Develop Bugs

Can my computer take the heat to make roms?

I started learning how to make roms few weeks ago and i really want to start to make my own, but can my computer take it?
CPU : Intel Core i3 2100 3.1GHz
GPU : Nvidia GeForce GT630 2GB GDDR3
RAM : 6GB DDR3
HDD : 2x500GB and 2x320GB

I think yes
Sent from my GT-I8150 using XDA Premium 4 mobile app

With that configuration sure ^^

MayB4ck said:
I started learning how to make roms few weeks ago and i really want to start to make my own, but can my computer take it?
CPU : Intel Core i3 2100 3.1GHz
GPU : Nvidia GeForce GT630 2GB GDDR3
RAM : 6GB DDR3
HDD : 2x500GB and 2x320GB
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
This configuration will easily handle it and would be easier using LINUX, i recommend UBUNTU or MINT, :good::

[Q] No 64bit - so what?

Hey,
So I keep hearing a lot of complaints that the Note 4 processor does not support 64bit (nor does Android 4.4), however, why does that really matter. The Note 4 has 3GB of RAM, not 4GB of RAM, therefore 64bit is not required.
Regards

Well, it's more that the chipset does support 64bit. 64bit is coming to Android, I believe the upcoming version.
The big deal is you can process more information at once on 64bit versus 32bit at one time; actually double. It really doesn't have do with ram. Although ram can be important for storing information to be processed or has been processed. I don't know if Android has the ram issue like Windows does with 32bit versus 64bit; I would look to Linux for an indicator.
This will be more important when we're getting true eight core mobile devices. Real speed doesn't come clock speeds, it's more about the numbers and buses. This is all first semester or basic computer classes everyone has to take in college.

Even though 64-bit is the next big step in smartphone evolution you wont see a night and day difference right out of the gate. The OS, the apps, the UI elements all need to be written and optimized for that architecture. The Note 5 and the S6 will almost certainly have 64-bit processors but that does not mean that suddenly the Note 4 and S5 will be obsolete overnight. If you upgrade every 2 years then the Note 4 should hold its own during that two years.

If the nexus 6 won't come with 64 bit then it's not that important for android right now in the early stages in converting to 64 bit. Android L is just a building block for what's to come.

---------- Post added at 01:14 PM ---------- Previous post was at 01:12 PM ----------
lovekeiiy said:
Well, it's more that the chipset does support 64bit. 64bit is coming to Android, I believe the upcoming version.
The big deal is you can process more information at once on 64bit versus 32bit at one time; actually double. It really doesn't have do with ram. Although ram can be important for storing information to be processed or has been processed. I don't know if Android has the ram issue like Windows does with 32bit versus 64bit; I would look to Linux for an indicator.
This will be more important when we're getting true eight core mobile devices. Real speed doesn't come clock speeds, it's more about the numbers and buses. This is all first semester or basic computer classes everyone has to take in college.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
No that's not even close to correct.
32 bit and 64 bit have to do with how much memory the processor can address in a cycle. The Amount of memory a 64bit processor can address is about 4billion times as much physical memory. 4gigs is the cap for 32 bit. Which is fine for most applications. I have not seen one smart phone that has that much ram, so at the moment there is no inherent benefit to 64bit processing. Just because the memory addressing capability is there, doesn't mean we can or are going to use it.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KgiMzKb8dD0
You really won't see a benefit from 64bit in any device until they start using > 4gigs of ram

Not even an issue until the next, or even the next next, upgrade.... Let the community catch up.
Unless you need to be on the cutting edge... Like the saps that bought into 4k with the lack of 4k programming.

spodemaster said:
---------- Post added at 01:14 PM ---------- Previous post was at 01:12 PM ----------No that's not even close to correct.
32 bit and 64 bit have to do with how much memory the processor can address in a cycle. .... at the moment there is no inherent benefit to 64bit processing. Just because the memory addressing capability is there, doesn't mean we can or are going to use it. ...
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
32 bit vs 64 bit is about bus between the CPU and RAM. This is first semester computer science topic. Everything you talked about is about how it's implemented. I don't know why 4GB of RAM is the minimum of RAM for 64bit systems. I assume it's about efficiencies over 32bit systems. But nonetheless, it's about how much data can be transferred to the CPU at one time.
It's only a matter of time before mobiles devices have 4GB of RAM.
IYet, we all agree, it makes little difference until the applications, and OS, are written and designed to make use of the 64bit architecture.

