Ditto. I still can't get over some of these phones being sold for $650+ that have 16GB storage and no expansion. After the operating system updates and some apps, you have room left for literally one HD movie which is completely ridiculous.
I've watched 3 HD movies (720p x264 in mkv) on my phone, in a row, on a single charge. They weren't 2 hour movies, though, so I think the total run time was only around 4-4.5 hours. It was at night, with the lights off, so the screen was turned way down. That makes a big difference.
The problem is the average smartphone user doesn't do that, at all, ever, they wouldn't even know how to... If there's no connection and/or it's not on Netflix/Hulu they really don't care.
Storage is still a long term issue for them, but it's seldom thought about initially because it's a hard thing to project, so market isn't gonna wake up and complain anytime soon.
From what I've seen of truly average users (older folks etc), their long term storage issues usually stem from having too many photos or recorded videos and no immediately obvious way (to them) to offload it all.
Heck even iMessage and it's dumb database the keeps pics even after messages are deleted can balloon to 4GB and become an issue. My mother's Moto X has something like 6GB of photos taken.
why should we limit ourselves to SD when we have 1080p and 4k now? also, this is a hardware site, not a movie forum, so let's talk about hardware, not taste in movies.
Oh man, I wanted to store several poorly encoded indy movies that you've never heard of on my phone, but I couldn't fit them all because it's only got 16GB of storage!
You'll get a 32GB chip with 16GB disabled ;). The problem wasn't the BoM as much as the fact that manufacturers want to squeeze as much money as possible from you starting with normal price for the most basic of configurations then charge a premium for higher capacities.
"but there are some real cost and performance benefits for certain scenarios that could provide an advantage over traditional MLC eMMC solutions at the high end which would go a long way to killing the 16GB SKU that has plagued the high-end smartphone for so long."
You lost the plot there a little bit, this is midrange at best and will have no impact on high end. Truth is that this year it's too early to drop 16GB for many including Apple. If Apple goes 32GB they lose well over 1 billion in income in a year (and that includes projected costs decline for NAND). The iphone 6 BOM should be maybe 150$ now, adding 1GB of RAM and after that adding some 6$ on 16GB more NAND would also be too much for their launch margins and Wall Street would get nervous. Given the weak demand maybe next year prices will be low enough for a lot more devices to drop 16GB but we are just not there yet.
Also you've missed the Hynix announcement a few days ago and that one was more interesting. Hynix announced that they are shipping UFS 2.0 eMMC with claimed perf at 780MB/s and 160MB/s seq read/write and 32,000 IOPS/17,000 IOPS random read/write.
I'm sure Apple is more than happy to charge 100$ for each incremental NAND upgrade. And sell iCloud subscriptions to make up for the small space. The point here is not really the BOM of the hardware, but rather "how long can they get away with it?" As long as people keep buying, they'll hardly change this.
The point is always the BOM or most phones would have 4GB now. It's about how much value it creates and how much you can afford to fit inside the targeted BOM. 16GB is popular now even in midrange because the cost difference between 8 and 16GB got small enough recently and price per GB favors 16GB in a big way. That's what is needed for 16-32GB, price needs to be low enough and per GB to favor 32GB in a significant way. Most high end devices went to 32GB already anyway, so now it's about lesser devices including the iphone (the iphone is not high end, only the SoC is that, every other part is midrange at best - good screen but midrange res, good cam but low res, average wifi, touch controller lacking key features, 1GB RAM, 16GB NAND, only cat 4 LTE, like a pimped out 100$ device with metal casing and a fast engine). Die capacity has it's role to play too since it dictates pricing, smaller dies are less efficient so price per GB is higher and the best value capacity keeps going up.
the specs of the iphone might not be high end compared to the competition, but the iphone is very much marketed and prices as high end. i think apple could very much afford starting with 32gb without making "the investors nervous".
You're epitomizing the concept of brain-dead consumers! Numbers aren't everything. I was examining the images from an iPhone 6, and it manages to keep a lot of quality. Samsung devices usually have really bad image quality, and all those megapixels are actually upres'd images. Sensors have barely gotten better over the years.
S6 is pretty neck and neck with an iPhone 6, they're both still crap compared to a large sensor compact or a cheaper MILC even with a slow lens. At some point people will realize that if a better camera is the sole/main reason to upgrade a $500-750 phone, there's far better ways to put that money towards vastly better IQ.
Camera companies are doing an absolutely dreadful job of getting that point across tho, never mind actually making cameras more inviting or connected (they're fine for an enthusiast but not mom and dad or six pack Joe).
