Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
Dunno what I'm doing different to you guys but I have an iPhone 6 currently running iOS 9.1 beta 2 with crystal ad blocker installed and I'm set on low power mode with the music app running in the background and I have 15 tabs open with no refreshing issues.

Couldn't be bothered to open more in the end but I am having no issues. This could be due to the adblocker installed or 9.1 is just THAT much better.

Most tabs I usually have open is about 2 or 3 and then I usually close them all after I'm done, I do the same on my Mac too but everyone is different.

*edit* forgot I had the Twitter app open in the background too so even more crap in the ram.
 
One of the reasons Apple stays conservative with how much RAM the devices have is because RAM must always have power from the battery, so with more RAM you get less battery life.
Oh, guess what constant page refreshes do, they use more cellular or WiFi connectivity, cause CPU spikes and all that.

Also, the amount of power proper RAM pulls is miniscule and whilst there is a very slight increase of power needed for the RAM it's really not that high and I'd go as far as saying before you give the CPU more clocking, just add more RAM.
Of all the things iPhones needed, RAM has been the number one needed upgrade for years now.

So when they decided to stick to 1GB of RAM to "conserve battery" according to your theory, not only would that be absolutely false (see above), they'd also rather upgrade the RAM and underclock the CPU a little more.

Glassed Silver:mac
 
One of the reasons Apple stays conservative with how much RAM the devices have is because RAM must always have power from the battery, so with more RAM you get less battery life.
You really believe that? If they cared about battery life, they would make a thicker device. Also, the 6+ has the same battery life with 2GB as the 6 has with 1GB. Plus, I would hope Apple optimizes a device for when it is used vs. when it is off.

They kept it at 1GB RAM purely because of profit.
 
Last edited:
Are you really? Why? Its utterly pointless. Maybe when I can have actual wireless charging so that my phone chargers whilst i'm walking around my house, that would be cool - or at the very least it charges whenever I lay it down on any surface. But having to put it on a pad which slow chargers the phone is really really useless.

I'm glad I'm not the only one. When wireless charging was first floating around, I thought it was finally the future: Walk within a certain distance of the power source or walk into the hosue and my phone would be charging. However, having to still place it on a specific pad seems pointless. It saves the 2 seconds to pick up the wire and plug it into the phone. Unlike micro USB found on android, the lightning connector can be plugged in either way, which makes the potential time savings for iOS devices even less.
 
The video proves nothing, technically. The author claims it's the extra RAM without any proof.

They did a similar test with Safari when the iPad Air 2 came out (which had 2GB RAM). No websites refreshing. Furthermore the iOS logs have shown that most Safari crashes/reloads on 1GB devices are due to RAM. And the 64-bit CPU has a larger RAM overhead by default. There are masses of threads/details about this.

You're right about one thing, though. The video doesn't "prove" anything. It simply confirms what people have been proving for the last 2 years.
 
You really believe that? If they cared about battery life, they would make a thicker device. Also, the 6+ has the same battery life with 2GB as the 6 has with 1GB. Plus, I would hope Apple optimizes a device for when it is used vs. when it it off.

They kept it at 1GB RAM purely because of profit.

Yes, clearly the radio chipset and the A9 processor is much more efficient or else how would they get the same battery life with a greater then 5% smaller batteries in both devices?
 
One of the reasons Apple stays conservative with how much RAM the devices have is because RAM must always have power from the battery, so with more RAM you get less battery life.
And constant website/app reloading doesn't affect battery life?
How come iPhone 6s with a smaller battery than the regular 6 does just fine with 2 gb of RAM?
 
I just did a test on my 6s. I opened in new tabs all of the sites that I often visit. Many of these sites are tech, photography and design blogs that are fairly resource intensive. I also opened several general news sites, different weather sites, financial sites—you name it. So a very diverse mix. I also had content blockers turned on.

What happened next blew my mind.

I maxed out Safari. It opened 36 tabs and kept them all in memory. I couldn't open any more tabs. That's the maximum. It was grayed out.

I just can't even right now.

