A8 Chip From 4.7-Inch iPhone 6 Appears to Carry 1 GB of RAM

[ray6712]

I love my new MacBook Pro and desperately want to stay in the Apple ecosystem, but Apple is cutting way too many corners if this is the case. I'm an Apple fan because I like high quality products, not because I want their stock to do well, or want their sales numbers to beat those of Samsung.



Allegiances aside, the OnePlus One offers 3GB of RAM and 64GB of storage for $350. I think it's fair to assume that the 5.5" iPhone 6 will cost at least twice that, and may offer less RAM. Apple is now charging us more for less, and it's frustrating as hell.

While this is very true remember the OnePlus One needs those extra resources to run that OS. That phone isn't nearly built out if the premium materials that Apple employs either.

Your MacBook Pro has great specs because it's considered a workhorse of Premium laptops. While the iPhone is basically a mobile built to bridge the gap between you and the Pro. Trust there are similar Windows systems that have just as good as specs but are probably cheaper yet do they last as long and perform as we'll with the OS they run?

 

[cfedu]

I'm not convinced that the image shown even indicates that the iPhone 6 will have 1GB of RAM.


From what I see on the image, this is what is printed:
H9CKNNN_KTMR_R

Now, let's compare this against the below:
http://www.skhynix.com/products/mob...nfo.ramKind=33&info.eol=NOT&posMap=MobileDDR3

1) H9CCNNN4GTMLAR (4Gb = 512MB)
2) H9CCNNN8JTALAR (8Gb = 1GB)
3) H9CCNNN8KTALBR (8Gb = 1GB)
4) H9CKNNN8GTMPLR (8Gb = 1GB)
5) H9CCNNNBLTALAR (16Gb = 2GB)
6) H9CCNNNBPTALBR (16Gb = 2GB)
7) H9CKNNNBJTMPLR (16Gb = 2GB)
8) H9CKNNNBKTMRPR (16Gb = 2GB)
9) H9CKNNNBKTMTDR (16Gb = 2GB)
10) H9CKNNNBPTATDR (16Gb = 2GB)
11) H9CKNNNDATMRPR (24Gb = 3GB)
12) H9CKNNNDATMTDR (24Gb = 3GB)

Row's 1-3 and 5-6 can be eliminated since they start as "H9CCNNN..." rather than the 'H9CKNNN...' we are looking for.

So far this leaves the following:

4) H9CKNNN8GTMPLR (8Gb = 1GB)
7) H9CKNNNBJTMPLR (16Gb = 2GB)
8) H9CKNNNBKTMRPR (16Gb = 2GB)
9) H9CKNNNBKTMTDR (16Gb = 2GB)
10) H9CKNNNBPTATDR (16Gb = 2GB)
11) H9CKNNNDATMRPR (24Gb = 3GB)
12) H9CKNNNDATMTDR (24Gb = 3GB)

After the 1st letter in question (8 or is it a B?), the sequence continues with what looks to be "KTM", so let's look at what that leaves us: Lines 7, and 10-12 can be removed as well, so we now have this left:

4) H9CKNNN8GTMPLR (8Gb = 1GB)
8) H9CKNNNBKTMRPR (16Gb = 2GB)
9) H9CKNNNBKTMTDR (16Gb = 2GB)

Looking at the remaining three digits, it looks like R_R (looks like a 'W' in between, but that doesn't match up with anything above), so looking at what we are left with, we just have:

8) H9CKNNNBKTMRPR (16Gb = 2GB)

The above leads me to believe that the iPhone 6 will indeed have 2GB of RAM; and continues the "tradition" of doubling/increasing RAM every form factor change. I don't know why it looks like a 'W' in the pictures, as opposed to a 'P' above, but this is what I have so far.

The above makes sense to me, but let me know if someone sees anything I may have done wrong.

I hope you are right!! I really want to see six wheeled cars!!

 

[Neebee]

From my experience, I think the device can handle adequately one OS update and not much more. It would then run into performance issues and frequent crashes. For those of us have the iPhone 5, it came with the iOS 6 and then I updated to iOS 7. With iOS 7, there was more of a RAM hit for sure, but it was ok. However, I expect a lot more sucking of RAM with iOS 8. That's why I said to myself I won't update the iOS than 7.1.3.

Nonetheless, I imagine not everyone has 133 apps on their device like I do so this may not be an issue for those who run very few apps.

