3 ms·

I still wonder why in the world Apple went with just 1GB of RAM on the 5s. Even the Nexus 4 that I bought contract-free for $200 comes has 2GB of RAM.

runjake 13y ago
1) Because the iPhone doesn't need 2 GB RAM. 2) They took the money they saved and devoted it elsewhere (perhaps the Sapphire home button? :) When it comes down to the bill of materials, every cent really does count when it scales across several million units sold.
- pslam 13y ago
  2GB of DDR also takes twice as much power to keep alive vs 1GB of DDR. If you don't need it - it's a waste of battery.
  - deleted 13y ago
    [deleted]
- denim_chicken 13y ago
  The iPhone doesn't need a 64-bit desktop-class processor, either. I personally think Apple strategically held off the RAM upgrade 'til next year's iPhone, so that they could have a "killer feature" to lean on if they don't manage to figure out a more novel^Winnovative one in time.
  - melange 13y ago
    Are you seriously claiming that Apple kept the RAM below 1GB so that "Now has >1GB' could be their headline feature for next year?
    - denim_chicken 13y ago
      Yes. What's wrong with the idea?
      - mwfunk 13y ago
        It seems way more likely that in the decision to go with a 64-bit CPU vs. 2 GB RAM, the pros outweighed the cons. I mean, who knows, but these kinds of decisions aren't made based on the simplistic criteria you're claiming they are. There are pros and cons (and benefits and compromises) to any engineering decision (and product design decision, and business decision, and marketing decision, etc. etc. etc.). I could easily see a situation where a bunch of people were sitting around saying, "y'know, we don't absolutely positively NEED a 64-bit processor, but it doesn't cost much more and there might be some performance gains and if nothing else it might be a good bullet point for marketing. On the other hand, doubling the RAM will double what we pay for RAM, it won't help performance, and it will eat into the power budget, and it wouldn't make a good bullet point for marketing. The only downside is that denim_chicken will think we're being nefarious and will tell the world about it on HN." I have no idea if that's what happened, but Occam's Razor suggests that it's more likely than the combination of pure evil and pure incompetence that you've been postulating here.
        mwfunk 13y ago
        (none of which means that they aren't going to do exactly what you say they will, either, just not for the reasons you seem to be basing it on)
        corresation 13y ago
        On the other hand, doubling the RAM will double what we pay for RAM, it won't help performance, and it will eat into the power budget, and it wouldn't make a good bullet point for marketing. The power consumption angle is a complete and utter non-issue. It generally comes up as an apologetic canard to justify Apple's choice here, but in the holistic sense the power difference between 1GB and 2GB is negligible. Note that the ARMv8 processor, however, is a serious power pig. However the limited memory should be an issue for people. I personally seriously considered a 5S to replace my GS3, largely for the fantastic camera, but the window of credible life for the 5S is simply too short -- 1GB just isn't enough, and seems especially deficient compared to such a fantastic processor.
  - runjake 13y ago
    > The iPhone doesn't need a 64-bit desktop-class processor, either. It doesn't need it, but it certainly helps, as benchmarks and my own development of an app that does live video effects has shown. so that they could have a "killer feature" to lean on if they don't manage to figure out a more novel Apple has never marketed, nor revealed (to my knowledge) what amount of RAM is in an iOS device model. This is always determined later by a 3rd party.
    - denim_chicken 13y ago
      The extra RAM also helps. Any good OS will not fail to find a use for extra RAM.
- corresation 13y ago
  Because the iPhone doesn't need 2 GB RAM. Neither does the Nexus 4. It's a performance optimization that allows applications to stay resident without being freeze-dried, so to speak, helping multitasking. Could the 5s benefit from more memory? Absolutely, if you're jumping between various applications it makes a difference. In any case, I wish my iPad had 2GB. With iOS 7 it seems to even discard images on richer webpages that are scrolled out of view. It is starting to seem very confined, and it's hard to view the 5s as a longer term option when it is already living in tight bounds (despite the fact that it has an amazing processor).
- matwood 13y ago
  1) Because the iPhone doesn't need 2 GB RAM. I disagree. Retina assets are huge. When programming for iOS (mobile in general) the biggest issue is memory usage and running out. Do anything with a lot of graphics and you start to bump into limits.
r00fus 13y ago
Power/battery. Extra RAM doesn't come for free power-wise, it costs energy to keep it's state.
- Peaker 13y ago
  The new ARM processor is said to be more power hungry than an extra 1GB of RAM.
  - rsynnott 13y ago
    Of course it is... when active. However, you can do a lot more about idling a processor than you can about idling RAM; at a minimum, DRAM requires power for the refresh cycle.