lovekeiiy said:
The big deal is you can process more information at once on 64bit versus 32bit at one time; actually double. It really doesn't have do with ram.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
It really does have to do with RAM though, for a couple of reasons. First, having a larger integer size doesn't really equate to processing things faster in most everyday applications. If you were working with really large numbers it might, but in general it's not really a big draw. Numbers under ~4 billion will process just as quickly on a 32 bit machine as on a 64 bit one. The big draw of 64 bit is definitely being able to address more memory.
Here's the second reason 64 bit matters in regards to RAM: in 64 bit, everything is bigger. Your pointers in memory are now 64 bits long instead of 32 bits (taking twice the space). So are integers. When an application that was 32 bit is recompiled to 64 bit, you can as much as double the amount of RAM is uses while running, even if nothing else changes.
So for me personally, if I don't have more than 4 GB of RAM on my phone, I actually don't want 64 bit processors or applications, because the RAM that I do have is going to be used up more quickly by the larger pointers and integers being stored. I'd personally want to stay away from it until I have a phone with more than 4 GB of RAM, because it's not until you hit that point that 64 bit makes much sense.
lovekeiiy said:
I don't know why 4GB of RAM is the minimum of RAM for 64bit systems. I assume it's about efficiencies over 32bit systems.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Again, it's because 64 bit applications can take as much as double the amount of RAM when they are running due to those larger pointer sizes. If you have a small amount of RAM, you do not want to waste it holding large 64 bit numbers. You want to wait until you have an actual need (such as having more than 4 GB of memory, which is the maximum a 32 bit system can address) before you make the jump to 64 bit. Otherwise, you lose more than you gain.

I'm not necessarily disagreeing with you about the need for RAM in the 64bit architecture. I'm not a programmer, and I know even less about low level programming, which is where more your arguments hold.
With that said, you have implied that it's possible to have 64bit system with less than 4GB of ram. You explained there would probably be more inefficiencies than the benefits gained from being able to process more data at once or at least the system would not run in the most beneficial ways for the end user.
Thus, I still hold big deal about 64bit system is about the amount of information that can be processed at one time. In tech today, it's not really about clock speeds any more. It's about the number of cores and bus size. RAM is important, but not they key, in that it's needed to supported these keys.
In this debate, obviously we may be arguing which came first, the chicken or the egg. We could have more than 4GB RAM in a 32 bit system, but what benefits does it hold? Yet, without the RAM, what benefits can be had from a 64bit system.
Personally, I would like to see a nice otco-core device. I do find mobile chipsets quite fascinating in what they have and can do versus PC counterparts. I just wish, in general, they put a little more GPU power in general in the mobile chips like NVivia does.

lovekeiiy said:
Personally, I would like to see a nice otco-core device. I do find mobile chipsets quite fascinating in what they have and can do versus PC counterparts. I just wish, in general, they put a little more GPU power in general in the mobile chips like NVivia does.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Snapdragon next yr will release an octo core 64 bit. The processor for the note 5 will most likely be the sd 810, octo core,64 bit + 4 gb of Samsung's newest ram. Also the screen will probably be 2k again, but even more perfected.

ryanalan82 said:
Snapdragon next yr will release an octo core 64 bit. The processor for the note 5 will most likely be the sd 810, octo core,64 bit + 4 gb of Samsung's newest ram. Also the screen will probably be 2k again, but even more perfected.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I'll most likely skip the Note 5, but will probably go Note 6, assuming something, I find, better doesn't come along. I could always use some more screen real estate and some true multi window action like the desktop/laptop OS gives, What can I say, I'm quirky in my demands, and maybe, just maybe, unrealistic is useful features for Joe Public.

Another tech question

OK, the big deal the last year was Apple pulling out a 64 bit chip.
Android is yet to catch up really.
My question is, are the differences between 32 bit and 64 bit huge or more a advertising gimmick?
The reason I ask is I read an article on an android site that was trying to say the biggest deal of going to 64 bit was the ability to handle over 4 gigs of ram.
I prefer objective answers so is this correct or is there a lot more to it?

Yes, the maximum amount of ram a 32bit processor can use is 4GB where a 64bit processor can handle more than 18 billion GB of ram (though you're not going to get that in your home pc, let alone your phone) . The big difference is the amount of bits per second the processor can calculate. It can make a huge difference if you take advantage of the ability to use more ram. As of right now Android for the most part is a little behind as far as the 64 bit processor goes but I believe there are already a couple phones that just came out with a 64 bit processor including the note 4 with the Exynos 7 Octa processor. Another thing to note is that Android version 5.0 "lollipop" supports a 64bit processor, so 64bit Android devices will be coming fast and furious. Once they begin to be more common Android phones will quickly pass Apple again in this area because they will take advantage of the ability to use more ram where as Apple has had the 64 bit processor now for a while and is still only using 1GB of ram in the iPhone 6.
Sent from my SM-N910V using XDA Free mobile app

