Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
You can't compare specs from an Android phone with that of an iOS device. 2 completely different operating systems that require different things. If specs are everything, please inform me how Apple's dual core 1.3 GHz A7 outclassed the Snapdragon processors available last year that were 2.0 GHz+ and quad-core?


Maybe you can't but I sure as hell can. Without even breaking a sweat.

Please inform me how you know that the A7 outclasses a Snapdragon if, as you say, you can't compare them? Your logic seems a bit broken to me.

And I don't need to compare anything to know that a 2 ghz quad core A7 with 4 gigs of ram would beat the 1.3 ghz dual core with 1 gig of ram.
 
It's interesting how users let all this happen. Im just going to stick with my iPhone 5 if this comes true.
 
Maybe you can't but I sure as hell can. Without even breaking a sweat.

Please inform me how you know that the A7 outclasses a Snapdragon if, as you say, you can't compare them? Your logic seems a bit broken to me.

And I don't need to compare anything to know that a 2 ghz quad core A7 with 4 gigs of ram would beat the 1.3 ghz dual core with 1 gig of ram.

Congratulations on your ability to sound like a tough guy on the internet. I would hope you wouldn't break out in a sweat by just typing on a keyboard. Anandtech is pretty thorough with their reviews, read their article on the A7 vs. competitors from last year. The processors can obviously can be compared with the same benchmark suites as shown in the comparison.

Apparently you forgot what you typed in your original post. It's common sense to know that an exact same armv8 processor design with higher clockspeeds will be faster than one with lower clockspeeds. Your original reference was against Apple's competitors:

"Exactly. The iPhone is the most expensive phone out there, yet it has the specs of a lower midrange from any of its competitors. And I don't care about any of that "it's still smoother than anything else"-BS. Because even if that was true, with proper hardware it would be even better."

Yawn.
 
It's interesting how users let all this happen. Im just going to stick with my iPhone 5 if this comes true.

Uneducated or dumb people dominate the world. That's why it happens. Apple is just exploiting that fact. Left to suffer and observe are we... "the others".
 
It's interesting how users let all this happen. Im just going to stick with my iPhone 5 if this comes true.

Crap. I was counting on you upgrading your phone. Now what am I going to do?
I'm going to upgrade to the iPhone 6 if this comes true, since the other huge improvements will be worth it even if it turns out to have the same amount of RAM.
 
Crap. I was counting on you upgrading your phone. Now what am I going to do?

I'm going to upgrade to the iPhone 6 if this comes true, since the other huge improvements will be worth it even if it turns out to have the same amount of RAM.


You and a lot more will do. Thus apple will continue to make $200 phones, selling them with $600+ profit, because "users buy". Believe me, I'm not an android person but this doesn't mean I'm blind for the obvious. And the amount of RAM is just the next nail in the coffin IMO.
 
apple always skimping... and having user wait till the "next" model to fuel their profits into infinity. i'm on to you apple.... other people just don't see it yet. haha
 
Apparently you forgot what you typed in your original post. It's common sense to know that an exact same armv8 processor design with higher clockspeeds will be faster than one with lower clockspeeds. Your original reference was against Apple's competitors:

"Exactly. The iPhone is the most expensive phone out there, yet it has the specs of a lower midrange from any of its competitors. And I don't care about any of that "it's still smoother than anything else"-BS. Because even if that was true, with proper hardware it would be even better."

Yawn.


And that still holds. An iPhone with a quad core would be faster than an iPhone with a dual core, no matter how you spin it. Apple, for some reason, gets cheap and only puts in one gig of ram and a midrange cpu because they seem to be getting away with it. Add to that a tiny screen with mediocre resolution, flaky battery life and so-so reception and yes, you have a pretty mid-specced phone on all those accounts. For a steeper price than basically anything else out there.

I don't really care what you think, but to me that is not good value.
 
And that still holds. An iPhone with a quad core would be faster than an iPhone with a dual core, no matter how you spin it. Apple, for some reason, gets cheap and only puts in one gig of ram and a midrange cpu because they seem to be getting away with it. Add to that a tiny screen with mediocre resolution, flaky battery life and so-so reception and yes, you have a pretty mid-specced phone on all those accounts. For a steeper price than basically anything else out there.

