Which of these phones is faster?

[dfuser312553]

^Where do you see TB has DDR?

 

[UNC]

^Where do you see TB has DDR?

If it was DDR2 it would've been one of the specs HTC brought up in the promo stuff. So one assumes its DDR.

 

[kptphalkon]

Edit/ blah... //edit.

Where do you see that it does not? SDram has been outmoded by ddr in the computing world for a decade now, and while the Low Power mobile offshoot of ram is more SD based in command/function, the fact that it runs at a higher clock than 133 Mhz, is coined 'lpddr' and 'lpddr2', and most significantly, operates on both edges of the bus, definitely make the ram DDR.

Dont fight the computer nerd....you will lose.

 

[dfuser312553]

I know I've seen this brought up before & the best I could find was xda's wiki on the TB says ram memory card. I can find the ram from any other phone & I thought it would be clarified after release. http://forum.xda-developers.com/wiki/index.php?title=HTC_Thunderbolt

Who's the computer nerd?

 

[kptphalkon]

Internal memory is different from the sd card...you are confusing Secure Digital cards with RAM.

I hate how specs don't differentiate the internal mounted storage from system bus RAM. Emmc is NOT equal to ram, nor is it used as the systems ram. It would be way way too stressful, and quite a bit slower, than ram.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/LPDDR

 

[dfuser312553]

Lawlz.... I'm not a moron & I know more about computers than I'd care to type right now so feel free to stop wiki-ing wut iz ram. The xda link I provided differentiates between the two. Give it another look see that *colon?

 

[kptphalkon]

You obviously dont know enough to differentiate from emmc storage, external sdhc, and ddr sdram. I just thought the mention of the xoom, ipad, and droid x having lpddr would have cleared things up.

 

[Fightnfire]

RAM is RAM, Random Access Memory.

DDR is a type of RAM = Double Data Rate

DDR 2 is a newer faster type of DDR

DDR 3 is a new faster than DDR2

This is of course VERY generalized. You're asking about size specifically which is ok but misleading because there is also RAM speed to consider, and then timings.

 

[andjarnic]

Hey all,

Keep in mind something about the new dual core and end of year quad cores coming out. This is especially true for the apple phones given their limited UI experience.. but in most cases, multiple cores are not going to help greatly. Android of course uses multi-tasking MUCH better than Apple primarily because you can actually run widgets on your phones/tablets, where as iphone/ipad the UI only allows for one app to take up the whole screen. That said, like iphone/ipad, when you click an app to run, it takes up the screen and is the "top" app running. Even though the impression is given that you're running multiple apps at once, sadly that isn't the case. Well.. not sadly..we'd have a 20 minute battery life if we were. Due to battery drain, android and apple took the "right path" in multi tasking on these devices. The top app runs, the rest of the apps are in a paused mode. They may still be in memory, but they are not executing. HOWEVER, before I get flamed by anyone that wants to counter this.. it is completely possible for some apps to still be running.. any app that uses threads within the app could very well NOT stop a thread and it could be running. This is similar to background apps (processes) running. Of course, these are badly written apps if they allow a thread to continue to run while not the top app AND are not a background process (aka.. no UI or a widget).

So, the main benefit of multi-core on phones at least for Android is widgets and background processes will be snappier. However, generally..you don't want too many of these things running or you'll drain your battery faster. In the case of the top app on both platforms, the multi-core can be utilized by threads.. although to be honest I don't quite know how threading works on apples platform. I am hoping the Dalvik JVM uses them in such a way that if two cores exist, both cores can be used for multiple threads..but I have not ready anything in regards to how a single app with multiple threads will utilize a multi-core chip yet. It's possible that the Dalvik JVM doesn't support it correctly too.. after all they are just coming out and most of them are still running 2.2.. which has been out a while now long before multi-core chips. One of these days I'll ask on the dev forums how the Dalvik JVM handles threads within a single app and multi-cores.

As for the OP.. the Bionic will technically be snappier even with less memory. If you load three apps on both phones, and consume 450MB of ram.. in both phones there is RAM left over.. so the bionic would most likely be a lot snappier. Since Android has built in automatic "shutdown of resources" management.. if on the Bionic you have too many apps open, android will shut down apps to make more room for the top app anyway..and I've not heard of a single android app using 512MB ram.. it's only recently phones with that much memory are available. It would be really stupid for any developer hoping to target the large variety of devices to consider even using 1/2 that memory. There are still a large volume of 256MB ram devices.

