Apple A8 Benchmarked

Page 6 - Seeking answers? Join the AnandTech community: where nearly half-a-million members share solutions and discuss the latest tech.

ComplexEntity

Junior Member
Oct 18, 2013
14
0
0
I don't know the specifics of why this is the case, but I know the same issues existed with XP and FAT32 and disappeared on 64bit machines.

You don't need a 64bit machine to solve the FAT32 4GB file limit on XP. All you need is NTFS format, and the 4GB file limit goes away
 

TreVader

Platinum Member
Oct 28, 2013
2,057
2
0
....And you are mentioning XP + FAT32 problem for a google search of Android because of?

Can you remember your last post? The current topic is 64bit



You said it was "a limit of XP". Obviously, it's a limit that trancends both OS and File system.
 

TreVader

Platinum Member
Oct 28, 2013
2,057
2
0
precisely, and that's why I said "on XP you just need NTFS, not necessary 64bit OS", and you return me a search on Android.

Not sure you can grasp the topic.





Maybe if you can't understand why people post what they do, you are in the wrong place? :/

I am saying that 32 bit and the 4GB limit transcend OS because it's related to the PROCESSOR being 32 bit and the OS being 32bit INSTEAD OF 64. Not much simpler an argument has ever existed.
 
Last edited:

rtsurfer

Senior member
Oct 14, 2013
733
15
76
That's two different products. The iPhone is for people who want a great screen, camera, battery life, CPU, and operating system all at the same time without having to choose.

As I said before I will not further contribute to making this Apple vs Android thread.

You be trollin, homeboy! Exactly zero people have said "don't have viruses" in this thread.

Cough.
Reading comprehension & inference.
Cough.

Obviously android overhead is 4x what iOS had because despite half the cores at half the frequency with a third the ram of a note 3 it's still faster. Or is it all those viruses and malware that slows your phones down so much?


You've never used it before but have a lot to say about what it is and isn't. Anandtech just found a new reviewer!

I have had brief encounters with Apple OS on my Cousin's phone & my University Library Computers.
I guess its just not for me.

You are a troll, as pointed out by Raekhelion, and if you want to advertise the fruits of your trolling that's your prerogative. You will not, however, get me to give a crap or spend more than a few seconds responding to you. I have better things to do.

RE ORIGINAL TOPIC:
The 4GB limit IS REAL and it only exists when you transfer to micro SD. That's the only time when android is truly "moving" a file that size anyway. This is a limit of 32bit android and I don't know why you guys can't accept this it's so easy to test. Just try to move a file from your S4 or S5 to microSD and BOOM error.


I don't know the specifics of why this is the case, but I know the same issues existed with XP and FAT32 and disappeared on 64bit machines. Coincidentally, there was an exactly 4GB limit to RAM in 32 bit machines. Why is 4GB such an important number, and does it have anything to do with 32 or 64 bit? I think it does and I think it's misleading to say otherwise.


It would seem to me that A8 is a very conservative effort by apple. I really would like to see GPU benchmarks, I'm sure there will be a review soon. When do NDAs end?

It's all greek to you Buddy.

If you had bothered to format your SDcard to exFAT, it would have worked.

Similarly, if you formatted your XP partition from FAT32 to NTFS.
You could work with 4GB files.
The OS can't allocate 4GB RAM to a program, that is what 64Bit changed.

Of course, all of this is beyond your level of understanding as you have previously demonstrated.
 
Last edited:

witeken

Diamond Member
Dec 25, 2013
3,899
193
106
In case you actually can comprehend the topic at hand: I am saying that 32 bit and the 4GB limit transcend OS because it's related to the PROCESSOR being 32 bit and the OS being 32bit INSTEAD OF 64. Not much simpler an argument has ever existed.

The only limitation of a 32-bit CPU is that you cannot use more than 4GB of RAM.
 

TreVader

Platinum Member
Oct 28, 2013
2,057
2
0
The only limitation of a 32-bit CPU is that you cannot use more than 4GB of RAM.

OK, why is it that android and 32 bit XP have issues with >4GB files? Coincidence?





The 4GB ram limit is true I know that. Nobody has put a good case for me that this file transfer issue in android is not related to 64 or 32 bit.
 

ComplexEntity

Junior Member
Oct 18, 2013
14
0
0
Not sure you can grasp the topic.





Maybe if you can't understand why people post what they do, you are in the wrong place? :/

In case you actually can comprehend the topic at hand: I am saying that 32 bit and the 4GB limit transcend OS because it's related to the PROCESSOR being 32 bit and the OS being 32bit INSTEAD OF 64. Not much simpler an argument has ever existed.