I understand real-world usage is probably different. Such as switching between apps. Or having lots of history per tab. But in normal circumstances for most users you shouldn't have much of a problem at all. I'd say 10-15 tabs should be no problem which is more than even I would ever need on a phone as a power user. My biggest problem was not being able to switch between even two tabs on my 6 Plus. In reality I would have been content with around 8. This is more than plenty! And no doubt content blockers helped significantly so use them!
 
Dunno what I'm doing different to you guys but I have an iPhone 6 currently running iOS 9.1 beta 2 with crystal ad blocker installed and I'm set on low power mode with the music app running in the background and I have 15 tabs open with no refreshing issues.

Couldn't be bothered to open more in the end but I am having no issues. This could be due to the adblocker installed or 9.1 is just THAT much better.

Most tabs I usually have open is about 2 or 3 and then I usually close them all after I'm done, I do the same on my Mac too but everyone is different.

*edit* forgot I had the Twitter app open in the background too so even more crap in the ram.

Exit Safari, play a game. Reopen Safari.

If your webpages don't refresh, I'm calling shenanigans.
 
And constant website/app reloading doesn't affect battery life?
How come iPhone 6s with a smaller battery than the regular 6 does just fine with 2 gb of RAM?

As I stated above in another reply, the radio chipset used and the A9 processor are much more efficient, which I thought would be obvious or else clearly the device would be getting worse battery life with a > 5% smaller battery.
 
I was curious after reading this thread. So I opened ten different sites on my iPhone 6 Plus and none of them are reloading when I switch back to them.
 
6s is a big difference for me (I haven't had a single tab refresh yet)

This always happened on any previous iPhone I owned including iPhone 6 and iPhone 5s (same RAM, same type of RAM); not once on my 6S. 2GB Makes a huge difference. A nice plus is it is using LPDDR4
 
As I stated above in another reply, the radio chipset used and the A9 processor are much more efficient, which I thought would be obvious or else clearly the device would be getting worse battery life with a > 5% smaller battery.
And the proof of A9 or radio chipset being "much" more efficient?
The same battery life could be the result of less reloading.
iPhone 6(plus) could have easily handled 2 gb of RAM. They had a bigger battery than 6s(plus) and they also have an ultra efficient A8.
 
One of the reasons Apple stays conservative with how much RAM the devices have is because RAM must always have power from the battery, so with more RAM you get less battery life.

Yep, and that's why iPhones have had such great battery life. :rolleyes: Good thing they kept that RAM locked down for so long!
 
  • Like
Reactions: TommyA6
The title of the YouTube video in the original post is "2 GB of RAM in the iPhone 6s makes Safari WAY better." I think a more appropriate title would have been "2 GB of RAM in the iPhone 6s makes Safari WAY snappier."
 
But i thought 1GB of Ram was enough........

It wasn't enough for the 6+ models. Apple duped millions in the market by trial-running it first, and then increasing the RAM once they found insufficient performance.
 
Clearly the RAM should've gotten more priority in previous years. Can't imagine 2GB wasn't possible before. Or was it (just guessing here)?

Apple doesn't prioritize specs. They prioritize features and user experience. Most users never have more than about 5 tabs open at once. If they do, like typical users, they simply close out all the old tabs to clear more space in the RAM. Apple has never catered to their 5% power user base. The RAM upgrade is fine but only about 5% of iPhone users are going to notice. The rest will just go on using their devices the same way and not whine about it on the forums like this.
 
Apple doesn't prioritize specs. They prioritize features and user experience. Most users never have more than about 5 tabs open at once. If they do, like typical users, they simply close out all the old tabs to clear more space in the RAM. Apple has never catered to their 5% power user base. The RAM upgrade is fine but only about 5% of iPhone users are going to notice. The rest will just go on using their devices the same way and not whine about it on the forums like this.

Y'know, I'd be willing to bet that a lot more than 5% of iPhone users have experienced detrimental effects due to the RAM limit, but as they're not a 'power user' it's pretty damn likely they don't know what's causing the problems.

And those prioritised features and user experience – like 16GB base storage since the iPhone 3GS?

Apple do a lot of good stuff and some crazy good innovation, but boy, do you ever sound like an apologist.
 
Register on MacRumors! This sidebar will go away, and you'll see fewer ads.