Related
Just wondering if this has 3.0 or 2.0 USB? All the spec sheets just say it has it but not which one
the_boo said:
Just wondering if this has 3.0 or 2.0 USB? All the spec sheets just say it has it but not which one
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
The A15 SOC is capable of USB 3.0; whether or on it is actually put to use, I have no idea. If it isn't, hopefully a developer can find a way to make it work.
In theory it should be USB 3.0 since the Exynos 5250 supports it, however it may be a moot point if the CPU and flash memory can't handle 3.0 speeds.
The new ARM based chromebook is also based on Exynos 5520 with 2g of ram etc and is also made by Samsung, so we can expect (??) this chromebook would have similar performance with the N4 (the chromebook does have lower resolution, which does not affect the speed of usb ports). According to Anandtech.com's review of the chromebook
http://www.anandtech.com/show/6422/samsung-chromebook-xe303-review-testing-arms-cortex-a15/2
"The USB 3.0 port is a bit useless on the new Chromebook. I dusted off my trusty Zalman SLC NAND USB 3.0 drive, capable of delivering more than 80MB/s and copied a 2.8GB file to the internal NAND. I timed the process and came away with an average transfer rate of around 12.7MB/s - well within the realm of USB 2.0 performance. Given the Exynos 5 Dual SoC features an integrated USB 3.0 controller, it's possible Samsung just wanted to take advantage of the feature and perhaps test its implementation. It's a nice checkbox feature but it does nothing for the end user as far as I can tell."
See also anand's comments about the hdmi out.
Disclaimer: Chrome OS of course is different from Android and these are two hardwares, so the two could have very performance... But until the devices are actually released I hope that anand's review could be of some use...
HDMI
Have you guys tried HDMI on this beastie? does it show 1080P?
mikojava said:
Have you guys tried HDMI on this beastie? does it show 1080P?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Nobody has it, so I wouldn't expect a response for two more weeks.
It should.
I found, sorry I still cannot post links, it should be v2.0
I only hope, it will be possible to attach an external storage without any mods or extra adapters.
Sent from my GT-P7510 using XDA Premium HD app
I enjoy using my tab with emulators. I had a tf700 that I sold recently to get money for the nexus 10. Nexus 10 only has 32gb of storage. Is there any way at all to get expandable storage on this thing that's not a giant usb hard drive to store my roms on? Also... would google drive work? would I be able to open a rom from say a nintendo or super nintendo emulator stored on google drive?
if someone could test this for me that'd be great! thanks!
You would have to have thousands of Nintendo and Super Nintendo ROMs in order to fill up a 32GB model. I think I have about 300 and they still take up less than 1GB of space.
You can get a USB OTG cable and a flash drive.
While the headline might seem familiar with the same keywords of Samsung producing 128GB flash storage modules, this story is different from the previous one. Last month, Samsung announced a 128GB storage based on the new and anticipated UFS 2.0 standard and targeted for flagship high-end devices — it made its debut in the Galaxy S6 and S6 Edge. This new module, however, is based on the established eMMC standard and it will appear in mass market mid-range devices.
If you missed the previous explanation about the difference between eMMC and UFS, you should know that eMMC is the de-facto standard for storage on smartphones right now. It differs from the swanky UFS 2.0 in two areas: it can't read and write simultaneously and it doesn't have a Command Queue system to sort and re-order the tasks it needs to perform. By comparison, it is slower than UFS, but it remains significantly faster than external MicroSD storage.
Samsung's new 128GB flash uses eMMC 5.0 (there's a newer 5.1 standard that is slightly faster), and can deliver sequential reading speeds of 260 MB/s, random reading at 6000 IOPS (input/output per second), and random writing at 5000 IOPS. It is a "value-focused" module and the company's aim is for "mid-market smartphones [to] be able to increase their storage capacity to 128GB." There's no word on when this module will start appearing in phones and tablets, but you should hear about 128GB devices from Samsung and other OEMs later in the year.