What? you are the one claiming the "4GB" file size limit issue on Android is also existed on XP + FAT32 (which is correct), and the problem "disappeared" when switched to 64 bit (which I don't believe is true. You can have a 64 bit Windows and convert your file system to FAT32, and 4GB limit still holds). I am just merely telling you, as long as the MicroSD and XP are formatted to NTFS, you can get rid of the 4GB limit. So, as conclusion, the file size limit issue ISN"T transcends between OS in terms of storage, but the file system is, as someone correctly pointed earlier.
 

TreVader

Platinum Member
Oct 28, 2013
2,057
2
0
What? you are the one claiming the "4GB" file size limit issue on Android is also existed on XP + FAT32 (which is correct), and the problem "disappeared" when switched to 64 bit (which I don't believe is true. You can have a 64 bit Windows and convert your file system to FAT32, and 4GB limit still holds). I am just merely telling you, as long as the MicroSD and XP are formatted to NTFS, you can get rid of the 4GB limit. So, as conclusion, the file size limit issue ISN"T transcends between OS in terms of storage, but the file system is, as someone correctly pointed earlier.

OK finally a post that illuminates this issue. It seemed to me to be more than coincidence that both XP and Android had those same issues. Apparently they are both using FAT32.




I just didn't know they formatted the microSD as FAT. Why would they do that?
 

TreVader

Platinum Member
Oct 28, 2013
2,057
2
0
Debunking imaginary benefits of A8's 64Bit prowess that you madeup, is still talking about A8 I think.


Not even reading your posts, did you catch that? I haven't since yesterday. I think the last post I read of yours was 3 pages ago.
 

Eug

Lifer
Mar 11, 2000
23,752
1,309
126
OK finally a post that illuminates this issue. It seemed to me to be more than coincidence that both XP and Android had those same issues. Apparently they are both using FAT32.

I just didn't know they formatted the microSD as FAT. Why would they do that?
TreVader, this is pretty common knowledge.

FAT32 is popular because it's common. Any machine can use it, from Android to Windows to Mac OS X to Linux.

However, you'll run into the same issues even on Windows 7 64-bit and Mac OS X 64-bit. FAT32 on these 64-bit OSes are still limited to 4 GB files. That's one reason why Apple has licensed exFAT. However, exFAT is not ideal, because a lot of machines don't support exFAT, and most consumer devices don't support it either. Try plugging in an exFAT USB drive into a Blu-ray Player, or an exFAT card into an Android phone, and it usually won't work. WinXP actually does support exFAT, but you may have to install a driver.

Actually, some Asus Android devices do support NTFS or exFAT IIRC, but that's because they have a driver that other manufacturers haven't paid for.
 
Last edited:

TreVader

Platinum Member
Oct 28, 2013
2,057
2
0
TreVader, this is pretty common knowledge.



FAT32 is popular because it's common. Any machine can use it, from Android to Windows to Mac OS X to Linux.



However, you'll run into the same issues even on Windows 7 64-bit and Mac OS X 64-bit. That's one reason why Apple has licensed exFAT. However, exFAT is not ideal, because a lot of machines don't support exFAT, and most consumer devices don't support it either. Try plugging in an exFAT USB drive into a Blu-ray Player, or an exFAT card into an Android phone, and it usually won't work. WinXP does, but you may have to install a driver.



Actually, some Asus Android devices do support NTFS or exFAT IIRC, but that's because they have a driver that other manufacturers haven't paid for.

Common possibly on this forum, and I don't think even that is the case. It took a good 3 pages with rtsurfer trolling along the whole way for somebody to explain it.


Interesting about exFAT. I thought FAT32 was a relic that would never be used again. Good to know android uses all that fresh new tech from 1995.
 

Eug

Lifer
Mar 11, 2000
23,752
1,309
126
Common possibly on this forum, and I don't think even that is the case. It took a good 3 pages with rtsurfer trolling along the whole way for somebody to explain it.
Just about anyone in the memory and storage forum or the mobile devices forum could have told you this.

Interesting about exFAT. I thought FAT32 was a relic that would never be used again. Good to know android uses all that fresh new tech from 1995.
You thought wrong. FAT32 is still a common format for all sorts of devices out there, including Android, Windows, and yes, even Mac OS X. I would say FAT32 use on OS X outnumbers exFAT use on OS X by a factor of 100:1.