I don't really care what you think, but to me that is not good value.

Mid-range CPU? LOL. Apple designs their own processor cores. Their cores are bigger and allow for more IPC than competitors. Quad-Core is useless if not optimized for it. They design to accommodate their thermal envelopes in their thin devices. What's sad is that you think more GHz and cores = more performance, which is not true in this case. Do you think AMD ships better products than Intel because they have eight cores and 5 GHz clockspeed?

I'm glad you don't care what I think, because you don't even have the knowledge to participate in such discussion. It's like having a discussion with a University of Phoenix grad.
 
Last edited:
And that still holds. An iPhone with a quad core would be faster than an iPhone with a dual core, no matter how you spin it. Apple, for some reason, gets cheap and only puts in one gig of ram and a midrange cpu because they seem to be getting away with it. Add to that a tiny screen with mediocre resolution, flaky battery life and so-so reception and yes, you have a pretty mid-specced phone on all those accounts. For a steeper price than basically anything else out there.

I don't really care what you think, but to me that is not good value.

You clearly have no idea what you are talking about. Look at any test results on tech sites. The 5s is right there with the top Android devices when it comes to processing speed, GPU, battery life and it gets better reception than any Android phone Ive ever owned. Go to an Android forum please.
 
Except the 64-bit transition cost the 5s about 25-30% of it's available RAM. So no, please don't drink the kool-aid.

Source: http://www.anandtech.com/show/7335/the-iphone-5s-review/4

Who cares if it takes 100% of the available RAM, as long as it runs smooth like butta. No kool-aid, just don't care what numbers they use. If they gave me a phone with a 100 MHz processor and 512KB of RAM, it wouldn't matter to me as long as it ran my software without hiccups.
 
Who cares if it takes 100% of the available RAM, as long as it runs smooth like butta. No kool-aid, just don't care what numbers they use. If they gave me a phone with a 100 MHz processor and 512KB of RAM, it wouldn't matter to me as long as it ran my software without hiccups.

I'd LOVE to have you show me a single example of a device running smooth and not having to reload cached data with 100% of it's RAM utilized... I'm not aware of a single device that is capable of such a feet, and that includes every single IOS device I've ever owned. You seem to indicate this is an achievable goal, and I can only assume this bold statement is derived through your own extensive personal experience with such devices. So, what magical device are you using that runs so flawlessly with 100% of it's RAM utilized?
 
You clearly have no idea what you are talking about. Look at any test results on tech sites. The 5s is right there with the top Android devices when it comes to processing speed, GPU, battery life and it gets better reception than any Android phone Ive ever owned. Go to an Android forum please.
That may well be true, but upgrading the specs would make it better still, that is the point being made, but no apple are profit mongering!
 
You're right. Apple should double the amount of RAM because it doesn't handle your jailbroken software / apps well. They should probably make you head of Product Development too (since you are so in tune with their target market).


So you need Apple to up RAM for your "jailbreak" apps to run smoothly? Does it sound right? BTW, who the f running 5 apps simultaneously on a 4" screen device?


lol. Fun responses. I don't install jailbroken tweaks or crap that mess up my phone. I don't use tweaks that require a large library to be running all of the time (think Flex, Stringtomize etc.) I use very few tweaks if any at al (maybe 10) and most of those affect minor things that cause no hit to performance.

I mentioned jailbreak BECAUSE I use a jailbreak tweak called crash reporter...DING !!!!
It tells me the reason of why an app is being frozen and if a jailbreak tweak is affecting it. Out of 30 times, only one was due to a jailbreak tweak, the rest were low memory due to somewhat poorly unoptimized apps such as Beatsmusic.

Running into low memory doesn't mean that your app will crash. It means that your background apps will be frozen so that memory being used for those apps can be reallocated to other tasks. Problem is that when you open that app again it'll refresh (lots of people experience this everyday say on Safari or Facebook).

