Related
I've seen a lot of discussion on various Android/Droid forums on the web over the past month or two about the Bionic, and it having 512MB of RAM. A lot of people don't seem to mind, and some people have even said it doesn't matter because it's DDR2, which is faster than regular DDR.
Well, 512MB of RAM is not enough for a dual-core phone you plan to use for 2 years or more. Here's why, in a rather lengthy post that I also put on MyDroidWorld the other night. I've been on the XDA forums for a long time, though I don't post very frequently and I'm curious to see what people will think of my admittedly long post. So, here is why I think people should think long and hard about whether to buy the Bionic when it does come out, assuming it still ships with 512MB of RAM.
Caching.
Ok - let me explain. The single most important factor in performance of a computer is having enough RAM. When a computer runs out of RAM, it starts to use what's called a page file. It's basically a file on your hard drive that acts as additional RAM. Now, DDR3-1600 speed RAM transfers data at 12.8 gigabytes per second. Phenomenally fast. It also has a reaction time of around 5 nanoseconds, also ridiculously fast. When your operating system has to start using the page file because the physical RAM is full, the performance hit is EXTRAORDINARY. Even the best hard disk drives (not counting SSDs) like the latest Raptor from Western Digital cap out at around 155 megabytes per second for reading and writing, and it has a peak latency of 7 milliseconds for reaction time. 1 nanosecond is 1 million milliseconds, which makes the DDR3 RAM over a MILLION times faster reacting than the hard drive, and the transfer rate of the RAM over 80 times faster than the transfer rate of the hard drive.
In real-world terms, it's like you're talking about an ant versus a Porsche 911 Turbo. Most old computers that have long pauses or hang for several seconds doing even basic tasks, it's because they don't have enough RAM and it's caching stuff between the hard drive and the RAM.
Now, whenever Android runs out of RAM, (same with any operating system) it has to start using its page file, which means it starts using this monstrously slow flash memory as RAM. It's like merging onto a freeway that is gridlocked with traffic when you were going hundreds of miles per hour. The flash memory is a lot slower than the Raptor hard drive for data transfer rates, but it has a read time a lot faster; the best-performing ones are generally under 1 microsecond. 1 microsecond is a thousand times slower than 1 nanosecond. The write times are closer to hard drives, though; generally less than 1 millisecond, so like 10x faster than a hard drive but still 100,000 times slower reaction time to writing data than the RAM is.
What this means is, when your permanent storage is flash-based, it has a much faster reaction time than a hard drive but it's still dog-slow compared to RAM; so when Android runs out of RAM, it caches to the page file on the flash memory, and you'll have the same slowdown effect as you do on an old POS computer, but it's not as noticeable because flash memory reacts faster than disk-based hard drives.
The point of all of this is that, 1GB of DDR1 memory on a phone is FAR better than 512MB of DDR2 memory. The 1GB will prevent you from hitting that metaphorical brick wall of caching data to your flash memory when the 512MB won't. We already use 400MB, or more, of our 512MB of RAM on our existing phones just by turning it on and having a couple of widgets/services in the background above & beyond the stock ones. How do you expect to take advantage significantly higher-end applications and games, which also means (for games, primarily) that they take up more RAM, as well?
You can't have higher-quality graphics without needing more RAM, so when that new version of Angry Birds comes out this fall or something that requires two cores and looks amazing, but uses 250MB of RAM to run instead of the 80MB or whatever the regular one uses now, what do you think has to happen? That's right. Android has to cache that much extra data to your flash memory so it can unload it from the RAM, freeing the necessary space to load Angry Birds HD. This causes more of a delay as it's writing data, and will cause extra choppiness, etc. Another thing to keep in mind is that, as resolutions increase, so do the texture sizes for all applications and widgets that you use, assuming they support the new resolution. More size needed, which takes up more space in RAM.
Don't be fooled. When truly good and proper dual-core benchmarks come out, 1GB RAM dual-core phones will spank their 512MB RAM dual-core brethren for real-world performance in games, and other high-memory applications. Also, excessive caching greatly increases the chance of flash memory going bad. Not a common occurrence if it was fine when shipped, but still something to think about.
So, in summary, even though the performance hit from caching to flash memory isn't as bad as caching to hard disk drives, it's still a tremendous slowdown and it will matter for dual-core phones way more than for single-core ones. The average amount of RAM installed on dual-core desktop computers from Dell/HP/etc. was significantly higher than what the average was for the previous single-core generations were, and there are reasons for that. Primarily, the same reasons I just outlined. In simple terms, faster processors can do more things, which necessarily requires more RAM.
Sorry for the wall of text, I tried to be more concise but it kind of got away from me. I'm not buying a Bionic because it has 512MB of RAM. After owning it a year, it'll be having performance issues on top-end dual-core-required games that run just fine on phones like the Atrix.
I'm sorry because I know this is probably going to come across the wrong way, but WOW, you spent a lot of time writing that up, and too much time for me to read it alll, especially considering Motorola has pulled back on the Bionic and it's receiving "enhancements". I guess what I'm saying is why all the speculation/conjecture until we know the revised specs? Maybe it'll land with 8GB of DDR 6 RAM.