For iOS it's moot, because it generally can't use flash cards anyway.
 

TreVader

Platinum Member
Oct 28, 2013
2,057
2
0
Just about anyone in the memory and storage forum or the mobile devices forum could have told you this.


You thought wrong. FAT32 is still a common format for all sorts of devices out there, including Android, Windows, and yes, even Mac OS X. I would say FAT32 use on OS X outnumbers exFAT use on OS X by a factor of 100:1.

For iOS it's moot, because it generally can't use flash cards anyway.


This is actually very interesting. I wonder why there has been zero development in the format arena. Or is FAT just that great?


I think for the first time, I have a reason to post in that forum.
 

Kalessian

Senior member
Aug 18, 2004
825
12
81
From wiki:

Android External storage
"Most Android devices include microSD slot and can read microSD cards formatted with FAT32, Ext3 or Ext4 file system. To allow use of high-capacity storage media such as USB flash drives and USB HDDs, many Android tablets also include USB 'A' receptacle. Storage formatted with FAT32 is handled by Linux Kernel VFAT driver, while 3rd party solutions are required to handle other popular file systems such as NTFS, HFS Plus and exFAT."

FAT32 is legacy, but also popular since many set top boxes only come with drivers for this file system. The reason for this is IP laws as far as I am aware (patents?). I think in the ideal world a "neutral" file system based on GNU/Linux projects such as ext3/4 would be used as those file systems are modern and open source, but again maybe the GPL prohibits the use of a kernel-level file system module without open-sourcing large parts of kernel code, I'm not sure.

Android uses the linux kernel. The file systems available are numerous. I don't know which file systems are compiled into the linux kernel used in most android distributions, but XFS, ZFS, Btrfs, ext2,3,4, fat** are supported, amongst many many others. I believe most androids uses yaffs (yet another flash file system) for its own internal storage, but if you install a custom ROM you can choose any of the other file systems optimized for flash (ext4, btrfs?).

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

The "4gb limit" coincidence/conspiracy comes from a simple reason: 2^32 ~= 4 billion

When FAT32 spec was written, it contained values that are chosen for things like cluster size, maximum clusters, maximum file size. From wiki for FAT32 regarding 4gb files: "This limit is a consequence of the file length entry in the directory table"

Speculation: Back then they chose 32-bit numbers to describe these limits as these fit into the data registers of a 32-bit processor and it was most likely believed that 4gb files would never exist in their lifetimes. It would obviously be a simple matter to describe these values using a 64-bit number to fix this issue, which the cpu would handle by simply splitting the number into two 32-bit numbers to fit into the 32-bit registers (or push them onto the stack instead, not entirely sure) (see: virtually any modern file system that runs on 32-bit machines capable of >4gb files [ext*, ntfs, btrfs, zfs, xfs, etc]). Yes, 32-bit machine can process numbers that are >32-bits, just as 64-bit machines often have to process numbers that are >64-bits. EDIT: This is loosely related to to the reason a 32-bit processor can only address 4gb of ram. I believe it has to do with a 32-bit register being used to map out the available memory, and with only 32-bits of address space, you get 4gb. Although, again, there are methods of addressing more than 4gb of ram to overcome the 32-bit register limit (See PAE: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Physical_Address_Extension)

EDIT: I'm not a file system expert but this took me all of ten minutes to look up, why argue about it here
 
Last edited:

Cerb

Elite Member
Aug 26, 2000
17,484
33
86
TreVader, this is pretty common knowledge.

FAT32 is popular because it's common. Any machine can use it, from Android to Windows to Mac OS X to Linux.

However, you'll run into the same issues even on Windows 7 64-bit and Mac OS X 64-bit. FAT32 on these 64-bit OSes are still limited to 4 GB files. That's one reason why Apple has licensed exFAT. However, exFAT is not ideal, because a lot of machines don't support exFAT, and most consumer devices don't support it either. Try plugging in an exFAT USB drive into a Blu-ray Player, or an exFAT card into an Android phone, and it usually won't work. WinXP actually does support exFAT, but you may have to install a driver.

Actually, some Asus Android devices do support NTFS or exFAT IIRC, but that's because they have a driver that other manufacturers haven't paid for.
Anecdote: my phone, running stock ICS (OTA JB update is buggy, and so is CM10), does not support exFAT. It will auto-mount FAT32. It will read and write to NTFS, but I need to mount the SD card with a 3rd-party app, first.
 
Last edited:

ChronoReverse

Platinum Member
Mar 4, 2004
2,562
31
91
Seriously TreVader, have you not used computers in the 2000's or something?