In future device reviews, Hopefully Anandtech will specify whether internal storage is MLC or TLC (and the lithography if possible). Using a device that utilizes 1x nm TLC storage is just asking for trouble, just ask Samsung about their 840 EVO.
TLC has been used in USB flash chips and stuff like eMMC phone storage for quite some time. The performance requirements of such devices are a LOT lower and the performance issues with the samsung 840 series drives don't really affect these situations as much.
I suppose it's true that most people don't write nearly as much data to their phone as they would to a PC, but what about the read errors caused by voltage shifting that occurred in the 840 EVO? That could happen in a phone also, couldn't it?
Random, semi-related question: to what extent are app launch times bottlenecked by NAND these day? How much of a day-to-day subjective performance advantage does UFS 2.0 offer?
I think that can vary wildly by app and how they store data... I've got a package tracking app, about the simplest thing possible, that has become the slowest loading app over time on my Nexus 5, it's literally cringe inducing. Wiping the delivery history fixes it so it's obviously massively bottlenecked and/or poorly written.
We’ve updated our terms. By continuing to use the site and/or by logging into your account, you agree to the Site’s updated Terms of Use and Privacy Policy.
Facebook
Twitter
RSS
25 Comments
Back to Article
Shadow7037932 - Monday, July 13, 2015 - link
>However, unlike the 7132 SanDisk has finally eliminated the 16GB SKU so the only available storage capacities are 32, 64, and 128 GB.Sweet. Hopefully, this means 32GB becomes the "standard" for midrange phones going forward.
Samus - Monday, July 13, 2015 - link
Ditto. I still can't get over some of these phones being sold for $650+ that have 16GB storage and no expansion. After the operating system updates and some apps, you have room left for literally one HD movie which is completely ridiculous.TheWrongChristian - Monday, July 13, 2015 - link
If you're watching movies where being HD versus SD makes a difference, you're really watching the wrong movies!Shadow7037932 - Monday, July 13, 2015 - link
SD (480p or below) is almost unwatchable especially if it was badly compressed.ishould - Monday, July 13, 2015 - link
Just be TheWrongChristian and watch from 5ft away, ppi problem solved. Add an extra foot for every inch over 5" of course.Flunk - Monday, July 13, 2015 - link
Do most phones even have enough battery life to playback a 2.5 hour movie in HD?phoenix_rizzen - Monday, July 13, 2015 - link
I've watched 3 HD movies (720p x264 in mkv) on my phone, in a row, on a single charge. They weren't 2 hour movies, though, so I think the total run time was only around 4-4.5 hours. It was at night, with the lights off, so the screen was turned way down. That makes a big difference.LG G2
Haven't tried with FullHD movies, though.
Impulses - Tuesday, July 14, 2015 - link
The problem is the average smartphone user doesn't do that, at all, ever, they wouldn't even know how to... If there's no connection and/or it's not on Netflix/Hulu they really don't care.Storage is still a long term issue for them, but it's seldom thought about initially because it's a hard thing to project, so market isn't gonna wake up and complain anytime soon.
From what I've seen of truly average users (older folks etc), their long term storage issues usually stem from having too many photos or recorded videos and no immediately obvious way (to them) to offload it all.
Heck even iMessage and it's dumb database the keeps pics even after messages are deleted can balloon to 4GB and become an issue. My mother's Moto X has something like 6GB of photos taken.
fokka - Monday, July 13, 2015 - link
why should we limit ourselves to SD when we have 1080p and 4k now? also, this is a hardware site, not a movie forum, so let's talk about hardware, not taste in movies.nafhan - Monday, July 13, 2015 - link
Oh man, I wanted to store several poorly encoded indy movies that you've never heard of on my phone, but I couldn't fit them all because it's only got 16GB of storage!Is that better? :)
close - Tuesday, July 14, 2015 - link
You'll get a 32GB chip with 16GB disabled ;). The problem wasn't the BoM as much as the fact that manufacturers want to squeeze as much money as possible from you starting with normal price for the most basic of configurations then charge a premium for higher capacities.jjj - Monday, July 13, 2015 - link
"but there are some real cost and performance benefits for certain scenarios that could provide an advantage over traditional MLC eMMC solutions at the high end which would go a long way to killing the 16GB SKU that has plagued the high-end smartphone for so long."You lost the plot there a little bit, this is midrange at best and will have no impact on high end.
