Oh, I’m not disagreeing with it being weird, my main point was to switch the weirdness towards battery use as nothing else matters.
And CPU doesn’t bottleneck RAM usage.
As for use case (which again, I’m not disagreeing as my main point is “it wouldn’t affect you in any way other than battery” + “they prob went with the cheapest option that still works, just like they did with CPU”), prob apps being fully in RAM and not swap, not closing old apps, etc. So like FF & 3 chat/social media apps (they all have inefficiently big libraries), a few store and service apps (for car/taxi/food delivery/etc), none need to leave RAM. Idk how to get to 32, but perhaps over 16.
And again I point out that it’s just what they did for the project to survive, it’s clearly frankensteined from the cheapest sensible parts. In your analogy the i3 with 32 or 128GB of RAM, if sold at the same price, will preform the same for most users.
Oh, I’m not disagreeing with it being weird, my main point was to switch the weirdness towards battery use as nothing else matters.
And CPU doesn’t bottleneck RAM usage.
As for use case (which again, I’m not disagreeing as my main point is “it wouldn’t affect you in any way other than battery” + “they prob went with the cheapest option that still works, just like they did with CPU”), prob apps being fully in RAM and not swap, not closing old apps, etc. So like FF & 3 chat/social media apps (they all have inefficiently big libraries), a few store and service apps (for car/taxi/food delivery/etc), none need to leave RAM. Idk how to get to 32, but perhaps over 16.
And again I point out that it’s just what they did for the project to survive, it’s clearly frankensteined from the cheapest sensible parts. In your analogy the i3 with 32 or 128GB of RAM, if sold at the same price, will preform the same for most users.