I'm hoping Motorola gives Verizon a phone that is higher end than the Atrix. Afterall Verizon has done much more than ATT in the way of supporting Moto..when they needed it. Anxious to see what Big Red winds up with.
Sent from my ERIS using XDA Premium App
I disagree that ram is the single most important factor of performance of a computer.
hard drives are the biggest bottleneck in a computer. this is why I use a vertex 3 ssd.
Sent from my PC36100 using XDA Premium App
gemro311 said:
I'm hoping Motorola gives Verizon a phone that is higher end than the Atrix. Afterall Verizon has done much more than ATT in the way of supporting Moto..when they needed it. Anxious to see what Big Red winds up with.
Sent from my ERIS using XDA Premium App
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I concur, really hope VZW pushes for a premier device
I disagree. Android isn't expanding as an OS at some breakneck pace and 512MB is definitely suitable for the near future. 1GB is absolutely not necessary for great performance in a phone. RAM is a bottleneck, but it is not something that magically allows for better performance if the device isn't hitting the pagefile anyway.
The way that Android manages applications will allow 512MB phones to be relevant for some time. The Bionic will be a solid phone for the next year, but there will always be something bigger and better next year. Phones aren't future-proof.
I was just checking out this thread and wanted to say maybe the reason that the atrix comes with 1gb of ram is because of the extra contraption that you can buy along with. It looks like a netbook but is not very well performing and who would even care to rely on it for anything I don't know.
gemro311 said:
I'm hoping Motorola gives Verizon a phone that is higher end than the Atrix. Afterall Verizon has done much more than ATT in the way of supporting Moto..when they needed it. Anxious to see what Big Red winds up with.
Sent from my ERIS using XDA Premium App
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I certainly hope Motorola makes the required improvements, but you also need to keep in mind Verizon approves and in many if not all cases specs the phones they want. They chose the specs, they had to live with the specs. I think once they saw what was coming they figured it was no longer premiere and wanted changes made.
Regardless of why its been pulled back the fact that it was is good, but if its going to take 4-5 months to get it out the door they should have just scrapped it altogether.
E30kid said:
I disagree. Android isn't expanding as an OS at some breakneck pace and 512MB is definitely suitable for the near future. 1GB is absolutely not necessary for great performance in a phone. RAM is a bottleneck, but it is not something that magically allows for better performance if the device isn't hitting the pagefile anyway.
The way that Android manages applications will allow 512MB phones to be relevant for some time. The Bionic will be a solid phone for the next year, but there will always be something bigger and better next year. Phones aren't future-proof.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Well, wait for Ice Cream and we'll see. Since the future Android version will also run in tablets, it is likely that it will have huge memory requirements.
By the way, my Acer Liquid A1 can't be officially upgraded to Froyo because it only has 256Mb. Later Liquid models with 512Mb are upgradeable. At the time I bought it, 512Mb seemed unnecessary because the Nexus One operating system only supported 256Mb, having the other 256Mb wasted. This was only 12 months ago...
galaxyjeff said:
I was just checking out this thread and wanted to say maybe the reason that the atrix comes with 1gb of ram is because of the extra contraption that you can buy along with. It looks like a netbook but is not very well performing and who would even care to rely on it for anything I don't know.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I think you are on to something here. I think I read somewhere that the atrix only uses 512 mb when not connected to the dock. I have the inspire which has 768 mb, and I came from the captivate which was 512 mb, and I done know if is the ram or what but this phone performs way better than the captivate. Even when I bought the inspire, right out the box stock, preformed much better than a captivate overclocked with an ext4 filesystem kernel. Not that this is empirical evidence, but hey.
Sent from my HTC Desire HD using XDA Premium App
cryptiq said:
I'm sorry because I know this is probably going to come across the wrong way, but WOW, you spent a lot of time writing that up, and too much time for me to read it alll, especially considering Motorola has pulled back on the Bionic and it's receiving "enhancements". I guess what I'm saying is why all the speculation/conjecture until we know the revised specs? Maybe it'll land with 8GB of DDR 6 RAM.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I lol'd. But seriously 512 MB of RAM is more than enough... It's a PHONE not a high end desktop system. I play tons of games on my x2 and with alot of crap in the backround open, and I notice zero performance hits. If you are spending all day monitoring your RAM on your phone and trying to measure FPS loss, load time differences, etc. I suggest that you try to pick up a new hobby ASAP, OCDing will be the end of you. Best of luck!
Edit: I wouldn't worry about it either! Bionic probably won't come out anyways, and if it does, another phone with 1GB to satisfy your OCD probably will be out by then.
As of now, I feel ALL future top tier smart phones need to come equipped with at least 1GB of DDR2. The G2x, for example, will most likely have issues running a custom ice cream rom. And people will be upset.. especially after putting up with all of the other various problems that particular phone has.
