Re: HD2 has 1ghz processor and 448MB ram, why not the n900?
 

i read this statement more here and there.

Why do people think that? SSD is not directly faster then even a notebook hd.. Yes ofcourse if we talk about real SSD harddrives like the Intel G2 or the Vertex of OCZ then those are really faster. But those have multiply channels access (up to 10) to many pages of flash.. That does make ik really faster. I cant believe that the controller thats inside the N900 is that advanced.

For example just put in a usb stick or a sd card in your laptop. do you really think that is faster then your normal hd that you have in your laptop? (i am comparing it to laptops here because desktop drives are even faster)

I do have a Intel G2 in my laptop and yes thats really fast way way better then any laptop hd you can have. Its the best upgrade a person can do (in the last few years combined) especially in the laptop world. But i dont think we can compare that to the flash (controller) thats in the N900

Re: HD2 has 1ghz processor and 448MB ram, why not the n900?
 

Well there's your issue. Flash is by no way optimized prior to Flash 10 on Linux systems. Prior versions of flash relied on the CPU to do most of the grunt work regardless if you had a videocard or not. While Flash 10 directs the work to the videocard.

My dual core systems when in Ubuntu would always slow down on heavy flash video sites prior to Flash 10. Luckily the n900 seems to be getting flash 10 in 2010.

Re: HD2 has 1ghz processor and 448MB ram, why not the n900?
 

The stuttering on the N900 appears to be due to a lack of pre-cache. That is a reason I would like to see Coreplayer on the N900, since it has adjustments for streaming video cache from zero to whatever you need.

Does the current apps have an option to adjust cache? Bet you the bank this is the problem, since when it gets going, the only stutter I have seen was when a demo had two Flash sessions going at once.

The stutter at launch is consistent in the demos I have seen, so it must be a missed parameter in the application build.

I have a Q8200, 6gig ddr3 and g9800 and sometimes vids lag, but it depends on too many other factors to assume it is a cpu, network or application problem. Too many combination without a control to orientate to a source of the problem and the 3430 is not a Q8200 with 6gigs ddr3.

Still, Maemo and the 3430 chipset is a better combination than snapdragon and WM. The N900 is also better off with the 3430 due to battery life. Snapdragon tries to do the same things the 3430 chipset does with extra clock cycles.

At least the consensus is this on most forums and tech links.

Re: HD2 has 1ghz processor and 448MB ram, why not the n900?
 

Even the slowest USB flash stick runs circles around the fastest hard drives when it comes to random access. This is due to seek delays of magnetic storage. Since swap is accessed randomly, flash memory is very well suited for it.

The internal 32 GB flash of the N900 is an eMMC device. It handles wear leveling and related stuff autonomously. It is not unreasonable to expect that the eMMC controller would also do parallel reads and writes.

Re: HD2 has 1ghz processor and 448MB ram, why not the n900?
 

It would be perhaps more accurate to say they have different characteristics and actual performance depends on the use-case scenario. In some cases one is superior, in others, it's the other one. Currently, IMO the N900 eMMC's weakest point is simultaneous small writes, that really kills performance. I would leave USB sticks out of the story as the USB bus/devices have their own limitations with regard to latency and bandwidth.