As a possible thought, maybe the 4.7 inch iPhone will be the low end model and the upcoming 5.5+ inch model will be the higher end and that's where you definitely would need the extra RAM ro run the larger screen.

For Apple not to double the RAM two years after introducing the iPhone 5 with 1 GB RAM would simple be baffling. In any event, form most consumers, they won't know about the RAM or care much about it. Their focus will be on whether they should get the 16 32, 64, or 128 GB model.

 

[Altis]

Yep. Exactly.

How can "the average user" determine that the extra 1GB of RAM they get in a 2GB phone is being used efficiently and to their benefit? They can't. Do people think throwing RAM at a spec sheet makes it "better"? Oh boy...

Placebo is one thing that many people experience, I am certain. Apple sell experience of the product, not nerdy spec sheet bullet points - that's the preserve of most others, and it SOUNDS better just because everyone else - the generally non-technically minded SAYS it's better, and nod in agreement like lemmings walking off a cliff, without ever truly knowing.

Would you agree that going from 1 GB of RAM to 2 GB would offer the potential for a better experience, especially in a year or two? Certainly 1 GB is not better than 2 GB...

It isn't about specs. Nobody cares about Apple spec sheets, really. What they do care about is improving the user experience. Safari reloading tabs non-stop and refreshing apps that you just left and are supposedly in "multi-tasking" (a concept Apple has yet to understand) are serious burdens on the iOS devices.

Now, I realize that this is the fault of iOS and not actually the hardware necessarily running out of RAM. But if it had more RAM, they might optimize iOS to utilize it and solve these issues, no?

Keep in mind iOS 6 32-bit ran on 1 GB. Then iOS 7 64-bit on 1 GB. iOS 8/9/10 on 1GB 64-bit is a bit of a stretch... and for what? The want to give the shareholders a little extra coin? Incentive to upgrade to the 6S or 7 sooner?

Apple makes billions, billions of dollars from their fans, supporters and yet they can't put up 2gb of ram? I don't get it.

I think it can be said that at this point, Apple is a bottom-line company. Ride the wave of success based on market share and popularity while spending as little as possible. It's about the shareholders and bottom-line. It's not about giving the users the best experience they can. It's not the enthusiast brand anymore. I suppose everything changes at some point.

Volkswagen did this over the past two decades. They had a huge global following developed due to their premium products. Then they set their sights on profit. Now, they were recently the highest profiting auto maker (not total revenue, just the ratio of money kept). The result is some seriously crappy cars, hanging on to a 20 year old engine, etc. People only buy them because the brand has an image and a following that's cult-like. I don't want that to be Apple, but that's up to them.

 

[Medic311]

From my experience, I think the device can handle adequately one OS update and not much more. It would then run into performance issues and frequent crashes. For those of us have the iPhone 5, it came with the iOS 6 and then I updated to iOS 7. With iOS 7, there was more of a RAM hit for sure, but it was ok. However, I expect a lot more sucking of RAM with iOS 8. That's why I said to myself I won't update the iOS than 7.1.3.

Nonetheless, I imagine not everyone has 133 apps on their device like I do so this may not be an issue for those who run very few apps.

As a possible thought, maybe the 4.7 inch iPhone will be the low end model and the upcoming 5.5+ inch model will be the higher end and that's where you definitely would need the extra RAM ro run the larger screen.

For Apple not to double the RAM two years after introducing the iPhone 5 with 1 GB RAM would simple be baffling. In any event, form most consumers, they won't know about the RAM or care much about it. Their focus will be on whether they should get the 16 32, 64, or 128 GB model.

i actually find that iOS 7 runs very well on the iPhone 5, much better than iOS 6 did. IMO, iOS 6 was one of the buggiest iOS versions that i can remember. i still feel that iOS 5.1.1 on the iPhone 4S was the best. awesome performance, no bugs, jailbreak.

i'm running iOS 7.04 on my iPhone 5 right now so i can keep my jailbreak and it is very snappy. i can remember only once where the iPhone froze up, and it was only a 2 second pause for some odd reason why i was typing. what happened was that i was in the middle of typing as multiple iMessages came through and some had photos, and then someone was trying to call me. basically everything stopped....then i heard a few ding ding noises then the phone started ringing.

i actually find my iPhone 5 more snappy than my iPad Mini Retina with the A7

 

[donnaw]

No, my point, and the point of some others here, is that it does indeed matter. That the developer writing the program will not bother taking the time to write the code more efficiently if it is not necessary to do so. If you write the program, and it works fine and runs fine, as it is.... then you will not waste your time rewriting anything to make it more efficient... regardless of whether it is an inefficient hog. But if you test it and it runs laggy and has a poor experience, you are somewhat forced to make it better or noone will want to use it. The more space available, the more space programmers will use.