OP, I don't agree entirely with your explanation of the use of caching by the OS - for all 3 major computer OSes, no matter how much excess RAM you have, they will start caching data to the hard drive, whether you like it or not. Obviously if you run out of RAM, it has to do so, but it'll even do it long before you've hit that cap - just because it determines an application has gone "inactive". Now I haven't read up on Android enough to know whether this is 100% true for it, too, but considering it's running a linux kernel, I would imagine so. So just like the 8GB of RAM in my desktop doesn't necessarily help for everyday computing needs, 1GB vs 512mb on the Bionic may not make a huge difference.
raptordrew said:
OP, I don't agree entirely with your explanation of the use of caching by the OS - for all 3 major computer OSes, no matter how much excess RAM you have, they will start caching data to the hard drive, whether you like it or not. Obviously if you run out of RAM, it has to do so, but it'll even do it long before you've hit that cap - just because it determines an application has gone "inactive". Now I haven't read up on Android enough to know whether this is 100% true for it, too, but considering it's running a linux kernel, I would imagine so. So just like the 8GB of RAM in my desktop doesn't necessarily help for everyday computing needs, 1GB vs 512mb on the Bionic may not make a huge difference.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
i beg to differ
my captivate; even though its a single core...is still quite capable at most everyday tasks...only thing lacking is the RAM
my phone will slow to a crawl after entering twitter, switching to pulse and then going back to my homescreen....
not to mention my launcher keeps getting killed by android as it keeps running out of RAM
droid_does said:
i beg to differ
my captivate; even though its a single core...is still quite capable at most everyday tasks...only thing lacking is the RAM
my phone will slow to a crawl after entering twitter, switching to pulse and then going back to my homescreen....
not to mention my launcher keeps getting killed by android as it keeps running out of RAM
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I have to lol at this one. Absolutely none of those issues have to do with amount of RAM. In fact the launcher problem has nothing to do with RAM at all.
Sent from my ADR6400L using XDA App
While I appreciate other people who have the same amount of passion for phones as I do, I just have two words to say about anyone saying phones with 512 mb ram will not get Ice Cream Sandwich. Nexus S.
Sent from my ADR6400L using XDA App
mb02 said:
I have to lol at this one. Absolutely none of those issues have to do with amount of RAM. In fact the launcher problem has nothing to do with RAM at all.
Sent from my ADR6400L using XDA App
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
it does as android keeps killing it to free up more RAM to use......
droid_does said:
it does as android keeps killing it to free up more RAM to use......
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Yea the task manager is killing the apps to keep ram freed up, as in stopping unused processes etc. That's just the aggressive working of the management software that would run just the same if you even had 8GB of ram.
Sent from my ADR6400L using XDA App
timothymilla said:
While I appreciate other people who have the same amount of passion for phones as I do, I just have two words to say about anyone saying phones with 512 mb ram will not get Ice Cream Sandwich. Nexus S.
Sent from my ADR6400L using XDA App
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Remember when everyone thought Gingerbread would require a 1GHz processor as a system requirement, which was later debunked?
http://www.talkandroid.com/23041-so...ngerbread-update-due-to-1ghz-cpu-requirement/
Nobody can say what will and will not get updated for sure, although I will venture to say that it's HIGHLY likely the Nexus S will be getting 2.4, you're right.
zetsumeikuro said:
I lol'd. But seriously 512 MB of RAM is more than enough... It's a PHONE not a high end desktop system. I play tons of games on my x2 and with alot of crap in the backround open, and I notice zero performance hits. If you are spending all day monitoring your RAM on your phone and trying to measure FPS loss, load time differences, etc. I suggest that you try to pick up a new hobby ASAP, OCDing will be the end of you. Best of luck!
Edit: I wouldn't worry about it either! Bionic probably won't come out anyways, and if it does, another phone with 1GB to satisfy your OCD probably will be out by then.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
512 mb is not enough for a dual core 4G phone it just isnt. the thunderbolt has 768 mb and its only single core and 4G and let me tell you it would be way faster with the 1024 mb of ram i cant imagine how laggy the bionic would be if you start doing anything with it! the 512 ram will be ate up in no time! i sure hope verizon reconsiders and adds more ram or i probably wont use this device as my daily phone either keep the thunderbolt with more ram which is sad cause it has been out for awhile now and the droid x also has 512 ram and it has been out for a year and they cant make improvements?? and they are going to want $299+++ for this phone ON CONTRACT! it better have more than 512 ram or it aint worth a lick! rip this phone open and put my own ram in it!
I was under the impression that encryption was supposed to be a good thing. Can someone explain why everyone wants it disabled?
It apparently slows the device down significantly since they did the encryption with software instead of hardware. Doing the mod simply makes it optional like it was before. Most people won't have that kind of sensitive info on their phones to really worry about it.
i dont notice any slow down thus far and i applaud the encryption.
Most people would choose faster performance over encryption. Almost ANYONE would choose to have encryption if it didn't affect performance...there's no arguing that encryption is a bad thing...it's just that performance is king for most people who don't consider their phone data to be extremely sensitive.
I think Google should have done one of two things: 1) make it optional so everyone could choose encryption or performance 2) make it so the encryption has little to no effect on performance.
Since it does strongly affect performance, the fact that it's FORCED on us is definitely a point of contention.
> i dont notice any slow down thus far and i applaud the encryption.
if you didn't then good for you. don't bother comparing your Nexus 6 with how a hated touchwizd Note4 behaves. Heck don't compare it even with the year old Nexus 5.
People don't notice any slowdowns, its only a problem for those benchmark geeks.
Yet, in all full hardware benchmarks, even a fully encrypted Nexus 6 outperforms every other phone.
