apps cannot be closed and are needed for the device to function.
I just recently got myself a Samsung Infuse, really like the phone. One thing that really bugs me is that it appears to be the same as my captivate in terms of RAM and ROM space, yet on my Infuse i get access to 452MB RAM yet on my captivate as stated we only get access to 329MB or 344MB.
Why such the huge difference?