A quote from a rather simplistic discussion in one of the Macrumors forums:

"But, I know what it is like. You get an idea and you just start coding and then it evolves. There are some programs I had to write 2 times! once because I added toms of features as I went along and added tons more code then I needed. So I went back and rewrote it so it is more efficient."

Yes, but when constrained by RAM a good dev will leave out aspects he/she might like to put in due to lack of RAM. This will result in dumbed-down apps, especially games. Want top level games? You have to have hardware that supports them. I don't think anyone's asking for XBox/Playstation level apps but come on, if hardware manufacturers all went with this type of thinking we would still have systems with 4 megs like my first computer.

If Apple keeps up with this you will not see the same top-level apps in the Apple App Store simply because the hardware won't run them.

Either a company moves forward or they are left behind. And frankly as consumers I would have thought that most would actually want more bang for their buck. I read threads on here all the time about how greedy the carriers are because they throttle unlimited plans, or charge sooooo much for data. But I'm betting some of the exact same posters give Apple a pass. I honestly cannot think of any other commodity where a segment of the consumer are so willing to fork over so much money and only not demand a better product but actually make excuses.

 

[Shirke]

Why wouldn't they add up more RAM? They need to sell you the iPhone 6S in 6 months with a revolutionary amount of 2GB!
Shame on you, Apple! for not adding more RAM.

 

[Parise]

This. 99% of iPhone users probably only have a vague idea of what RAM is at best. 80-90% probably don't know what RAM is at all, let alone worry about how much is in their phone.

Most people don't know what anti lock brakes do or what limited slip differential is either. Doesn't mean they don't use it without realizing it. Take the traction control off my wife's car and I can guarantee you she will notice a difference.

 

[gavroche]

Yes, but when constrained by RAM a good dev will leave out aspects he/she might like to put in due to lack of RAM. This will result in dumbed-down apps, especially games. Want top level games? You have to have hardware that supports them. I don't think anyone's asking for XBox/Playstation level apps but come on, if hardware manufacturers all went with this type of thinking we would still have systems with 4 megs like my first computer.

If Apple keeps up with this you will not see the same top-level apps in the Apple App Store simply because the hardware won't run them.

Either a company moves forward or they are left behind. And frankly as consumers I would have thought that most would actually want more bang for their buck. I read threads on here all the time about how greedy the carriers are because they throttle unlimited plans, or charge sooooo much for data. But I'm betting some of the exact same posters give Apple a pass. I honestly cannot think of any other commodity where a segment of the consumer are so willing to fork over so much money and only not demand a better product but actually make excuses.

I agree with you here. I can see that happening, to an extent. Although its a much different discussion for the iPhone than for the iPad. I just don't see iPhones being meant as a platform for cutting edge games. The iPad, yes. And a lot of comments I have read here today are from people that have said they are willing to give Apple more of a pass in re the iPhone than they are the iPad. Seems crazy that te iPad would not have more.

 

[mozumder]

Would you agree that going from 1 GB of RAM to 2 GB would offer the potential for a better experience, especially in a year or two? Certainly 1 GB is not better than 2

No.

1GB is better than 2GB because 1GB draws less power.

Over-designed systems specced for measurebators are the absolute WORST.

You'll find this a lot in worthless junk phones from China, where the market for some reason thinks 8 core processors are better than 2 cores.

Again, there is no advantage to 2GB in a cell phone. If you need 2GB, then that means your software is inefficient.

----------

Why wouldn't they add up more RAM? They need to sell you the iPhone 6S in 6 months with a revolutionary amount of 2GB!
Shame on you, Apple! for not adding more RAM.

Shame on you for thinking specs are more important than user experience.

 

[dampfnudel]

5.5 better have at least 2gb!

Of course the new iPhone flagship model gets 2gb, along with a better camera.

 

[StyxMaker]

Ironically enough, I've had a single Macrumors tab opened on both a 5S and iPad (current), and they both reload when I switch out of Safari and re-open it. And guess what? Safari is the only thing I had active on the iPad (according to the App Drawer).

