Once and for all, do larger SSDs require more RAM?

[secretk]

Well some doofus started this rumor about the 1TB iPad requiring extra ram for the storage lol. Why did he? I have no idea!

Yeah I wondered about those rumours when they started. As far as I know (however it might not be valid for the SSDs in iPads) is that you need specific percentage of the actual drive memory free so that the SSD can be efficient. So it is not that you need more RAM. You just need to be careful on how much you fill in your SSD. I think in general whatever SSD you put in, you will see that the available memory to you is not the one being sold officially. It reserves around 20 % for its own work. Then you put of course the OS and then you know what is available for usage. And you still should leave aside some memory free and available.

The Samsung Galaxy S10+ 1TB has 50% more ram too! Oh my goodness, it is also all available to the OS for general usage.. Just like the iPad Pro 1TB 6GB of ram is.

Well IMO there are few reasons for this (which does not mean that you should agree with them):

1. Samsung S10 + is a phone. iPAd Pro is a tablet. Most people prefer more powerful tablets than phones. People wanted to know how much powerful the 6 GB RAM iPad would be. Problem is it is difficult to say because there are no monitoring tools for iOS when it comes to this.
2. Samsung has DEX. That phone can be transformed into full blown computer with mouse, monitor and keyboard. People would see themselves using those 12 GB RAM in those cases. It is not just Android, with DEX they can run Linux on it. A lot of people in IT world could use Linux productively and efficiently for work and would take advantage of that said RAM.
3. While it might be still 50 %, 4 GB RAM increase is more noticeable than 2. Plus Samsung that this is their top tiered product. Apple ignored the whole RAM topic and did not even announce that the 1 TB models have more RAM. People that ran benchmarks found out and reported this.

Why doesn’t any one question the Samsung? Well that’s easy! Because Samsung labels it as “The Ultimate Performance Edition”

I honestly have not used Samsung phones so I cannot comment on them. Well I have used one phone but it was long time ago - budget galaxy phone that ran Android 4. I hated that thing. It was so slow, laggy and well unreliable. This is the only Android phone that I dislike :lol: . For the sake of their users I sincerely hope that Samsung have improved the longevity of their phones but I cannot say if it is true or not.

I myself am a bit worried about phone with 12 GB RAM. Now if we can all go to a future where our phones are mini computers that can be plugged in to monitors, mouse, keyboard then yes go for it. I like this idea a lot. I am worried however that this RAM would give excuse to Developers to not optimise their software and think on how much RAM they are consuming. That is not the future I want . There is fine balance there. Plus my laptop currently has 8 GB RAM and it handles it fine. I would not want a phone that needs more RAM than my computer to do basic work you know.

Do I think that flagship phones need more than 2 GB RAM? Hell yeah yes. However anything past 6 GB RAM is concerning for me as it will give the Developers the freedom to not care about RAM management.

Apple should have done the same I guess. Instead they add in 50% more ram, and assume the consumer could put two and two together.

For me personally (but I am not the regular consumer as I am not huge Apple fan, Apple have never convinced me that they offer something better than their competitors and never compelled me to pay for an iPad Pro product) Apple ignored the whole RAM topic which is what techies love. YouTube tech channels are all about specs, benchmarks etc. The end consumer? Does not even care! And this is what Apple is aiming for and I do think that their marketing is fine. Apple knows who buys them. Regular consumers does not care about the numbers. They care about claims like "our new iPad Pro is 50 % faster than any computer you have".

Android market is different. Every person that uses Android knows pretty much specs and benchmarks. We even install system apps to monitor RAM usage, CPU usage and all that jazz (but we have them unlike iOS users and trust me Android fanboys love to have that possibility). And to Apple's claim I would ask why would I care? So iPad Pro has powerful CPU, has 6 GB RAM and has better benchmarks than my laptop. Sure. Can I use this for something? How does this translates to my every day usage? This is where Apple failed. Not just for me, but for a lot of YouTube techies. And this is why people then question Apple because Apple expects them to pay over 2000 $ for that device. And naturally people start asking questions to know if that price is justifiable.

Plus Apple is popular. Questioning Apple generates ratings too.

 

[rui no onna]

There is no relationship between RAM and available disk space. Zero. There is a maximum amount of system memory (RAM) that can be used by a 64-bit processor (theoretically 2^64 = 16 exabytes but this is a theoretical limit). I can build you a system with 2Gb of RAM and 100Tb of storage, no problem. The max disk space depends on the type of file system used more than anything.