sprintuser1977 said:
OK, the big deal the last year was Apple pulling out a 64 bit chip.
Android is yet to catch up really.
My question is, are the differences between 32 bit and 64 bit huge or more a advertising gimmick?
The reason I ask is I read an article on an android site that was trying to say the biggest deal of going to 64 bit was the ability to handle over 4 gigs of ram.
I prefer objective answers so is this correct or is there a lot more to it?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
+1 with what Thrill3d said. Another thing to keep in mind is that a 64bit processor and architecture doesn't in and of itself make for a faster device that the user can tell/see. The firmware and software (apps) that run on that device must be 64bit also before the user sees a notifiable difference. I'm not aware of any 64bit Android apps available right now and that's because there are no 64bit Android phones available in the US. You can run a 32bit apps (for the most part) on a 64bit systems, but you can't run a 64bit app on a 32bit system.

Thanks guys. It is crazy to me that the Iphone 6 has a 64 bit chip and then throw in an anemic 1 gig of Ram.
If I am not mistaken Android had phones with 2 gigs in 2012

sprintuser1977 said:
Thanks guys. It is crazy to me that the Iphone 6 has a 64 bit chip and then throw in an anemic 1 gig of Ram.
If I am not mistaken Android had phones with 2 gigs in 2012
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
If I'm not mistaken, most Android phones had 2gigs prior to 2012, but I won't swear to that.
---------- Post added at 03:54 PM ---------- Previous post was at 03:53 PM ----------
sprintuser1977 said:
Thanks guys. It is crazy to me that the Iphone 6 has a 64 bit chip and then throw in an anemic 1 gig of Ram.
If I am not mistaken Android had phones with 2 gigs in 2012
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Yeah, I don't understand the rationale, except maybe its a target price "thing". But hay, how much does 1 gig cost?

sprintuser1977 said:
Thanks guys. It is crazy to me that the Iphone 6 has a 64 bit chip and then throw in an anemic 1 gig of Ram.
If I am not mistaken Android had phones with 2 gigs in 2012
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
I think the rational is that Apple has far better software to hardware integration because of the closed eco system. Whether or not that translates to better performance is highly suggestive. My note 4 hauls ass and is a beast.

Redapple63 said:
I think the rational is that Apple has far better software to hardware integration because of the closed eco system. Whether or not that translates to better performance is highly suggestive. My note 4 hauls ass and is a beast.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
The iPhone has to only do the same thing it did for the past 5 years. It's basically been the same phone and same os(minus minor changes). I'm not surprised it only needs a gig, it can't multi-task.
As for 64 bit. For Android it's going to change everything. Not just amount of ram. There is a new type of internal memory coming out called ufs that is no longer going to be an emmc variant. It's going to be similar to the solid state flash memory in ssd hard drives. The real advantages are it's more than 2x-4x faster than the fastest emmc(depending on the ufs version) . And the real beauty is that it can read and write at the same time. Emmc can't.
There is also better and faster ram technology that will be available.
But just like 64bit did for the pc it allows for better multitasking which is where android shines.
-Wizzle