Holy cow... more I read in this thread the more I feel Image

If this is what (competent) Geniuses have to go through, then I feel for you.

The only time I've ever had tabs reload has been when I'm on dynamic web forums where the page contents are constantly changing and being updated. I've worked on documents where I moved from Pages to Safari (where I had several tabs open on a relatively static web site), and the Photos app and had no problems with tabs reloading or with Pages crashing or loosing my work.

As I've said it's only on dynamic web forums that I've had tabs reload.

 

[dampfnudel]

No.

1GB is better than 2GB because 1GB draws less power.

Over-designed systems specced for measurebators are the absolute WORST.

You'll find this a lot in worthless junk phones from China, where the market for some reason thinks 8 core processors are better than 2 cores.

Again, there is no advantage to 2GB in a cell phone. If you need 2GB, then that means your software is inefficient.

----------



Shame on you for thinking specs are more important than user experience.

Shame on you for not knowing the type of people who come here.

----------

Why wouldn't they add up more RAM? They need to sell you the iPhone 6S in 6 months with a revolutionary amount of 2GB!
Shame on you, Apple! for not adding more RAM.

Apple is releasing the 6s next spring?

 

[Edd.Dantes]

Facepalm without context or reason is plain ignorant and rude. Did my post baffle you with common sense?

Not reading all my posts, made BEFORE yours... Maybe that is plain ignorant and rude?

 

[bushman4]

Looks like Apple is trying to offset the extra cost of the sapphire screen by only having 1GB RAM

 

[TommyA6]

No.

1GB is better than 2GB because 1GB draws less power.

Over-designed systems specced for measurebators are the absolute WORST.

You'll find this a lot in worthless junk phones from China, where the market for some reason thinks 8 core processors are better than 2 cores.

Again, there is no advantage to 2GB in a cell phone. If you need 2GB, then that means your software is inefficient.

----------



Shame on you for thinking specs are more important than user experience.

With iPhone 6 getting a higher resolution display (1334 × 750, 326 PPI @2x, for a 4,7" model and 2208 × 1242, 461 PPI @3x for a 5,5" one), and a 64 bit CPU and OS you'll end up with less RAM than on iPhone 5s and even less than on iPhone 5.

So you might want to reconsider that "2 gb of RAM or more is reserved for Chinese **** or spec whores only" opinion.

 

[Edd.Dantes]

By this logic, cars should come with 6 wheels, even if they're not needed. Bizarre... and I doubt Apple care that "everyone else does it" - why would they? They're NOT everyone else, and have no desire to be.

"2GB is simply better" - that's a tad simplistic, but I'll leave you to think that, I am not argumentative, and merely point out what *I* feel to be the case, you're entitled to think what you wish, and I am - of course - entitled to not have to agree.

I could go to a hot dog stall where they're selling 4 hot dogs for the price of 1 - can I eat that amount? No, but I perceive it as value for money IF I can find 3 people to give them to. Perceiving more as "better" is simplistic and meaningless... but that's how companies generally condition customers to feel, and they are treated like gibbering idiots so long as it makes a sale.

Take care.

By internet rules, your argument is less valid than the points I have made in all my posts because you have zero up votes and I have many.

Being childish, petty and simply not making a true argument, or not supporting your argument, is not conducive to reality.

Intelligent discourse is what eventually gets things done. If Android had not been so customizable, and thus competitive in the market, I hate to think of what the iPhone would be. It has taken so much from Android OS and I love that! I just wish they would start copying their hardware superiority. Ok, Apple's A series chips are hard to beat but we need more RAM. 4K recording may be a little early but at the rate of Apple's implementation, we won't have it for another 2-3 years and that's sad.

Life and tech move forward, they don't stand still. My argument for 4K recording is that it will be the new standard, as will H.265. Staying with 1080p for 2-3 more years is like continuing to use VHS for home movies when MiniDv has been out for years. There's no sense in it.

Apple does these things because they want to milk the consumer, has nothing to do with margin calls. They have more money than most developed countries. They do it so we will continue to upgrade and upgrade often.
Old Apple used to "think different" and push the limits. New Apple caters more to stock holders. In some ways, they have sold out. I don't like to mention Steve because it spurns too much argument but he did have a strong spirit in him. He didn't always make great choices but I think we all sort of miss him. However, I'm not entirely sure if we would have a 4", much less a 4.7" phone if he were still around.

These are the reasons Apple sinks every year in my own mind. They are definitely not what they used to be. The only reason they bumped up the screen size on the 5 and now the 6 is because Android OEM's have been kicking their ass.