Antutu is still 50k+ for example. Lol
chrisjcks said:
People don't notice any slowdowns, its only a problem for those benchmark geeks.
Yet, in all full hardware benchmarks, even a fully encrypted Nexus 6 outperforms every other phone.
Antutu is still 50k+ for example. Lol
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
People have said the phone is significantly snappier after disabling it. Some may say it's placebo, but the read/write speeds are increased quite a lot, so it is believable. I personally didn't even use the phone with encryption and compared to the video reviews I've seen, mine seems to perform a whole lot better. In some vids there were noticeable delays when opening apps.
It is faster at saving files and opening my photos app without encryption. I have 3000+ pictures on my phone from that I took on my G3 and its much faster and there is almost 0 scroll lag now.
P1 Wookie said:
It apparently slows the device down significantly since they did the encryption with software instead of hardware. Doing the mod simply makes it optional like it was before. Most people won't have that kind of sensitive info on their phones to really worry about it.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Have any developers actually dug in to the kernel to validate that it's using software encryption only? It could be that the Snapdragon 805's crypto module is just slow. Surely there has to be a way to enable hardware encryption if it's not available.
phekno said:
Have any developers actually dug in to the kernel to validate that it's using software encryption only? It could be that the Snapdragon 805's crypto module is just slow. Surely there has to be a way to enable hardware encryption if it's not available.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I don't have time to go look because I'm about to go into work, but I believe the person that made the modded boot image was the one that figured it out.
I feel I don't need it. I have used a smartphone for years now and they could have been encrypted at any time but I chose to rely on my lock screen and the ability to remotely wipe my device. I don't want to give up the performance for something I don't feel I need. If there was dedicated hardware, which it looks like there isn't, I'd leave it encrypted. Apple, for example, uses dedicated hardware so that the encryption doesn't impact performance which means they can use encryption and still get speeds equivelant to or faster than most phones out there now.
---------- Post added at 09:03 AM ---------- Previous post was at 09:00 AM ----------
chrisjcks said:
People don't notice any slowdowns, its only a problem for those benchmark geeks.
Yet, in all full hardware benchmarks, even a fully encrypted Nexus 6 outperforms every other phone.
Antutu is still 50k+ for example. Lol
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
But there are videos showing the Nexus 6 performing operations slower than a Nexus 5 or did you mean it outperforms every other encrypted phone?.
The slow down is not noticeable by any significant margin. It's purely in benchmarks and possibly when installing some larger apps, you might notice it taking a bit longer than it should. After disabling encryption, it's most likely placebo that it feels faster, but the phone did not feel "slow" by any means with encryption enabled.
I just don't care enough to have my data encrypted, I don't keep anything of vital importance on my phone, so I just decided to get rid of it anyway.
Berzerker7 said:
The slow down is not noticeable by any significant margin. It's purely in benchmarks and possibly when installing some larger apps, you might notice it taking a bit longer than it should. After disabling encryption, it's most likely placebo that it feels faster, but the phone did not feel "slow" by any means with encryption enabled.
I just don't care enough to have my data encrypted, I don't keep anything of vital importance on my phone, so I just decided to get rid of it anyway.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I'm not sure it is just benchmarks. Not based on the video at http://arstechnica.com/gadgets/2014...premium-price-still-comes-with-compromises/2/ anyway. App launch, boot everything seems to be slower on the encrypted device (vs an un-encrypted N5).
Maybe it was pre-release software, so dunno if the issue is still as bad
jj14 said:
I'm not sure it is just benchmarks. Not based on the video at http://arstechnica.com/gadgets/2014...premium-price-still-comes-with-compromises/2/ anyway. App launch, boot everything seems to be slower on the encrypted device (vs an un-encrypted N5).
Maybe it was pre-release software, so dunno if the issue is still as bad
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
At least personally, I haven't noticed any real difference and the phone felt plenty quick while I was encrypted. I just wanted the piece-of-mind and wiped early so that I wouldn't be bothered later when the phone was more used and it would have been more of a hassle to wipe.
Another issue to keep in mind is the hit to battery life. If encryption is taking place in software, that's going to tax the CPU much more than if it was being done via dedicated hardware. Removing encryption will reduce CPU load, thus increasing battery life. So even if the device "feels" the same with and without encryption, you still benefit from disabling encryption.
Anecdotally, yesterday I experienced better battery life than what the reviewers were getting (about 5-6 hours of SOT). We already know that the I/O speeds are objectively faster with encryption disabled, so I'd love to see some objective tests done on battery life.
I may opt out then. I'm not a criminal or part of a sleeper cell of any kind.
Sent from my SAMSUNG-SM-N900A using XDA Free mobile app
i don't even have a lock screen.
do i need encryption?
bradputt said:
i don't even have a lock screen.
do i need encryption?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Encryption is just another barricade protecting your data beyond a lock screen. As far as I know it basically means that even if someone manages to pull data off your phone, they won't be able to view it. Could be wrong though.
Xileforce said:
Encryption is just another barricade protecting your data beyond a lock screen. As far as I know it basically means that even if someone manages to pull data off your phone, they won't be able to view it. Could be wrong though.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
In simple terms without being all technical, it is pretty much the process where you (Point A) is communicating with a user or server (Point B). A unknown identity (government, adversary) is possible to take the data you sent to Point B but then they will have a difficult time to "decrypting" the jibberish to translate it into something that is useful.