Finally.. all that said, I am quite surprised that the Atrix has 1GB and the Bionic only 512MB.. with 2 cores..I don't understand why they didn't put 1GB on this device. There are rumors that it may be possible to replace the 512MB with 1GB ddr2..but I don't know that I want to void my warranty to find out. I am sure the bionic will be a magnitude faster than my current Droid 1.

 

[illmatic636]

So it appears the Bionic will be faster because of the dual core processor. Got it.

Which is the faster RAM? DDR2? Then what would the slower RAM be? Non-DDR2?

Cant really say that until the phone actually comes out. It manages Ram differently on top of being dual core. Should be faster, but without a Demo release of the Bionic. we won't know for sure. Same thing with battery life.

 

[UNC]

Hey all,

Keep in mind something about the new dual core and end of year quad cores coming out. This is especially true for the apple phones given their limited UI experience.. but in most cases, multiple cores are not going to help greatly. Android of course uses multi-tasking MUCH better than Apple primarily because you can actually run widgets on your phones/tablets, where as iphone/ipad the UI only allows for one app to take up the whole screen. That said, like iphone/ipad, when you click an app to run, it takes up the screen and is the "top" app running. Even though the impression is given that you're running multiple apps at once, sadly that isn't the case. Well.. not sadly..we'd have a 20 minute battery life if we were. Due to battery drain, android and apple took the "right path" in multi tasking on these devices. The top app runs, the rest of the apps are in a paused mode. They may still be in memory, but they are not executing. HOWEVER, before I get flamed by anyone that wants to counter this.. it is completely possible for some apps to still be running.. any app that uses threads within the app could very well NOT stop a thread and it could be running. This is similar to background apps (processes) running. Of course, these are badly written apps if they allow a thread to continue to run while not the top app AND are not a background process (aka.. no UI or a widget).

So, the main benefit of multi-core on phones at least for Android is widgets and background processes will be snappier. However, generally..you don't want too many of these things running or you'll drain your battery faster. In the case of the top app on both platforms, the multi-core can be utilized by threads.. although to be honest I don't quite know how threading works on apples platform. I am hoping the Dalvik JVM uses them in such a way that if two cores exist, both cores can be used for multiple threads..but I have not ready anything in regards to how a single app with multiple threads will utilize a multi-core chip yet. It's possible that the Dalvik JVM doesn't support it correctly too.. after all they are just coming out and most of them are still running 2.2.. which has been out a while now long before multi-core chips. One of these days I'll ask on the dev forums how the Dalvik JVM handles threads within a single app and multi-cores.

As for the OP.. the Bionic will technically be snappier even with less memory. If you load three apps on both phones, and consume 450MB of ram.. in both phones there is RAM left over.. so the bionic would most likely be a lot snappier. Since Android has built in automatic "shutdown of resources" management.. if on the Bionic you have too many apps open, android will shut down apps to make more room for the top app anyway..and I've not heard of a single android app using 512MB ram.. it's only recently phones with that much memory are available. It would be really stupid for any developer hoping to target the large variety of devices to consider even using 1/2 that memory. There are still a large volume of 256MB ram devices.

Finally.. all that said, I am quite surprised that the Atrix has 1GB and the Bionic only 512MB.. with 2 cores..I don't understand why they didn't put 1GB on this device. There are rumors that it may be possible to replace the 512MB with 1GB ddr2..but I don't know that I want to void my warranty to find out. I am sure the bionic will be a magnitude faster than my current Droid 1.

I think half of the Atrix RAM is tied to use of the docking station. The Bionic is basically the same thing.
Sent from my Droid using DroidForums App

 

[dfuser312553]

You obviously dont know enough to differentiate from emmc storage, external sdhc, and ddr sdram. I just thought the mention of the xoom, ipad, and droid x having lpddr would have cleared things up.

.... I thought ram was an animal that frequents mountains. Do you think you could wiki me some infos that I could put in my head movie?