And the limits we are talking about are so large, any consumer device wouldn't even be a drop in the bucket.

Caveat, in this case system memory is shared among CPU, GPU and storage controller. None of these devices get dedicated memory allocations.

SSDs typically get 1GB per TB storage and even HDDs get 256MB or so of RAM cache.

During the keynote for the 2018 iPad Pro, Apple mentioned needing to do something extra in order to make 1TB work. I assume one of those things is more RAM. With how stingy Apple is when it comes to memory, I just don’t see them adding more unless it’s necessary. It’s not like they even list the amount of RAM in the tech specs for iOS devices as an upsell.

 

[tps3443]

Caveat, in this case system memory is shared among CPU, GPU and storage controller. None of these devices get dedicated memory allocations.

SSDs typically get 1GB per TB storage and even HDDs get 256MB or so of RAM cache.

During the keynote for the 2018 iPad Pro, Apple mentioned needing to do something extra in order to make 1TB work. I assume one of those things is more RAM. With how stingy Apple is when it comes to memory, I just don’t see them adding more unless it’s necessary. It’s not like they even list the amount of RAM in the tech specs for iOS devices as an upsell.

I’m pretty sure if there is any kind of DRAM used as a cache for the SSD storage, or for just the storage controller operation it is built in to the storage controller. I’m looking at the logic board of a 2018 iPad Pro, and you can see the CPU, the memory, the nand storage and storage controller area. And there looks to be a single memory chip soldered right where the storage controller is and where the actual physical storage chip is.

I do not think apple would use system ram for operation and caching of the storage controller. It would have its own ram built in, and would not be listed in specs anywhere. It just isn’t that important to list how much cache dram the storage controller has in a non upgradeable consumer device.

 

[secretk]

Caveat, in this case system memory is shared among CPU, GPU and storage controller. None of these devices get dedicated memory allocations.

Interesting! I had not thought about this but you are right.

SSDs typically get 1GB per TB storage and even HDDs get 256MB or so of RAM cache.

Just to make sure that I understood you well - is this valid for devices like iPad or also for regular laptops and desktop machines.

During the keynote for the 2018 iPad Pro, Apple mentioned needing to do something extra in order to make 1TB work. I assume one of those things is more RAM. With how stingy Apple is when it comes to memory, I just don’t see them adding more unless it’s necessary. It’s not like they even list the amount of RAM in the tech specs for iOS devices as an upsell.

Do you happen to remember what they have said? I mean did you take it as they had to do something more because of hardware restrictions or that they had software restrictions that they solved with hardware means?

Btw am I wrong to assume that the SSD in iPads is different than the SSD we use for our laptops/desktop machines?

Sorry for the stupid questions but I am more knowledgeable about the components used in laptops and desktops than the ones used in mobile devices.

You are right that Apple are not generous when it comes to RAM and that if they put it was because it was needed. Otherwise they have used this fact as part of their marketing strategy. The fact that they do not points me to believe that it was added for another reason.[/QUOTE][/QUOTE][/QUOTE]

 

[rui no onna]

I’m pretty sure if there is any kind of DRAM used as a cache for the SSD storage, or for just the storage controller operation it is built in to the storage controller. I’m looking at the logic board of a 2018 iPad Pro, and you can see the CPU, the memory, the nand storage and storage controller area. And there looks to be a single memory chip soldered right where the storage controller is and where the actual physical storage chip is.

I do not think apple would use system ram for operation and caching of the storage controller. It would have its own ram built in, and would not be listed in specs anywhere. It just isn’t that important to list how much cache dram the storage controller has in a non upgradeable consumer device.

Thing is afaik, the Apple A12 itself contains the storage controller.

Mind, I’m not sure where you’re seeing the storage controller. If you’re referring to the chip with blue outline near the NAND flash (orange), that’s the wifi/bluetooth module.

 

[rafark]

I was looking in to the new Samsung Galaxy S10+ “Ultimate Performance Edition”
It has 12GB of ram, and while this seems like a lot, it hammers ram usage. Mac OS, and iOS seem to get by with way less ram and manage it much better too.

I was watching someone open as many applications as they could on that S10+ 1TB and it was using easily 7-8+GB of ram with nothing even serious going on. Just a few random apps open like, Edmunds, cars.com, eBay, Reddit, several other apps are open etc.etc. I’m thinking the whole time, where is this ram going?! So, it really needs 12GB lol.