E.G. I send the following string "Hello"
The unknown identity would receive the encrypted text as "A45K1K1JKNN" (just a example)
Read more about cryptography if you're interested.
zephiK said:
In simple terms without being all technical, it is pretty much the process where you (Point A) is communicating with a user or server (Point B). A unknown identity (government, adversary) is possible to take the data you sent to Point B but then they will have a difficult time to "decrypting" the jibberish to translate it into something that is useful.
E.G. I send the following string "Hello"
The unknown identity would receive the encrypted text as "A45K1K1JKNN" (just a example)
Read more about cryptography if you're interested.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Thanks for clarifying it further, that's pretty much what I thought the general idea was.
I've been seeing a lot of people talking about the nexus being encrypted by default. People are of course clamoring about getting it decrypted.
At face value it seems like a good thing. Encryption will keep your stuff safe. I even noticed with TWRP that it requires the pattern unlock to mount the system/storage areas (this is also probably due to the fact I selected it to require pattern on startup). It feels like at that point, the only way to use a stolen phone is to completely factory reset it with fastboot flashing. Your data however will be safe in that regards, being removed on the reset.
The only con so far that I see is that it lowers performance. Is that it? Why are you people choosing to decrypt or leaving your device encrypted?
The device feels smooth enough with encryption on. The specs are pretty beefy, so that might be the reason behind it.
Performance doesnt bother me. Plus that can be fixed. I work in IT and have dealt with encryption to the point that I don't like it. I like control over my data even at the risk of loss/ theft.
i dont care either way about it, and have left mine encrypted. performance isnt an issue(most people dont know enough and listen to whomever said that performance takes a hit). but, performance isnt affected. what is affected is read/write gets a little slowed down, to nexus 5 levels. which isnt anything to cry about, like many are doing. performance wise, my phone hits 58000+ on antutu, and i havent seen an unencrypted phone come close to that yet.
I haven't noticed performance being an issue. I know that it will slow down benchmarks with read/write speeds but heck, I don't move a lot of files between my phone and computer. The times I do, it seems plenty fast. I'm just super curious on why so many people are asking about getting there phones decrypted.
8Fishes said:
I've been seeing a lot of people talking about the nexus being encrypted by default. People are of course clamoring about getting it decrypted.
At face value it seems like a good thing. Encryption will keep your stuff safe. I even noticed with TWRP that it requires the pattern unlock to mount the system/storage areas (this is also probably due to the fact I selected it to require pattern on startup). It feels like at that point, the only way to use a stolen phone is to completely factory reset it with fastboot flashing. Your data however will be safe in that regards, being removed on the reset.
The only con so far that I see is that it lowers performance. Is that it? Why are you people choosing to decrypt or leaving your device encrypted?
The device feels smooth enough with encryption on. The specs are pretty beefy, so that might be the reason behind it.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
The so called "performance issue" can only be evident when you put it after a decrypted nexus 6 which will be 0.2-0.3 seconds faster. The encryption only affect the read and write speed of internal storage but not that much
I decrypted my device when I first got it, but when I flashed the CM nightlies I accidentally forgot to flash the no encrypt zip and haven't bothered to undo it. I honestly can't tell a difference in performance.. So I feel that the benefits outweigh the cons of being encrypted
The only "performance issue" I've encountered is a longer boot time with the pass code. It's not noticeable in every day use.
SAW_JOK3R said:
The so called "performance issue" can only be evident when you put it after a decrypted nexus 6 which will be 0.2-0.3 seconds faster.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Storage performance isn't measured in seconds
The encryption only affect the read and write speed of internal storage but not that much
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Not that much?
http://www.androidpolice.com/2014/1...us-6-encrypted-vs-unencrypted-its-not-pretty/
Note that the *smallest* performance *improvement* is ONLY 100%.
The largest... 520%.
I don't think that I can agree with your definition of "not that much".
doitright said:
Storage performance isn't measured in seconds
Not that much?
http://www.androidpolice.com/2014/1...us-6-encrypted-vs-unencrypted-its-not-pretty/
Note that the *smallest* performance *improvement* is ONLY 100%.
The largest... 520%.
I don't think that I can agree with your definition of "not that much".
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
If you use a custom kernel with the encryption patches then it is "not that much."
Hrm.. I will definitely have to try a custom kernal with the patches after everyone rebases with 5.1
doitright said:
Storage performance isn't measured in seconds
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I mean operating apps
SAW_JOK3R said:
I mean operating apps
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
iops is the most common method of measuring storage performance. The "s" does indeed stand for "seconds".
When comparing performance of storage, you would typically look at the input/output operations per second and compare that value. However, you can also match that value on the 2 results you're comparing and see which one performed quicker that way. So you could in fact, say that something was 0.3 seconds quicker
rootSU said:
iops is the most common method of measuring storage performance. The "s" does indeed stand for "seconds".