Windows XP by default ran with NTFS and didn't have >4GB file issues at all. I'm pretty sure OSX was the same and I know Linux was the same as well. 32bit'ness has nothing to do with it.


As for _why_ FAT32 is so often used, that has everything to do with licensing (and how simple it was to implement). If Microsoft had made exFAT's license more accomodating we might all be using and not having this discussion.
 

Nothingness

Platinum Member
Jul 3, 2013
2,767
1,427
136
The only limitation of a 32-bit CPU is that you cannot use more than 4GB of RAM.
That's wrong: a single process can't use more than 4 GB (due to addresses being only 32-bit), but a system can have and use more than 4 GB. Look for Intel PAE. 32-bit ARM CPU can use similar techniques.
 

Rakehellion

Lifer
Jan 15, 2013
12,182
35
91
RE ORIGINAL TOPIC:
The 4GB limit IS REAL and it only exists when you transfer to micro SD. That's the only time when android is truly "moving" a file that size anyway. This is a limit of 32bit android and I don't know why you guys can't accept this it's so easy to test. Just try to move a file from your S4 or S5 to microSD and BOOM error.

I don't have an Android phone, but are the memory cards formatted as FAT32? If so, that's why. Not a hardware limitation.
 

TreVader

Platinum Member
Oct 28, 2013
2,057
2
0
Seriously TreVader, have you not used computers in the 2000's or something?

Windows XP by default ran with NTFS and didn't have >4GB file issues at all. I'm pretty sure OSX was the same and I know Linux was the same as well. 32bit'ness has nothing to do with it.


As for _why_ FAT32 is so often used, that has everything to do with licensing (and how simple it was to implement). If Microsoft had made exFAT's license more accomodating we might all be using and not having this discussion.


I really don't think this issue is as simple as it seems. It's really odd to me that, by pure coincidence, every 32 bit system I've used (very few) was limited to 4GB ram and had other weird 4GB limits (app usage or processor?). Nobody seems to agree as to why any of this happens.


Edit: apparently it's all a file system issue?


So no limit to ram? That's just propoganda.
 
Last edited:
sale-70-410-exam    | Exam-200-125-pdf    | we-sale-70-410-exam    | hot-sale-70-410-exam    | Latest-exam-700-603-Dumps    | Dumps-98-363-exams-date    | Certs-200-125-date    | Dumps-300-075-exams-date    | hot-sale-book-C8010-726-book    | Hot-Sale-200-310-Exam    | Exam-Description-200-310-dumps?    | hot-sale-book-200-125-book    | Latest-Updated-300-209-Exam    | Dumps-210-260-exams-date    | Download-200-125-Exam-PDF    | Exam-Description-300-101-dumps    | Certs-300-101-date    | Hot-Sale-300-075-Exam    | Latest-exam-200-125-Dumps    | Exam-Description-200-125-dumps    | Latest-Updated-300-075-Exam    | hot-sale-book-210-260-book    | Dumps-200-901-exams-date    | Certs-200-901-date    | Latest-exam-1Z0-062-Dumps    | Hot-Sale-1Z0-062-Exam    | Certs-CSSLP-date    | 100%-Pass-70-383-Exams    | Latest-JN0-360-real-exam-questions    | 100%-Pass-4A0-100-Real-Exam-Questions    | Dumps-300-135-exams-date    | Passed-200-105-Tech-Exams    | Latest-Updated-200-310-Exam    | Download-300-070-Exam-PDF    | Hot-Sale-JN0-360-Exam    | 100%-Pass-JN0-360-Exams    | 100%-Pass-JN0-360-Real-Exam-Questions    | Dumps-JN0-360-exams-date    | Exam-Description-1Z0-876-dumps    | Latest-exam-1Z0-876-Dumps    | Dumps-HPE0-Y53-exams-date    | 2017-Latest-HPE0-Y53-Exam    | 100%-Pass-HPE0-Y53-Real-Exam-Questions    | Pass-4A0-100-Exam    | Latest-4A0-100-Questions    | Dumps-98-365-exams-date    | 2017-Latest-98-365-Exam    | 100%-Pass-VCS-254-Exams    | 2017-Latest-VCS-273-Exam    | Dumps-200-355-exams-date    | 2017-Latest-300-320-Exam    | Pass-300-101-Exam    | 100%-Pass-300-115-Exams    |
http://www.portvapes.co.uk/    | http://www.portvapes.co.uk/    |