I keep saying this over and over, but the web is very different than it was 10 years ago. Websites these days (especially webapps) can easily use 250, 500, 750mb of ram or more. I have a Mac with 2gigs running only a browser and it cannot handle more than 5 or 6 tabs at the same time, gmail is a resource hog and so are many other webapps because Javascript is not memory efficient. And there's very little apple can do here.

 

[rui no onna]

Just to make sure that I understood you well - is this valid for devices like iPad or also for regular laptops and desktop machines.

Laptops and desktops wouldn’t really care since they just interface to the SSD or HDD. The SSD/HDD itself would have its own storage controller and built-in RAM cache.

Do you happen to remember what they have said? I mean did you take it as they had to do something more because of hardware restrictions or that they had software restrictions that they solved with hardware means?

As is often the case, Apple didn’t really provide any details. It just got special mention. You could always watch the keynote again. Apple bought an SSD company a few years back. I’m sure whatever was required to make it happen, they had the expertise necessary.

Btw am I wrong to assume that the SSD in iPads is different than the SSD we use for our laptops/desktop machines?

It’s not so much SSD in the iPad as it is raw NAND flash chips (the same storage chips used in SSDs) paired with a proprietary storage controller.

 

[secretk]

Laptops and desktops wouldn’t really care since they just interface to the SSD or HDD. The SSD/HDD itself would have its own storage controller and built-in RAM cache.

Thanks! This is how I thought it to be but wanted confirmation .

As is often the case, Apple didn’t really provide any details. It just got special mention. You could always watch the keynote again. Apple bought an SSD company a few years back. I’m sure whatever was required to make it happen, they had the expertise necessary.

Interesting! I did not know that they had bought SSD company. You are right. Whatever it was, they must have had the knowledge and the expertise to do it.

It’s not so much SSD in the iPad as it is raw NAND flash chips (the same storage chips used in SSDs) paired with a proprietary storage controller.

Thanks for the explanation!
[doublepost=1556524771][/doublepost]

I keep saying this over and over, but the web is very different than it was 10 years ago. Websites these days (especially webapps) can easily use 250, 500, 750mb of ram or more. I have a Mac with 2gigs running only a browser and it cannot handle more than 5 or 6 tabs at the same time, gmail is a resource hog and so are many other webapps because Javascript is not memory efficient. And there's very little apple can do here.

This is so true. Indeed! When I say that I need more RAM in my devices a lot of people think that I am power user that plays video games and uses power hungry software. I don't. I just open lots of tabs as part of my reading, researching and brainstorming. And I open a lot of apps. It's not that I have one that uses a lot of RAM. It's a lot of apps that use RAM memory at moderate, but when you accumulate them altogether you are left with very little memory being free.

And you are right that Apple cannot optimize those sites. What they can do is only offer more RAM so that the device can handle opening more than 5-6 tabs.

 

[mixel]

2 GB in the 9.7” Pro was a travesty.

Yes it *needed* more than 2 GB RAM, unless you think a Pro is just about playing games. It should have shipped with a minimum of 3 GB RAM.

I wouldn’t say it was a travesty, as such.. Reviews at the time were going on about how capable and fast the 9.7 was, and I really don’t have memory problems compared the the insane crappiness of the iPad 3 I upgraded from.. 2 seemed reasonable as iOS was so efficient.. I am a bit concerned about what’ll happen in iOS 13 though!

The 2GB in my 9.7 is fine until I need lots of layers at high dpi. Then it falls apart, other than that this thing still performs beautifully.

 

[rui no onna]

I wouldn’t say it was a travesty, as such.. Reviews at the time were going on about how capable and fast the 9.7 was, and I really don’t have memory problems compared the the insane crappiness of the iPad 3 I upgraded from.. 2 seemed reasonable as iOS was so efficient.. I am a bit concerned about what’ll happen in iOS 13 though!

The 2GB in my 9.7 is fine until I need lots of layers at high dpi. Then it falls apart, other than that this thing still performs beautifully.

Agreed. Lol, I was expecting to have replaced the Pro 9.7 last year. Surprisingly, it has lasted me longer than I expected. Found a good deal on a 512GB iPad Pro 10.5 LTE so I already moved on (performance-wise though don't really need it yet). Depending on what's on offer though, I might still upgrade to the next Pro. I really want 326 ppi and tablet-layout Split View on the 10-11" class iPad (that should almost be like 2 iPad minis side by side).

 

[EugW]

I wouldn’t say it was a travesty, as such.. Reviews at the time were going on about how capable and fast the 9.7 was, and I really don’t have memory problems compared the the insane crappiness of the iPad 3 I upgraded from.. 2 seemed reasonable as iOS was so efficient.. I am a bit concerned about what’ll happen in iOS 13 though!