I love both OS's but I choose iOS because it is best for my business needs. I still have tons of respect for Android and all they have done, and done to improve iOS.

Apple needs these kicks in the ass and I am glad OEM's are doing well.

 

[ee4life]

I'm not convinced that the image shown even indicates that the iPhone 6 will have 1GB of RAM.


From what I see on the image, this is what is printed:
H9CKNNN_KTMR_R

Now, let's compare this against the below:
http://www.skhynix.com/products/mob...nfo.ramKind=33&info.eol=NOT&posMap=MobileDDR3

1) H9CCNNN4GTMLAR (4Gb = 512MB)
2) H9CCNNN8JTALAR (8Gb = 1GB)
3) H9CCNNN8KTALBR (8Gb = 1GB)
4) H9CKNNN8GTMPLR (8Gb = 1GB)
5) H9CCNNNBLTALAR (16Gb = 2GB)
6) H9CCNNNBPTALBR (16Gb = 2GB)
7) H9CKNNNBJTMPLR (16Gb = 2GB)
8) H9CKNNNBKTMRPR (16Gb = 2GB)
9) H9CKNNNBKTMTDR (16Gb = 2GB)
10) H9CKNNNBPTATDR (16Gb = 2GB)
11) H9CKNNNDATMRPR (24Gb = 3GB)
12) H9CKNNNDATMTDR (24Gb = 3GB)

Row's 1-3 and 5-6 can be eliminated since they start as "H9CCNNN..." rather than the 'H9CKNNN...' we are looking for.

So far this leaves the following:

4) H9CKNNN8GTMPLR (8Gb = 1GB)
7) H9CKNNNBJTMPLR (16Gb = 2GB)
8) H9CKNNNBKTMRPR (16Gb = 2GB)
9) H9CKNNNBKTMTDR (16Gb = 2GB)
10) H9CKNNNBPTATDR (16Gb = 2GB)
11) H9CKNNNDATMRPR (24Gb = 3GB)
12) H9CKNNNDATMTDR (24Gb = 3GB)

After the 1st letter in question (8 or is it a B?), the sequence continues with what looks to be "KTM", so let's look at what that leaves us: Lines 7, and 10-12 can be removed as well, so we now have this left:

4) H9CKNNN8GTMPLR (8Gb = 1GB)
8) H9CKNNNBKTMRPR (16Gb = 2GB)
9) H9CKNNNBKTMTDR (16Gb = 2GB)

Looking at the remaining three digits, it looks like R_R (looks like a 'W' in between, but that doesn't match up with anything above), so looking at what we are left with, we just have:

8) H9CKNNNBKTMRPR (16Gb = 2GB)

The above leads me to believe that the iPhone 6 will indeed have 2GB of RAM; and continues the "tradition" of doubling/increasing RAM every form factor change. I don't know why it looks like a 'W' in the pictures, as opposed to a 'P' above, but this is what I have so far.

The above makes sense to me, but let me know if someone sees anything I may have done wrong.

One thing I noticed is that it appears all of the products listed on the Hynix site have 32-bit wide data interfaces. I believe the A7 introduced a 64-bit wide memory data bus. To me this could indicate two things:

1. The "W" portion of the part indicates a wide bus, meaning 1GB RAM.
2. The stack is somehow configured with two of these chips to accommodate the 64-bit bus, meaning 2GB.

The latter is often seen on development kits with non-PoP RAM; board designers often use two cheaper 16x memory chips to get a 32-bit bus. Don't know how that would work in a PoP stack configuration.

Anyway, just a random thought.

 

[nigerson]

I know everyone is sad about this news, but there's something to be said about 1 GB.

First, it uses less power to keep 1 GB of RAM up than 2 GB or more.
Second, not all operating systems use RAM the same. For instance, there was a point when you could buy a Windows XP laptop with 4 GB of memory, but due to how Windows worked, it could only effectively use 3.5 GB. Just because you throw RAM at something doesn't make it any more efficient if the OS can't handle it.
Third, while more RAM is always nice as a developer... I'm not sure you need that much RAM as long as you are doing things correctly. Android probably needs more RAM because it's not being efficient (Java is a higher-level language that traditionally uses a lot of RAM). I have a pretty complex app that can chew up RAM and crash the app, but it's usually because of very large images or PDF files being used and I'm being sort of lazy with displaying that information.

