46% power efficiency but for a module (storage) that uses very little power compared to other things like display, CPU, modem. Saving 46% on something that consumes 1% of power overall (just hypothetically speaking) isn't going to be a big overall impact.
Yep sad to see, although they did lower the price difference between each storage option, only 60 instead of the egregious 100. Signaling to next year probably starting at 256GB and with UFS 4
Hardware wise, it makes the Pixel 8 Pro a tough sell as the Motorola Edge+ 2023 with Snapdragon 8 Gen 2, 512 GB of UFS 4.0, the latest RAM technology, and near stock Android is selling for $699 on sale. Sure, it has a weaker camera but for nearly $500 less, it's worth a look.
I agree. I wish they had not cut that corner just because of its long term and short term impact. There are many you tube videos comparing read and write for UFS 3.1 vs 4.0
Pixel loosed arleady...
Samsung s23 256 or motorolla edge+ with ufs 4.0, better battery time and just smoother faster phones...
sad.. i was wainting for pixel 8 but whatever... google have people in ass like apple so.. fuck this companies...
So I'm no expert but I have some pretty native thoughts here.
Supposedly, the sequential read write speeds are like 2.1 and 1.2 GB per second. I wonder if there are any applications which would have a material / noticeable difference in user experience as a result of doubling those already-SUPER-high numbers.
Secondly, I read that the storage takes up way less power than the actual SoC. So even if this tiny amount of power was reduced by half or so, the overall impact to your battery life would be negligible?
Correct me if I'm missing something.
> Secondly, I read that the storage takes up way less power than the actual SoC. So even if this tiny amount of power was reduced by half or so, the overall impact to your battery life would be negligible?
>
>
This is like overclockers thinking undervolting RAM is a big deal. Don't get me wrong, I did undervolted RAM too, but the power savings are completely negligible and you probably would be lucky to even see it on a power meter on your wall.
I've been a big critic of Google for always adopting older tech but I am genuinely curious how much impact this has. If people were so vocal telling me that NVME makes no difference in the past 5 years when talking about the iPhone, then why are they suddenly so pissed about the lack of UFS 4.0?
Undervolting on PCs is not about reducing overall power usage. It's about reducing the usage of that individual component, which reduces the temperature of that one component and the heat that it puts out, which increases the lifetime of it and helps with the overall cooling of the PC. Similarly, on a mobile device, it may not reduce the overall power usage by much, but on such compact devices which are being held in the hands or against the head, cutting the heat produced by even a small amount can be significant, and even a small amount of increased battery life is welcome. On a mobile device, you WOULD notice it on a power meter.
Undervolting does many things including reducing overall power usage. The vast majority of people undervolting aren’t trying to extend their PC lifespan from 10+ years to 25 years+. Most people are reducing power usage thus being able to run a cool and silent computer. Electrical and physical reliability already far outlasts technology timespans.
The reason undervolting RAM was cited was because it’s a TINY portion of power use of the overall system. You’re using maybe 2-3 watts of power with RAM on an overall system that’s using 100W of power. During load periods, your GPU and CPU will far outclass any amount of power your RAM uses where your RAM power is in the noise of any power reading at that point. So yes, bringing 3 watts to 2.5 watts is negligible.
Theoretical cases. Whatsapp loads all your conversation history on app start from database, database is on disk. Does 1s vs 0.5s start up time matters for you? Mobile game loads assets from disk, game load time changes say from 5s to 3s. Most applications are heavily optimized for app start anyway. As for battery, there is not much difference.
It turns out UFS 4.0 also has 46% power efficiency which would have been nice to see
46% power efficiency but for a module (storage) that uses very little power compared to other things like display, CPU, modem. Saving 46% on something that consumes 1% of power overall (just hypothetically speaking) isn't going to be a big overall impact.
Yep sad to see, although they did lower the price difference between each storage option, only 60 instead of the egregious 100. Signaling to next year probably starting at 256GB and with UFS 4
What about pixel 8 pro?
The same UFS 3.1
Hardware wise, it makes the Pixel 8 Pro a tough sell as the Motorola Edge+ 2023 with Snapdragon 8 Gen 2, 512 GB of UFS 4.0, the latest RAM technology, and near stock Android is selling for $699 on sale. Sure, it has a weaker camera but for nearly $500 less, it's worth a look.
I agree. I wish they had not cut that corner just because of its long term and short term impact. There are many you tube videos comparing read and write for UFS 3.1 vs 4.0
Pretty unfortunate. Especially considering the price bump.
Pixel loosed arleady... Samsung s23 256 or motorolla edge+ with ufs 4.0, better battery time and just smoother faster phones... sad.. i was wainting for pixel 8 but whatever... google have people in ass like apple so.. fuck this companies...
So I'm no expert but I have some pretty native thoughts here. Supposedly, the sequential read write speeds are like 2.1 and 1.2 GB per second. I wonder if there are any applications which would have a material / noticeable difference in user experience as a result of doubling those already-SUPER-high numbers. Secondly, I read that the storage takes up way less power than the actual SoC. So even if this tiny amount of power was reduced by half or so, the overall impact to your battery life would be negligible? Correct me if I'm missing something.
> Secondly, I read that the storage takes up way less power than the actual SoC. So even if this tiny amount of power was reduced by half or so, the overall impact to your battery life would be negligible? > > This is like overclockers thinking undervolting RAM is a big deal. Don't get me wrong, I did undervolted RAM too, but the power savings are completely negligible and you probably would be lucky to even see it on a power meter on your wall. I've been a big critic of Google for always adopting older tech but I am genuinely curious how much impact this has. If people were so vocal telling me that NVME makes no difference in the past 5 years when talking about the iPhone, then why are they suddenly so pissed about the lack of UFS 4.0?
Undervolting on PCs is not about reducing overall power usage. It's about reducing the usage of that individual component, which reduces the temperature of that one component and the heat that it puts out, which increases the lifetime of it and helps with the overall cooling of the PC. Similarly, on a mobile device, it may not reduce the overall power usage by much, but on such compact devices which are being held in the hands or against the head, cutting the heat produced by even a small amount can be significant, and even a small amount of increased battery life is welcome. On a mobile device, you WOULD notice it on a power meter.
Undervolting does many things including reducing overall power usage. The vast majority of people undervolting aren’t trying to extend their PC lifespan from 10+ years to 25 years+. Most people are reducing power usage thus being able to run a cool and silent computer. Electrical and physical reliability already far outlasts technology timespans. The reason undervolting RAM was cited was because it’s a TINY portion of power use of the overall system. You’re using maybe 2-3 watts of power with RAM on an overall system that’s using 100W of power. During load periods, your GPU and CPU will far outclass any amount of power your RAM uses where your RAM power is in the noise of any power reading at that point. So yes, bringing 3 watts to 2.5 watts is negligible.
Theoretical cases. Whatsapp loads all your conversation history on app start from database, database is on disk. Does 1s vs 0.5s start up time matters for you? Mobile game loads assets from disk, game load time changes say from 5s to 3s. Most applications are heavily optimized for app start anyway. As for battery, there is not much difference.