[Q] Optimal RAID scheme for ROM source

Hi all,
Late last year I came into possession (dumpster dive find) of an HP ProLiant rackmount server. It started out with lackluster specs (single Xeon E5205, 2GB RAM, no storage, dead SmartArray/RAID battery), that I eventually upgraded the internals:
Dual Xeon X5270 (did not determine if the particular board supports quad-core/socket CPU's, played it safe with best-available dual-core CPU's instead)
32 GB fully-buffered DDR2 RAM (was my first upgrade via a subsequent dumpster dive)
250GB Mushkin SATA SSD
320GB Seagate 2.5" SATA HDD
Replacement SmartArray battery
With that I could complete an Oreo 8.0 build from clean in 55 minutes - my 3rd-gen i5 PC would do so in 40 - in spite of the Xeons calculating prime numbers faster then my i5, the server has twice the age in terms of I/O.
What I determined to be a significant barrier is the SATA-1 bus (that's right, the 1.5Gbps variety). SATA-1 has a theoretical maximum throughput of 187 MBps, but in real world, my SSD was still falling 50 MBps short in tests (and is not much faster than the HDD in this scenario for that matter):
Code:
[email protected] ~> sudo hdparm -tT /dev/sda
/dev/sda:
Timing cached reads: 15532 MB in 1.99 seconds = 7788.53 MB/sec
Timing buffered disk reads: 412 MB in 3.01 seconds = 137.06 MB/sec
[email protected] ~> sudo hdparm -tT /dev/sdb
/dev/sdb:
Timing cached reads: 16086 MB in 1.99 seconds = 8066.75 MB/sec
Timing buffered disk reads: 322 MB in 3.00 seconds = 107.30 MB/sec
[email protected] ~>
The SmartArray, however has and encourages SAS-1 (3 Gbps/375 MBps theoretical throughput). Since I decided I will be keeping the rack-mount for the long haul, I invested in a few SAS drives (4x 300GB, 10K RPM).
Question time.
While the SAS disks deliver, I wonder what RAID configuration would make the most sense. I was thinking RAID 10 all four (effectively oversaturating the SmartArray E200 at up to 440MBps unless there are two channels to split the load) for 600GB, or to RAID 5 three of the drives for 150-to-220 MBps throughput and have a spare - also making 600GB.
Then it was suggested to me to RAID 5 all four (if a drive fails, just means slower performance while running in that state and will be fine as long as a second does not fail - if I use the server at all in the meantime) for 225-to-330 MBps throughput and 900GB space.
Since the arrays' purpose is to provide a place for source code (lots of reads, including random ones, few writes during system load) as I will still use the SSD for ccache and out (a bit more about that later), which scheme would make the most sense? I am inclined to do the RAID 5 with all four drives now, even though I may need to do so with software (ZFS-on-Linux) since the E200 model can have the RAID 5 option turned off based on the cache size available (I should be fine though, luckily) or want to because the server is a WOL/on-demand machine so the cache battery protection is often drained/recharging for the first 50 minutes of boot anyway (I suppose the way around that for 90% of cases is to change the BIOS setting to power back on if power lost while operational if not already).
225-to-330 MBps throughput may be a reasonable enough improvement or hard to improve upon in the situation anyway, unless there is other important information in play. What do you think?
And if I ever get a hold of a spare SSD, I plan for a PCIe X4 SATA-3 riser to hook it up with. I would have got one by now, but it is doubtful they are bootable with this machine. All this and you may be wondering, why prop up a 10+ year old server? At the moment I have quotes prepared to replace my i5, and the current cost to do it the way I want is quite a bit more (ten-fold at least) than the $120 here, $50 there that I am doing with the server.
Many thanks.

Pinging @rwilco12 and @garwynn

A bit of an update:
Some significant details changed as well, but I have received the four drives and I used the SmartArray to create a RAID5 with all four (no spare), making a logical drive of 838 GiB. Transferred my 320 GB contents over (after making larger swap, /var and /home partitions) offline with a CloneZilla CD, rewrote the related UUID's in fstab and initramfs.
The new benchmarks (keep in mind I am currently downloading AOSP as well):
Code:
[email protected] ~> sudo hdparm -tT /dev/sdb
/dev/sdb:
Timing cached reads: 11008 MB in 2.00 seconds = 5515.37 MB/sec
Timing buffered disk reads: 1260 MB in 3.00 seconds = 419.86 MB/sec
[email protected] ~>
Because of the significant changes, there is a benefit to the SSD also:
Code:
[email protected] ~> sudo hdparm -tT /dev/sda
/dev/sda:
Timing cached reads: 11498 MB in 2.00 seconds = 5758.57 MB/sec
Timing buffered disk reads: 784 MB in 3.00 seconds = 261.23 MB/sec
[email protected] ~>
And where it is important, for a 70,296-object Android 8.1 build:
Code:
Package size: 327M
════════════════════════════════════════════════════════════════════════════════
#### build completed successfully (33:32 (mm:ss)) ####
[email protected]:~/carbon$
Because this is still a ProLiant server, I have been playing with the iLO interface - neat things in there.
Wait, did I say "still"?
Yeah, I found an unexpectedly good deal on a DL380 G6 (loaded with G7-era CPU's) that I was compelled to snatch up.

using VRAM as swap space ???

Hi all,
I was wondering...
The Pixel C has 3GB of ram and 1GB of VRAM.
Would it be possible to use part of the VRAM, instead of using the 500MB zram, as swap space?
I personally exclusively use my PixelC in a chroot environment with debian and Xserver Xsdl, so GPU is not much used anyway, so there is almost 1GB of memory just sitting there unused...
I have read the following pages that mention that something was/is possible on desktop NVIDIA gpus...
https://stackoverflow.com/questions/6321551/how-to-use-graphics-memory-as-ram
https://web.archive.org/web/2016032...iki.info/TIP_Use_memory_on_video_card_as_swap
By the way... would it be remotely possible to swap out the ram chips? from what i understand there are 2 1.5 GB samsung chips on the board...
Would do anything to get more memory on my beloved tablet