I suspect that Apple will have a 1 GB model reserved for lower-end versions of the phone. Not every user needs tons of power and 1 GB is more than plenty for most users. For power users, I suspect they will add to the 5.5" version. Of course Apple isn't going to be getting into a spec war on this and won't announce how much RAM the phone has. The larger device will have a larger battery and have less of an issue driving the RAM.

Those are my two cents at least. I don't think it has to do with being greedy, but has more to do with making an affordable option that will last. Apple has a really good track record of supporting devices for a long time. Google with Android device... not so much.

You are referring to a windows xp laptop that can't utilize more than 3.5gb out of the avaliable 4, well the problem is that most xp users are running 32-bit which limits the ram to slightly above 3gb. Being that iphone 5s/6 are running 64bit it should fully support any amount of ram without a problem. When you say that 2gb of ram uses more battery than 1gb I can not dispute, but somehow apple's #1 competitor Samsung is launching a note 4(64bit) with 4gb of ram and the note series is known for it's outstanding battery.

 

[pika2000]

If Apple stick with 1GB RAM, I will have mixed feelings. On one hand, 1GB is sufficient... for now. I think there are tests out there that show that the current issues with iOS7 and apps are not due to the amount of RAM, but due to iOS7/Safari itself. Plus, having such limitation may actually force developers to code more efficiently. On the other hand, it obviously put a limitation on certain class of apps like games and multimedia editing apps. Watching a video may not need 1GB of RAM, but with Apple focusing iDevices as creation tools, that limitation of RAM can be a hindrance.

I have this bad feeling that Apple is reaching a certain plateau. The bumps on iOS7 have yet all been straightened out (I'm still getting Springboard reboots). And I have mixed feelings about opening the OS more (let's see how many crap emoji keyboards will be unleashed). I'm hoping Apple still have the goods, but I am starting to get weary.

 

[smulji]

No.

1GB is better than 2GB because 1GB draws less power.

Over-designed systems specced for measurebators are the absolute WORST.

You'll find this a lot in worthless junk phones from China, where the market for some reason thinks 8 core processors are better than 2 cores.

Again, there is no advantage to 2GB in a cell phone. If you need 2GB, then that means your software is inefficient.

----------



Shame on you for thinking specs are more important than user experience.

The specs drive the experience.

 

[Rockies]

Looks like Apple is trying to offset the extra cost of the sapphire screen by only having 1GB RAM

More like offsetting there stupidity in buying Beats.:

 

[mozumder]

With iPhone 6 getting a higher resolution display (1334 × 750, 326 PPI @2x, for a 4,7" model and 2208 × 1242, 461 PPI @3x for a 5,5" one), and a 64 bit CPU and OS you'll end up with less RAM than on iPhone 5s and even less than on iPhone 5.

So you might want to reconsider that "2 gb of RAM or more is reserved for Chinese **** or spec whores only" opinion.

It's not going to change anything.

Computers have reached an upper limit on resource requirements. That's why CPUs are about the same speed now as they were 10 years ago.

The only difference now is the lower power.

Get used to 1GB for phones. You're going to be seeing it for the next 10 years.

 

[Edd.Dantes]

It's not going to change anything.

Computers have reached an upper limit on resource requirements. That's why CPUs are about the same speed now as they were 10 years ago.

The only difference now is the lower power.

Get used to 1GB for phones. You're going to be seeing it for the next 10 years.

I used "face palm" too early -_-

Look up IPC and quantum tunneling. Also, read about transistors and how they get hotter as the node shrinks and number of transitions increases. Oh, and 3D chip manufacturing processes and heterogeneous computing (think OpenCL).

Also, computers don't use resources, OS's do.

After all that, tell your mom to slap you for the last 2 sentences you wrote.

 

[HiRez]

As disappointed as I am, it's important to note that the iPhone operates fine on 1 GB. It's really the iPad that needs more for safari everything.

FTFY. It is generally true that it's more critical on the iPad. However, we are almost certainly getting higher-resolution screens on these new phones, with some rumors speculating greater than iPad resolution (hard to believe). With significantly more pixels to buffer, that's going to put more memory pressure on the iPhone and bring it closer to iPad in performance. With a significantly higher-resolution screen, memory may well become a serious problem on iPhone. Even my new iPad Air is woefully short on RAM, and not just for Safari. Everything else about the Air is so great, it's just very disappointing to have the lack of RAM hold it back.