The 2GB in my 9.7 is fine until I need lots of layers at high dpi. Then it falls apart, other than that this thing still performs beautifully.

Bingo. For your Pro usage, it isn't very Pro, but it's fine as a consumer device.

I've always said that if you ever have to make the choice to scrimp on either CPU vs memory, most of the time you're better off scrimping on CPU than memory, at least if longevity is a factor.

 

[tps3443]

Thing is afaik, the Apple A12 itself contains the storage controller.


View attachment 834336


Mind, I’m not sure where you’re seeing the storage controller. If you’re referring to the chip with blue outline near the NAND flash (orange), that’s the wifi/bluetooth module.

View attachment 834337

I can see that now, and that was my mistake.

Although I’m still not convinced. You are comparing an iPad Pro’s storage to a Samsung NVMe that uses like up to 8 watts by its self. The iPads have Toshiba Nand storage, some Toshiba NVMe’s do NOT use Volatile DRAM for caching. Toshiba NAND storage uses write caching, which is not as fast as Samsung’s method to use Volatile DRAM as a cache method. Although, Toshiba would be much more reliable especially in the event of power loss. I myself have purchased several “dead” Samsung drives due to corrupt files, and or because of sudden loss of power can indeed corrupt the NVMe. I paid $3-$5 bucks each, plugged them in power on and off for about 10 minutes straight, and it fixes them. Also, I think the iPhone 6+ suffered from the same problem. With these iPads having Toshiba NAND storage in them, I highly doubt they use volatile system ram to cache the storage drive.

So, what I’m getting at is a SSD doesn’t even need a cache. As a cache is just there for Samsung to get some big numbers and fast performance on small transfers. These Samsung drives drop in performance once this cache is depleted and full anyways during a larger file transfer.


The iPad Pro is not out to get performance numbers like a enthusiast level Samsung NVMe is.

There is 7% of the 6GB of ram missing though. So, if the Toshiba NAND storage built in to the iPad does use a caching system with Volatile ram and it is using a small 7% portion of the LPDDR on the A12X, then that would give it 560MB of caching which seems more than adequate considering this iPad probably has 1/4th the endurance of some of these consumer NVMe drives.


So if the 512GB iPad has 327MB of LPDDR cache, then the 1TB iPad Pro would have about 70% more cache at 560MB of LPDDR available.

So if apple wanted to increase the ram to allow a higher cache size for the larger 1TB of storage, then they gave it more memory than it ever needed to begin with. Going 2x3GB modules instead of 2x2GB modules.

If apple increased the 1TB iPad Pro cache size, then it would have less available ram than the lower storage models. Considering they have ram modules most likely in a specific set size. Possibly 1GB, 2GB, and 3GB. They probably do not mix these when they are soldered on to the SOC. A iPad 6TH gen probably has (2) 1GB modules. The iPad Pro 512GB probably has (2) 2GB modules. And I suppose when they made the 1TB they installed (2) 3GB modules.

 

[rui no onna]

I can see that now, and that was my mistake.

Although I’m still not convinced. You are comparing an iPad Pro’s storage to a Samsung NVMe that uses like up to 8 watts by its self. The iPads have Toshiba Nand storage, some Toshiba NVMe’s do NOT use Volatile DRAM for caching. Toshiba NAND storage uses write caching, which is not as fast as Samsung’s method to use Volatile DRAM as a cache method. Although, Toshiba would be much more reliable especially in the event of power loss. I myself have purchased several “dead” Samsung drives due to corrupt files, and or because of sudden loss of power can indeed corrupt the NVMe. I paid $3-$5 bucks each, plugged them in power on and off for about 10 minutes straight, and it fixes them. Also, I think the iPhone 6+ suffered from the same problem. With these iPads having Toshiba NAND storage in them, I highly doubt they use volatile system ram to cache the storage drive.

So, what I’m getting at is a SSD doesn’t even need a cache. As a cache is just there for Samsung to get some big numbers and fast performance on small transfers. These Samsung drives drop in performance once this cache is depleted and full anyways during a larger file transfer.


The iPad Pro is not out to get performance numbers like a enthusiast level Samsung NVMe is.

There is 7% of the 6GB of ram missing though. So, if the Toshiba NAND storage built in to the iPad does use a caching system with Volatile ram and it is using a small 7% portion of the LPDDR on the A12X, then that would give it 560MB of caching which seems more than adequate considering this iPad probably has 1/4th the endurance of some of these consumer NVMe drives.