When comparing performance of storage, you would typically look at the input/output operations per second and compare that value. However, you can also match that value on the 2 results you're comparing and see which one performed quicker that way. So you could in fact, say that something was 0.3 seconds quicker
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Yeah, my statement was based only on this The R/W speed just get a bit escalated after decrypting the device. But one can easily live without such escalated speed unless he has to transfer a huge amount of p**n :silly: jk
And speed of opening apps is not even that much noticeable Persons like me will live happily with an encrypted device
rootSU said:
iops is the most common method of measuring storage performance. The "s" does indeed stand for "seconds".
When comparing performance of storage, you would typically look at the input/output operations per second and compare that value. However, you can also match that value on the 2 results you're comparing and see which one performed quicker that way. So you could in fact, say that something was 0.3 seconds quicker
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
iops is a complex unit, not just seconds.
---------- Post added at 05:00 PM ---------- Previous post was at 04:59 PM ----------
SAW_JOK3R said:
I mean operating apps
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
So, the objective is to measure the speed of a car, and you are doing so by taking pictures of girls on a beach.
Brilliant.
---------- Post added at 05:02 PM ---------- Previous post was at 05:00 PM ----------
zephiK said:
If you use a custom kernel with the encryption patches then it is "not that much."
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
So its only 500%... got it.
[/COLOR said:
So, the objective is to measure the speed of a car, and you are doing so by taking pictures of girls on a beach.
Brilliant.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
dude, I'm not taking picture of girls on beach, I'm actually doing my objective Why does anyone like to decrypt a device then? It actually increase the operating power, to be specific launching time by a lil bit
My Nexus 5 on T-Mobile with good bars was easily downloading large files at 2MBPS. When I recently got a Nexus 6, all of a sudden my max sustained rate is 450KBPS in the exact same locations. Wifi did not help. Hands down it was the software encryption defaulted by lollipop. After following the xda thread to unencrypt data I am cruising at just under 2MBPS downloads again.
I have no idea why encryption would be the default without a dedicated hardware chip. All I can say is that thank the lord it was fixable. I was very unhappy to have a brand spanking new N6 be a dog compared to its year and a half older brother the N5.
SAW_JOK3R said:
I mean operating apps
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Second half of this video can give you an idea: http://youtu.be/FAaOONpxC48
GrayBoltWolf said:
Second half of this video can give you an idea: http://youtu.be/FAaOONpxC48
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
You mean we should decrypt the device just to launch apps 0.3-0.4 seconds faster and a 6 seconds faster bootup? I don't always turn off my device but when it happens it's either the low battery or the force shut down bug
BTW Nice video though
SAW_JOK3R said:
dude, I'm not taking picture of girls on beach, I'm actually doing my objective
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
My point is that you are trying to explain the performance impact of one thing by providing measurements of something ENTIRELY UNRELATED.
Why does anyone like to decrypt a device then? It actually increase the operating power, to be specific launching time by a lil bit
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
The answer to the question, is because it increases FLASH I/O PERFORMANCE. That means the speed at which data is read and written to/from flash storage. THIS IS NOT THE SAME AS LAUNCH TIME. Your second sentence is indecipherable.
A running program's performance is determined predominantly by CPU and RAM, sometimes GPU performance. NOT FLASH SPEED.
---------- Post added at 03:32 PM ---------- Previous post was at 03:29 PM ----------
thionylx said:
I have no idea why encryption would be the default without a dedicated hardware chip. All I can say is that thank the lord it was fixable. I was very unhappy to have a brand spanking new N6 be a dog compared to its year and a half older brother the N5.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Well, the SoC *has* hwcrypto. Its just not turned on.... yet.
doitright said:
My point is that you are trying to explain the performance impact of one thing by providing measurements of something ENTIRELY UNRELATED.
The answer to the question, is because it increases FLASH I/O PERFORMANCE. That means the speed at which data is read and written to/from flash storage. THIS IS NOT THE SAME AS LAUNCH TIME. Your second sentence is indecipherable.
A running program's performance is determined predominantly by CPU and RAM, sometimes GPU performance. NOT FLASH SPEED.
---------- Post added at 03:32 PM ---------- Previous post was at 03:29 PM ----------
Well, the SoC *has* hwcrypto. Its just not turned on.... yet.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I was actually trying to highlight the Basic Features
It seems that OP3 has some Memory Management issues right no:
http://www.gsmarena.com/video_shows_the_oneplus_3_struggling_to_manage_its_6gb_of_ram-blog-18866.php
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vYv8YQJbJaQ
Let's hope OP and/or custom ROM developers will fix that in a near future. Otherwise, 6GB would be completely useless.
tnttrx said:
It seems that OP3 has some Memory Management issues right no:
http://www.gsmarena.com/video_shows_the_oneplus_3_struggling_to_manage_its_6gb_of_ram-blog-18866.php
Let's hope OP and/or custom ROM developers will fix that in a near future. Otherwise, 6GB would be completely useless.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
That looks pretty bad from the YouTube vid, hope its fixable
Really want to know if the test has been made before or after updating to OOS 3.1.2... and what OOS 3.1.2 changelog is !
I think it was made before the update. They said in another video that they have had it since June 5th and that they will be releasing multiple videos soon. I am guessing this is one of those videos. But that doesn't mean it is fixed.
I have posted a question about update 3.1.2 to video owner.
Let's see what he replies.