runjake 13y ago

1) Because the iPhone doesn't need 2 GB RAM. 2) They took the money they saved and devoted it elsewhere (perhaps the Sapphire home button? :) When it comes down to the bill of materials, every cent really does count when it scales across several million units sold.

pslam 13y ago
2GB of DDR also takes twice as much power to keep alive vs 1GB of DDR. If you don't need it - it's a waste of battery.
- deleted 13y ago
  [deleted]
denim_chicken 13y ago
The iPhone doesn't need a 64-bit desktop-class processor, either. I personally think Apple strategically held off the RAM upgrade 'til next year's iPhone, so that they could have a "killer feature" to lean on if they don't manage to figure out a more novel^Winnovative one in time.
- melange 13y ago
  Are you seriously claiming that Apple kept the RAM below 1GB so that "Now has >1GB' could be their headline feature for next year?
  - denim_chicken 13y ago
    Yes. What's wrong with the idea?
    - mwfunk 13y ago
      It seems way more likely that in the decision to go with a 64-bit CPU vs. 2 GB RAM, the pros outweighed the cons. I mean, who knows, but these kinds of decisions aren't made based on the simplistic criteria you're claiming they are. There are pros and cons (and benefits and compromises) to any engineering decision (and product design decision, and business decision, and marketing decision, etc. etc. etc.). I could easily see a situation where a bunch of people were sitting around saying, "y'know, we don't absolutely positively NEED a 64-bit processor, but it doesn't cost much more and there might be some performance gains and if nothing else it might be a good bullet point for marketing. On the other hand, doubling the RAM will double what we pay for RAM, it won't help performance, and it will eat into the power budget, and it wouldn't make a good bullet point for marketing. The only downside is that denim_chicken will think we're being nefarious and will tell the world about it on HN." I have no idea if that's what happened, but Occam's Razor suggests that it's more likely than the combination of pure evil and pure incompetence that you've been postulating here.
      - mwfunk 13y ago
        (none of which means that they aren't going to do exactly what you say they will, either, just not for the reasons you seem to be basing it on)
      - corresation 13y ago
        On the other hand, doubling the RAM will double what we pay for RAM, it won't help performance, and it will eat into the power budget, and it wouldn't make a good bullet point for marketing. The power consumption angle is a complete and utter non-issue. It generally comes up as an apologetic canard to justify Apple's choice here, but in the holistic sense the power difference between 1GB and 2GB is negligible. Note that the ARMv8 processor, however, is a serious power pig. However the limited memory should be an issue for people. I personally seriously considered a 5S to replace my GS3, largely for the fantastic camera, but the window of credible life for the 5S is simply too short -- 1GB just isn't enough, and seems especially deficient compared to such a fantastic processor.
- runjake 13y ago
  > The iPhone doesn't need a 64-bit desktop-class processor, either. It doesn't need it, but it certainly helps, as benchmarks and my own development of an app that does live video effects has shown. so that they could have a "killer feature" to lean on if they don't manage to figure out a more novel Apple has never marketed, nor revealed (to my knowledge) what amount of RAM is in an iOS device model. This is always determined later by a 3rd party.
  - denim_chicken 13y ago
    The extra RAM also helps. Any good OS will not fail to find a use for extra RAM.
corresation 13y ago
Because the iPhone doesn't need 2 GB RAM. Neither does the Nexus 4. It's a performance optimization that allows applications to stay resident without being freeze-dried, so to speak, helping multitasking. Could the 5s benefit from more memory? Absolutely, if you're jumping between various applications it makes a difference. In any case, I wish my iPad had 2GB. With iOS 7 it seems to even discard images on richer webpages that are scrolled out of view. It is starting to seem very confined, and it's hard to view the 5s as a longer term option when it is already living in tight bounds (despite the fact that it has an amazing processor).
matwood 13y ago
1) Because the iPhone doesn't need 2 GB RAM. I disagree. Retina assets are huge. When programming for iOS (mobile in general) the biggest issue is memory usage and running out. Do anything with a lot of graphics and you start to bump into limits.

r00fus 13y ago

Power/battery. Extra RAM doesn't come for free power-wise, it costs energy to keep it's state.

Peaker 13y ago
The new ARM processor is said to be more power hungry than an extra 1GB of RAM.
- rsynnott 13y ago
  Of course it is... when active. However, you can do a lot more about idling a processor than you can about idling RAM; at a minimum, DRAM requires power for the refresh cycle.