So if the 512GB iPad has 327MB of LPDDR cache, then the 1TB iPad Pro would have about 70% more cache at 560MB of LPDDR available.

So if apple wanted to increase the ram to allow a higher cache size for the larger 1TB of storage, then they gave it more memory than it ever needed to begin with. Going 2x3GB modules instead of 2x2GB modules.

If apple increased the 1TB iPad Pro cache size, then it would have less available ram than the lower storage models. Considering they have ram modules most likely in a specific set size. Possibly 1GB, 2GB, and 3GB. They probably do not mix these when they are soldered on to the SOC. A iPad 6TH gen probably has (2) 1GB modules. The iPad Pro 512GB probably has (2) 2GB modules. And I suppose when they made the 1TB they installed (2) 3GB modules.

Shared memory structure means Apple doesn't have to dedicate memory to any single component and can allocate RAM as needed. Perhaps storage only needs the extra memory 1% of the time and the rest of the time, it's available to be used by CPU or GPU.

Yes, I do believe Apple gave the 1TB more memory than was strictly necessary for storage precisely because RAM manufacturers don't make 2.25 GB RAM modules. I've mentioned that before on one of my previous posts. 1TB got more RAM likely because it needed it. It got more than was necessary and even what was needed likely wasn't required 100% of the time so the system has excess RAM available to use for other tasks.

That 7% system reserved probably serves other functions and isn't strictly for storage.

Apple's not out for performance numbers for the sake of high numbers, true, however, fast storage is part and parcel of fast system performance. Particularly so if they have plans to start using storage-backed virtual memory.

In any case, without insider knowledge from Apple, everything in this thread is merely speculation.

 

[tps3443]

Shared memory structure means Apple doesn't have to dedicate memory to any single component and can allocate RAM as needed. Perhaps storage only needs the extra memory 1% of the time and the rest of the time, it's available to be used by CPU or GPU.

Yes, I do believe Apple gave the 1TB more memory than was strictly necessary for storage precisely because RAM manufacturers don't make 2.25 GB RAM modules. I've mentioned that before on one of my previous posts. 1TB got more RAM likely because it needed it. It got more than was necessary and even what was needed likely wasn't required 100% of the time so the system has excess RAM available to use for other tasks.

That 7% system reserved probably serves other functions and isn't strictly for storage.

Apple's not out for performance numbers for the sake of high numbers, true, however, fast storage is part and parcel of fast system performance. Particularly so if they have plans to start using storage-backed virtual memory.

In any case, without insider knowledge from Apple, everything in this thread is merely speculation.

Yep, it’s all just speculation unfortunately. That 7-8% is kinda convenient though. And pretty convincing that it may just be used as a cache for the storage. And, the fact that it is the same size on all iPads accept for the 1TB model does sound compelling enough. The size of it would also seem sufficiently large enough to be used as a cache too, and it is hidden from iOS to be seen or used. Almost as if some other firmware has prioritized this missing 7% to something else. Even important system services, and kernels run on the available system ram and you can see how much is being used.

^ To much speculation lol.

The only thing I know for a fact is, the 5.6GB ram is available to be used vs only having 3.7gb of ram.

Also, this doesn’t even begin to explain some performance issues that I was able to recreate over and over again with the 512GB, or 64GB models due to micro stuttering or running low on memory.

I’ve yet to experience this while having more ram.

 

[tps3443]

so I know many have said the 1TB Pro doesn’t use the extra RAM for memory management... I’m curious if that is the case with Apple’s storage type. I also ask because I have heard way more people say it is absolutely for storage management while many also say it is not.
I wish Apple would have said why, lol.
*also not trying to start a war, so let’s keep this civil. I’m just curious of who thinks what.





Kallum.

So if you gathered all the responses in regards to this thread.

I’m going to recap this.

The iPad Pro 6GB can use all of its memory in iOS just like the 4GB model can. If some ram may be used for the slightly large storage to cache, just like your iPad with 4GB of ram does too. Either way, apple has added a lot more ram than was even necessary to begin with. So, it is a win win regardless.

I think 3.7GB of ram may be a little tight for iOS and some of these intensive applications. I couldn’t take the skipping and performance issues in Adobe Rush, and Ark survival too. I haven’t Experience the problem since.

If you do not edit videos, Or requiring a lot of storage, or if you’re just casually using an iPad why would you consider a 1TB model?