To me this comment makes a lot of sense too:
Very interesting test, but not very conclusive. From video history of the same test performed on different devices by C4ETech:
1:05 - 1:54 - 1st and 2nd round - Galaxy S7 (exynos, 4Gb)
1:01 - 1:35 - 1st and 2nd round - Galaxy S7 Edge (exynos, 4Gb)
1:24 - 2:00 - 1st and 2nd round - HTC 10 (SD820, 4Gb)
1:05 - 2:10 - 1st and 2nd round - LG G5 (SD820, 4Gb)
1:10 - 2:22 - 1st and 2nd round - Oneplus 3 (SD820, 6Gb)
If you compare those numbers, you will see that:
1) +/- 5 seconds don't really mean anything. S7E vs S7 with same CPU and same ram in 2 tests gave different results in the 1st round.
2) Memory management can be luck of the draw and depends on other factors. Again difference is S7 vs S7E clearly shows that one app is still in memory in one test and not in memory on the other, even though hardware and software are almost the same (if you don't consider S7 and S7E to be all that different). Otherwise you might as well call S7E "awesome" phone and S7 "crappy" phone.
3) Speed of all those (except HTC10) is almost the same judging by the 1st round. HTC10 is just a bit slower due to storage (emmc on HTC 10 vs ufs on others)
4) Now that new phones have so much memory (that is clearly not utilized to full potential), there really should be an update to the android system as a whole to take advantage of it. I don't see any reason for any of these devices (regardless of 4Gb or 6Gb) to unload apps from memory in the scenario of this test. Good thing is that tools/apps exist that can force system to keep apps in memory, if desired, but it is not really a substitute for better native memory management (by android as a whole) that can take advantage of all the ram available.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Yeahj.. just wait for the update
And even if it was the slowest of them it comes with dev friendly sources and not with a locked bootloader and too high price
dev friendly sources should be the way to overcome this issue at least in custom ROMs... we will see...
Carl Pei wrote on twitter, that they did this on purpose for better battery life and it is possible to change it within the framework, if someone wants to change it.
Shusky said:
Carl Pei wrote on twitter, that they did this on purpose for better battery life and it is possible to change it within the framework, if someone wants to change it.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
OMG!
well, freeze app, don't let it do anything, no data, no CPU usage -> that will save battery.
do not throw it away from RAM!
tnttrx said:
OMG!
well, freeze app, don't let it do anything, no data, no CPU usage -> that will save battery.
do not throw it away from RAM!
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
What exactly are we seeing here that people are calling memory management issues? OOM/LMK limits? Or are we stashing too much in RAM? I can't see the video because of the network I am on. I am certain it can be fixed regardless and tuned to ensure the issue is gone.
DespairFactor said:
What exactly are we seeing here that people are calling memory management issues? OOM/LMK limits? Or are we stashing too much in RAM? I can't see the video because of the network I am on. I am certain it can be fixed regardless and tuned to ensure the issue is gone.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Exactly OOM/LMK limits. 16 apps are opened, then 2 large games are kicked from the cache and have to reload. That's about it.
Will there be any xposed mod possible for this issue?
Sent from my ONEPLUS A3003 using Tapatalk
Same guy did a new video with 3.1.2 update and compared.
I have the device in hand now and not seeing any issues with all apps open not one relloaded but if i open all on my s7e some start to reload
DespairFactor said:
What exactly are we seeing here that people are calling memory management issues? OOM/LMK limits? Or are we stashing too much in RAM? I can't see the video because of the network I am on. I am certain it can be fixed regardless and tuned to ensure the issue is gone.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
The LMK limits are messed up. It is too aggressive in killing apps....btw what have you decided? Will you support our phone or undecided yet? I hope you get on board the OP3 train!! Peace
Konskl said:
The LMK limits are messed up. It is too aggressive in killing apps....btw what have you decided? Will you support our phone or undecided yet? I hope you get on board the OP3 train!! Peace
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
If you root, I know kernel adiutor let's you change the limits, if you have 6gb of ram you may as well be like Samsung and use it all. What are you guys seeing for usage with no apps running? And what is the amount you see apps getting killed at?
DespairFactor said:
If you root, I know kernel adiutor let's you change the limits, if you have 6gb of ram you may as well be like Samsung and use it all. What are you guys seeing for usage with no apps running? And what is the amount you see apps getting killed at?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
If no apps are open the unused ram is around 4.6gb out of 5.6gb
tnttrx said:
I have posted a question about update 3.1.2 to video owner.
Let's see what he replies.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
He replied with a new video. Check it out!
Looks like it is being released to reviewers first then to us. I'm excited to see what other tweaks are included and how it performs after that update. Although my screen seems perfect and I've changed my ram limit to use all 6gb, it will be interesting to see how the world reacts.
http://www.neowin.net/news/oneplus-...xed-in-upcoming-update-reviewers-get-it-first
Maybe a reviewer could give us that update file even sooner ?
I hope that both are only options in developer section. I have no interest in a RAM fix right now.
derdjango said:
I hope that both are only options in developer section. I have no interest in a RAM fix right now.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Why not? There's nothing to lose and lots to gain.
EP2008 said:
Why not? There's nothing to lose and lots to gain.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
RAM fix may impact the battery life.
white43 said:
RAM fix may impact the battery life.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Nobody has demonstrated that. I'm willing to bet that it conserves battery life because fetching an app from RAM is far more efficient than having to reload apps all the time.