Truth is that this year it's too early to drop 16GB for many including Apple. If Apple goes 32GB they lose well over 1 billion in income in a year (and that includes projected costs decline for NAND). The iphone 6 BOM should be maybe 150$ now, adding 1GB of RAM and after that adding some 6$ on 16GB more NAND would also be too much for their launch margins and Wall Street would get nervous. Given the weak demand maybe next year prices will be low enough for a lot more devices to drop 16GB but we are just not there yet.
Also you've missed the Hynix announcement a few days ago and that one was more interesting.
Hynix announced that they are shipping UFS 2.0 eMMC with claimed perf at 780MB/s and 160MB/s seq read/write and 32,000 IOPS/17,000 IOPS random read/write.
MrSpadge - Monday, July 13, 2015 - link
I'm sure Apple is more than happy to charge 100$ for each incremental NAND upgrade. And sell iCloud subscriptions to make up for the small space. The point here is not really the BOM of the hardware, but rather "how long can they get away with it?" As long as people keep buying, they'll hardly change this.jjj - Monday, July 13, 2015 - link
The point is always the BOM or most phones would have 4GB now. It's about how much value it creates and how much you can afford to fit inside the targeted BOM. 16GB is popular now even in midrange because the cost difference between 8 and 16GB got small enough recently and price per GB favors 16GB in a big way. That's what is needed for 16-32GB, price needs to be low enough and per GB to favor 32GB in a significant way. Most high end devices went to 32GB already anyway, so now it's about lesser devices including the iphone (the iphone is not high end, only the SoC is that, every other part is midrange at best - good screen but midrange res, good cam but low res, average wifi, touch controller lacking key features, 1GB RAM, 16GB NAND, only cat 4 LTE, like a pimped out 100$ device with metal casing and a fast engine).Die capacity has it's role to play too since it dictates pricing, smaller dies are less efficient so price per GB is higher and the best value capacity keeps going up.
fokka - Monday, July 13, 2015 - link
the specs of the iphone might not be high end compared to the competition, but the iphone is very much marketed and prices as high end. i think apple could very much afford starting with 32gb without making "the investors nervous".Stochastic - Monday, July 13, 2015 - link
Meanwhile, you've been able to buy a 64GB Oneplus One for months at $300.mkozakewich - Monday, July 13, 2015 - link
You're epitomizing the concept of brain-dead consumers! Numbers aren't everything. I was examining the images from an iPhone 6, and it manages to keep a lot of quality. Samsung devices usually have really bad image quality, and all those megapixels are actually upres'd images. Sensors have barely gotten better over the years.mdriftmeyer - Monday, July 13, 2015 - link
The new Sony sensors will make Android fans cry when they are in the new iPhone 6S.Impulses - Tuesday, July 14, 2015 - link
S6 is pretty neck and neck with an iPhone 6, they're both still crap compared to a large sensor compact or a cheaper MILC even with a slow lens. At some point people will realize that if a better camera is the sole/main reason to upgrade a $500-750 phone, there's far better ways to put that money towards vastly better IQ.Camera companies are doing an absolutely dreadful job of getting that point across tho, never mind actually making cameras more inviting or connected (they're fine for an enthusiast but not mom and dad or six pack Joe).
LordConrad - Monday, July 13, 2015 - link
In future device reviews, Hopefully Anandtech will specify whether internal storage is MLC or TLC (and the lithography if possible). Using a device that utilizes 1x nm TLC storage is just asking for trouble, just ask Samsung about their 840 EVO.Flunk - Monday, July 13, 2015 - link
Why bother, all phones have been TLC for ages.extide - Monday, July 13, 2015 - link
TLC has been used in USB flash chips and stuff like eMMC phone storage for quite some time. The performance requirements of such devices are a LOT lower and the performance issues with the samsung 840 series drives don't really affect these situations as much.LordConrad - Monday, July 13, 2015 - link
I suppose it's true that most people don't write nearly as much data to their phone as they would to a PC, but what about the read errors caused by voltage shifting that occurred in the 840 EVO? That could happen in a phone also, couldn't it?Stochastic - Monday, July 13, 2015 - link
Random, semi-related question: to what extent are app launch times bottlenecked by NAND these day? How much of a day-to-day subjective performance advantage does UFS 2.0 offer?Impulses - Tuesday, July 14, 2015 - link
I think that can vary wildly by app and how they store data... I've got a package tracking app, about the simplest thing possible, that has become the slowest loading app over time on my Nexus 5, it's literally cringe inducing. Wiping the delivery history fixes it so it's obviously massively bottlenecked and/or poorly written.