Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.

BMac702

macrumors regular
Original poster
Jun 9, 2009
168
0
One thing i didnt notice about the 3GS was does it actually have more RAM? Did they bump it up from 128 or no? It would be nice for my games to crash a lot less often
 
One thing i didnt notice about the 3GS was does it actually have more RAM? Did they bump it up from 128 or no? It would be nice for my games to crash a lot less often

I just raised the same question in another post. I'd like to know too.
 
it likely has 256mb...but we wont know until launch day...and ifixit teardown
 
Isn't it kind of odd tho that they havent said anything about it besides its "magic?" To me, 256MB of RAM is a lot more impressive spec than just something concocted at disneyland
 
It may have more, or they may just be adequately clocking the current 3G processor. The fact they aren't giving nitty-gritty tech specs means it isn't flattering to tell.
 
We'll see when the iphone gets in people's hands. They'll either take the poor thing apart or dig deep into the internals.
 
Isn't it kind of odd tho that they havent said anything about it besides its "magic?" To me, 256MB of RAM is a lot more impressive spec than just something concocted at disneyland

The problem is that a lot of normal consumers don't understand what Ram does and how 256 is better than 128. You'll notice that in a lot of keynotes, most of the technical stuff is dumbed down so EVERYONE can understand it. For example, more people can relate to "TWICE THE SPEED* than "the processor is now running at 1.3 ghz as opposed to 1.0 ghz and there is an increase of ram by 512 mb."

Those numbers to the normal consumer are just meaningless.
 
The problem is that a lot of normal consumers don't understand what Ram does and how 256 is better than 128. You'll notice that in a lot of keynotes, most of the technical stuff is dumbed down so EVERYONE can understand it. For example, more people can relate to "TWICE THE SPEED* than "the processor is now running at 1.3 ghz as opposed to 1.0 ghz and there is an increase of ram by 512 mb."

Those numbers to the normal consumer are just meaningless.

That makes a lot of sense
 
The problem is that a lot of normal consumers don't understand what Ram does and how 256 is better than 128. You'll notice that in a lot of keynotes, most of the technical stuff is dumbed down so EVERYONE can understand it. For example, more people can relate to "TWICE THE SPEED* than "the processor is now running at 1.3 ghz as opposed to 1.0 ghz and there is an increase of ram by 512 mb."

Those numbers to the normal consumer are just meaningless.

I think most people can understand that 256 > 128. If they don't, then they probably shouldn't be using an iPhone. ;)
 
It may have more, or they may just be adequately clocking the current 3G processor. The fact they aren't giving nitty-gritty tech specs means it isn't flattering to tell.

I really don't think clocking the normal processor up to 600 from 400 would result in a 2-3x performance increase and better battery life.

Am I thinking correctly?
 
I think most people can understand that 256 > 128. If they don't, then they probably shouldn't be using an iPhone. ;)

Apple is all about simplification and 2x is, as noted by a previous poster, easier to understand. Your mom for instance, may want an iPhone, but she quite possibly won't understand what 256 MB is. Maybe she will confuse it with flash drive space. 2x Faster is very Apple, putting things in technical terms is very Microsoft.
 
The problem is that a lot of normal consumers don't understand what Ram does and how 256 is better than 128. You'll notice that in a lot of keynotes, most of the technical stuff is dumbed down so EVERYONE can understand it. For example, more people can relate to "TWICE THE SPEED* than "the processor is now running at 1.3 ghz as opposed to 1.0 ghz and there is an increase of ram by 512 mb."

Those numbers to the normal consumer are just meaningless.

doesnt explain why they wont tell the developers attending WWDC there currently..
 
We're going to have to wait for a teardown, I'm afraid. So we won't know for a little while.

I'm very very interested in what changes were made to the guts of the 3GS
 
I really don't think clocking the normal processor up to 600 from 400 would result in a 2-3x performance increase and better battery life.

Am I thinking correctly?

The performance of a processor is defined more than by just the listed clock speed. For example, the amount of cache, which is what differentiated the the pentiums from the celerons back in the day. The supposed new processor in the iPhone 3GS has a different architecture that improves its overall performance by something like 1.5-2X.

The perfomance of the new iPhone is most likely due to increased Ram and a more powerful processor. Nothing is confirmed, but I'm 99% sure this is what is causing the performance boost.
 
Apple is all about simplification and 2x is, as noted by a previous poster, easier to understand. Your mom for instance, may want an iPhone, but she quite possibly won't understand what 256 MB is. Maybe she will confuse it with flash drive space. 2x Faster is very Apple, putting things in technical terms is very Microsoft.

I find it strange that they won't put up ram sizes but they'll use java web page graphs, as if people could understand that more. If what you say is true, why didn't apple just say "a web page" and simply show the time differences?

Is it possible that it was a specific case, and the only case in which you'll see results the significant? Is it possible that they DIDN'T put in 256mb ram?:eek:
 
Exactly. I'm pretty sure people will notice 256 is better than 128 instead of a bar graph
 
Isn't it kind of odd tho that they havent said anything about it besides its "magic?" To me, 256MB of RAM is a lot more impressive spec than just something concocted at disneyland

I think most people can understand that 256 > 128. If they don't, then they probably shouldn't be using an iPhone. ;)

Yep! Also once Apple publishes specs, that's all the competitors will compare against. Every competitor will make their products look good on paper by beating the specs of the 3GS. You know, them Microsoft computer hunter ads - the same things would happen.

I really don't think clocking the normal processor up to 600 from 400 would result in a 2-3x performance increase and better battery life.

Am I thinking correctly?

You are correct. If all they did was increase the clock frequency of the processor it would get slightly better performance, i.e. iPod Touch 2nd Gen, and worse battery life.

*before someone tries to raise a flag about the iPod Touch not having worse battery life than the 3G, well duh, it doesn't have to provide power to everything the iPhone does.
 
doesnt explain why they wont tell the developers attending WWDC there currently..

The audience was not just the developers at the conference. The audience was majorily the people who would be downloading and watching the conference from their computers at home.

Apple may have given more technical specs to the developers off camera; however, the number of normal consumers watching the event greatly outnumber the developers at the conference. Apple will shift their jargon so that the majority can understand what's new and attact their money.
 
Apple is all about simplification and 2x is, as noted by a previous poster, easier to understand. Your mom for instance, may want an iPhone, but she quite possibly won't understand what 256 MB is. Maybe she will confuse it with flash drive space. 2x Faster is very Apple, putting things in technical terms is very Microsoft.

My dad thought that the iPhone 3G had 3GB of flash space....
When I told him that I was getting the 3GS, he was like "But didn't the iPhone already have 3GB of space?"
 
Exactly. I'm pretty sure people will notice 256 is better than 128 instead of a bar graph

I disagree and will continue to disagree. Saying something is 2 times faster is more universally understood than saying we put in 128mb more ram into the phone.

Those who are not technically endowed could care less about what MB and ram is. The people here who understand technical terminology are not the majority. The majority are those people who don't know why their monitors don't power on when they aren't plugged into an outlet.
 
I really don't think clocking the normal processor up to 600 from 400 would result in a 2-3x performance increase and better battery life.

Am I thinking correctly?

You are thinking correctly...but you aren't thinking like someone in marketing. :D
 
Register on MacRumors! This sidebar will go away, and you'll see fewer ads.