Running 4 apps is not unheard of...Listening to music (appCount = 1), checking Facebook real quick (appCount =2), got an email, check that (appCount=3), have to open a link in safari (appCount =4). Now I want to go back on Facebook to finish up that status or comment I was typing up. Oh crap looks like Facebook restarted. DING!!!! Because memory was reallocated.


By the way, 64 bit = MORE memory usage!!!!
 
A8 Chip From 4.7-Inch iPhone 6 Appears to Carry 1 GB of RAM

1gb is clearly not enough, even now I get facebook reloaded sometimes. And apps change all the time. They update with new features, probably they become more resources hungry. Some split into 2 (fb+messenger). My Iphone's RAM is clearly not happy with such.
 
A8 Chip From 4.7-Inch iPhone 6 Appears to Carry 1 GB of RAM

Just trying to load the live event on apple.com ATM
Safari insta crashes. Irony?
ImageUploadedByTapatalk1410297939.075155.jpg
 
Last edited:
So how much RAM is actually in the iPhone 6? The specs page conspicuously omits RAM, only mentioning storage.
 
You were saying?

Lol, if true....
I suppose all I can do is tell you how crow tastes. I'm absolutely flabbergasted. I couldn't be more incredulous. As I said.. the history has shown each "set" of phones getting its own RAM upgrade (the 4 & 4S at 512mb, the 5 & 5S at 1gb)... it seemed like such a no-brainer that 6 & 6S would get 2gb. I'm saddened about the decision, if this is how it pans out. I'll tell ya- although I AM getting the 6... I will NOT be getting Air 2 if only 1gb of RAM. #
 
So how much RAM is actually in the iPhone 6? The specs page conspicuously omits RAM, only mentioning storage.
I am wondering the same....just like last year, the info, iirc didn't come out until someone actually did a tear down and reported the RAM months later. I guess most people don't care how much RAM it has.

The Note 4 is going to have 3 GB and some people were saying they'd be content with 2 GB. :eek:

----------

Lol, if true....
I suppose all I can do is tell you how crow tastes. I'm absolutely flabbergasted. I couldn't be more incredulous. As I said.. the history has shown each "set" of phones getting its own RAM upgrade (the 4 & 4S at 512mb, the 5 & 5S at 1gb)... it seemed like such a no-brainer that 6 & 6S would get 2gb. I'm saddened about the decision, if this is how it pans out. I'll tell ya- although I AM getting the 6... I will NOT be getting Air 2 if only 1gb of RAM. ��

One of my in-laws in Asia said he was very disappointed with the 6 and 6 Pro. Nothing really new except for the size and now Apple is more or less on even playing field (depending on your POV) as Samsung and the other manufacturers. It'll be interesting to see how Samsung in Q1 and Q2 in 2015 do.
 
[url=http://cdn.macrumors.com/im/macrumorsthreadlogodarkd.png]Image[/url]


Last week, a wiring schematic said to be for the iPhone 6 was initially interpreted to be referring to the device's RAM, showing the same 1 GB of memory for the A8 as found in the current A7 chip. That was quickly determined to be an incorrect interpretation of component being shown in the schematic, however, and Apple's plans for RAM in the iPhone 6 have remained uncertain.

A new photo leak from Feld & Volk [Instagram page] and Sonny Dickson showing an assembled logic board from the 4.7-inch iPhone 6 has revealed a number of pieces of information already, and it appears from one of the photos that the A8 chip on the board does indeed include 1 GB of LPDDR3 RAM.

As pointed out by MacRumors forum member commander.data, a silk-screened part number on the A8 reveals that the package-on-package contains Hynix RAM. Based on Hynix's part number format, the character in the eighth position reveals the amount of RAM in the package, with an "8" denoting 8 Gb (1 GB) and a "B" denoting 16 Gb (2 GB). While it is a bit difficult to read the part number clearly given the distance and angle in the photo, our staff and several posters in our forum agree that the character very much appears to be an "8", indicating 1 GB of RAM.

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

I think it's a B.
 
Register on MacRumors! This sidebar will go away, and you'll see fewer ads.