Yesterday, with the ram fix, I got over 5h SOT with heavy multitasking. If that's the battery being impacted, then I'll take it :good:
EP2008 said:
Nobody has demonstrated that. I'm willing to bet that it conserves battery life because fetching an app from RAM is far more efficient than having to reload apps all the time.
Yesterday, with the ram fix, I got over 5h SOT with heavy multitasking. If that's the battery being impacted, then I'll take it :good:
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Good to know, in which case - no issues with the fix my end.
white43 said:
Good to know, in which case - no issues with the fix my end.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I kill apps like it's my f'n job. If i'm not actively using it, kill it with fire.
EP2008 said:
Why not? There's nothing to lose and lots to gain.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Because I agree with OnePlus' decision in the first place as it fits my usage better.
It has seemed to make my battery life better, and to open up an app exactly where I left off is amazing. I think it's worth the fix.
derdjango said:
Because I agree with OnePlus' decision in the first place as it fits my usage better.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Their decision was because they wanted to conserve battery life - but if it doesn't have a negative impact on battery life, then that's a moot point, right?
EP2008 said:
Their decision was because they wanted to conserve battery life - but if it doesn't have a negative impact on battery life, then that's a moot point, right?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I don't know. If it doesn't have any impact on battery life and snappiness, then I would probably welcome it. However, I barely use more than 6 different apps on a single day, so I wouldn't even see a difference.
derdjango said:
However, I barely use more than 6 different apps on a single day, so I wouldn't even see a difference.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I'm curious (please don't take this as being rude or anything). How are you using only 6 apps a day? I mean, just making a phone call, texting someone, and checking email takes three.
EP2008 said:
I'm curious (please don't take this as being rude or anything). How are you using only 6 apps a day? I mean, just making a phone call, texting someone, and checking email takes three.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Don't worry, no offence taken. A regular day would look like this:
phone, hangouts, chrome, inbox, whatsapp, camera, spotify - sorry, that's already 7, but I don't use the camera nor spotify (only in the gym) everyday. Most used apps are hangouts, chrome and inbox. I'm a pretty boring user but use my phone a lot.
derdjango said:
Don't worry, no offence taken. A regular day would look like this:
phone, hangouts, chrome, inbox, whatsapp, camera, spotify - sorry, that's already 7, but I don't use the camera nor spotify (only in the gym) everyday. Most used apps are hangouts, chrome and inbox. I'm a pretty boring user but use my phone a lot.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Ah, I can see why the 6gb wouldn't be that important.
Do know that chrome uses a lot of ram! Every tab is an app. So 7 tabs is 7 apps
I've never been able to max out 3GBs of RAM much less 4 even with a 64bit Android OS. OnePlus added 6GB of RAM and USB C solely for the bragging rights, which explains why neither are implemented properly. I would have bought the OP3 if it didn't have either of them.
Sent from my ONEPLUS A3000 using Tapatalk
I'm all for updates, and glad they're pushing them out quickly. Honestly though I'm perfectly content with the current version. I think the screen looks great, I don't notice any over saturation. And while I guess putting more of the RAM to use would be a welcome thing, I have yet to experience any kind of slowdown at all. I guess I'm kind of like Derdjango in that I use my phone all the time, but only a select few apps. Maybe closer to 10-12 depending on the day though.
Battery should be more efficient with multitasking, and a camera upgrade is badly needed as sometimes camera got buggy and stucks while clicking the pics.
Sent from my ONEPLUS A3003 using XDA-Developers mobile app
rickyx32 said:
I've never been able to max out 3GBs of RAM much less 4 even with a 64bit Android OS. OnePlus added 6GB of RAM and USB C solely for the bragging rights, which explains why neither are implemented properly. I would have bought the OP3 if it didn't have either of them.
Sent from my ONEPLUS A3000 using Tapatalk
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I can see why people are calling USB C and 6 gb ram as a gimmick but if it's giving me a future proof phone, I will take it. 2 years back 2 gb ram was more than enough and today 3 gb is considered as a baseline. With 6 gb ram at least I will have options to keep this phone for few years even if it fails to manage RAM properly. We all came to XDA to learn how to tweak with our devices after all and it would be better to respect OP's decision of how to manage their OS and take the tinkering in our own hands.
rickyx32 said:
I've never been able to max out 3GBs of RAM much less 4 even with a 64bit Android OS. OnePlus added 6GB of RAM and USB C solely for the bragging rights, which explains why neither are implemented properly. I would have bought the OP3 if it didn't have either of them.
Sent from my ONEPLUS A3000 using Tapatalk
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Here is a screenshot where you can see only 1Gb unused out of 6Gb. 5Gb used for system, apps and cache. There are a lot of apps opened/cached (nothing crazy). Only 1 game in memory (candycrush).
The other screenshot shows battery life under this load. I must say, I'm quite surprised.
I think many people complain because they were hoping that less memory would've made phone cheaper, but I doubt that there would be much difference in price. I like 6Gb for the future proof as mentioned earlier. It can be used right now with build.prop fix or upcoming OTA. I hope that Google builds system that can even better utilize it in the future.