Are you having the performance stuttering issues?
[doublepost=1556575839][/doublepost]

Yeah I wondered about those rumours when they started. As far as I know (however it might not be valid for the SSDs in iPads) is that you need specific percentage of the actual drive memory free so that the SSD can be efficient. So it is not that you need more RAM. You just need to be careful on how much you fill in your SSD. I think in general whatever SSD you put in, you will see that the available memory to you is not the one being sold officially. It reserves around 20 % for its own work. Then you put of course the OS and then you know what is available for usage. And you still should leave aside some memory free and available.



Well IMO there are few reasons for this (which does not mean that you should agree with them):

1. Samsung S10 + is a phone. iPAd Pro is a tablet. Most people prefer more powerful tablets than phones. People wanted to know how much powerful the 6 GB RAM iPad would be. Problem is it is difficult to say because there are no monitoring tools for iOS when it comes to this.
2. Samsung has DEX. That phone can be transformed into full blown computer with mouse, monitor and keyboard. People would see themselves using those 12 GB RAM in those cases. It is not just Android, with DEX they can run Linux on it. A lot of people in IT world could use Linux productively and efficiently for work and would take advantage of that said RAM.
3. While it might be still 50 %, 4 GB RAM increase is more noticeable than 2. Plus Samsung that this is their top tiered product. Apple ignored the whole RAM topic and did not even announce that the 1 TB models have more RAM. People that ran benchmarks found out and reported this.



I honestly have not used Samsung phones so I cannot comment on them. Well I have used one phone but it was long time ago - budget galaxy phone that ran Android 4. I hated that thing. It was so slow, laggy and well unreliable. This is the only Android phone that I dislike :lol: . For the sake of their users I sincerely hope that Samsung have improved the longevity of their phones but I cannot say if it is true or not.

I myself am a bit worried about phone with 12 GB RAM. Now if we can all go to a future where our phones are mini computers that can be plugged in to monitors, mouse, keyboard then yes go for it. I like this idea a lot. I am worried however that this RAM would give excuse to Developers to not optimise their software and think on how much RAM they are consuming. That is not the future I want . There is fine balance there. Plus my laptop currently has 8 GB RAM and it handles it fine. I would not want a phone that needs more RAM than my computer to do basic work you know.

Do I think that flagship phones need more than 2 GB RAM? Hell yeah yes. However anything past 6 GB RAM is concerning for me as it will give the Developers the freedom to not care about RAM management.



For me personally (but I am not the regular consumer as I am not huge Apple fan, Apple have never convinced me that they offer something better than their competitors and never compelled me to pay for an iPad Pro product) Apple ignored the whole RAM topic which is what techies love. YouTube tech channels are all about specs, benchmarks etc. The end consumer? Does not even care! And this is what Apple is aiming for and I do think that their marketing is fine. Apple knows who buys them. Regular consumers does not care about the numbers. They care about claims like "our new iPad Pro is 50 % faster than any computer you have".

Android market is different. Every person that uses Android knows pretty much specs and benchmarks. We even install system apps to monitor RAM usage, CPU usage and all that jazz (but we have them unlike iOS users and trust me Android fanboys love to have that possibility). And to Apple's claim I would ask why would I care? So iPad Pro has powerful CPU, has 6 GB RAM and has better benchmarks than my laptop. Sure. Can I use this for something? How does this translates to my every day usage? This is where Apple failed. Not just for me, but for a lot of YouTube techies. And this is why people then question Apple because Apple expects them to pay over 2000 $ for that device. And naturally people start asking questions to know if that price is justifiable.

Plus Apple is popular. Questioning Apple generates ratings too.

I was being 100% sarcastic when I posted this lol.

 

[EugW]

So if you gathered all the responses in regards to this thread.

I’m going to recap this.

The iPad Pro 6GB can use all of its memory in iOS just like the 4GB model can. If some ram may be used for the slightly large storage to cache, just like your iPad with 4GB of ram does too. Either way, apple has added a lot more ram than was even necessary to begin with. So, it is a win win regardless.

I think 3.7GB of ram may be a little tight for iOS and some of these intensive applications. I couldn’t take the skipping and performance issues in Adobe Rush, and Ark survival too. I haven’t Experience the problem since.

If you do not edit videos, Or requiring a lot of storage, or if you’re just casually using an iPad why would you consider a 1TB model?

Are you having the performance stuttering issues?
[doublepost=1556575839][/doublepost]


I was being 100% sarcastic when I posted this lol.

You should try LumaFusion instead of Adobe Rush.