It's worth noting that Samsung also highlights the speed gains compared to external memory cards in its press release, so you might want to take the hint that the company's devices that will be equipped with this new flash module won't have a MicroSD slot. Financially, it makes a lot of sense given the mark-up difference that added built-in storage incurs compared to external storage. And Samsung can rake in that extra casheesh instead of sending it SanDisk's (or Kingston's or other companies') way.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
http://www.androidpolice.com/2015/0...rage-module-for-mid-range-phones-and-tablets/
Complaining about the lack of micro SD is still a thing? I thought we went over this... multiple times...
It's time to accept the reality that all of the S6 versions will not have micro SD. If you need a micro SD then simply grab another phone.
I don't buy it. Does that mean USB OTG isn't going to work, either?
lopri said:
I don't buy it. Does that mean USB OTG isn't going to work, either?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Why wouldn't it work?
I actually am not bothered by lack if sdcard support as long as bigger storages wont be overpriced like hell. Anyways personally, for me speed and responsivness > sd card support
Sent from my HTC One using XDA Free mobile app
kerelberel said:
Why wouldn't it work?
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Well, if it's too slow compared to the built in flash...
istperson said:
Well, if it's too slow compared to the built in flash...
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
There's nothing in the software which prohibits it from being discovered by a file browser. It works but read/write speed in the music/video player apps is slower than if the files were on the internal storage themselves.
So, is this a confirmation on a feature which may or may not exist, on a phone which doesn't currently exist?
The SD card was an issue when the phone only had 8 or 16 GB of internal storage. Now that the phone has minimum 32 GB with an option of having 64Gb (of much faster storage) for a manageable price I don't think the SD card is a problem anymore. Most people i know only use a 32 GB SD card anyway.
Looks like USB OTG will work fine:
http://www.androidcentral.com/dealing-local-storage-backups-galaxy-s6-and-galaxy-s6-edge
kerelberel said:
There's nothing in the software which prohibits it from being discovered by a file browser. It works but read/write speed in the music/video player apps is slower than if the files were on the internal storage themselves.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
It was supposed to be a joke.
Samsung's Galaxy S6 Active may come with a microSD card slot, but at a high cost
Reddit user “garshol” sat down with a Samsung rep a couple of days ago to discuss the new Galaxies, and the Active was among the topics at the table. The ruggedized version of Sammy's latest flagship will boast “similar” hardware under the hood, according to the report, and will come with an SD card slot. However, it will also come at a cost – according to garshol's posts, the Active's camera will be a lower class than the one on the flagship model, but at least it may still have OIS. Additionally, the endurance model will not have a fingerprint scanner, and will lack a heartbeat sensor.
http://www.phonearena.com/news/Sams...-microSD-card-slot-but-at-a-high-cost_id67615
These tradeoffs would be acceptable to me. I'm curious about what the dimensions and weight of the phone will be.
I've read a few comments on some sites that suggest including an SD card slot and its associated controller slow down the overall performance of a phone, even if there's no SD card inserted. I have no idea if this is true, but if so, I can at least understand why the S6 lacks SD from a performance standpoint. I've assumed that Samsung's assertion that SD was too slow for the S6 was because they didn't want benchmarks/comments that the built-in internal storage is lightning fast, but SD card is still slow. More of a "we don't want any suggestions that ANY aspect of the S6 is slow", even though most users are well aware of SD's limitations and are primarily interested in simply having the ability to easily expand the storage space despite it not keeping up with the phone storage speeds.
I definitely will not be getting the S6 due to the lack of removable battery and lack of micro SD slot. I think that HTC and LG are going in the right direction here.
I own a amazon firetv stick (late to the party) had it for a month or more seen the new model is coming out was about to buy the box this time as im loving using kodi on it, I would however like to use it as a android gaming machine eg make use of the sd card slot and usb ports I know it doesnt support the google play store, ive been sideloading apps on my fire tv stick.can the shield do the same eg use usb storage and sideload games that are not the android tv platform?
what would you reccomend as there is a big price gap between both, I know the shield comes with a controller but it doesnt include a remote and the fire tv includes a remote but no controller
I personally am glad that I bought this box. It's the most powerful Android box on the market and it might not be superseded for a long time, especially in terms of android gaming. The main issue for me with the Fire TV which I did consider was that it uses an non-mainline branch of android and is relatively heavily locked down.
On the other hand this box isn't without it's drawbacks, the price being the main one. It's aimed at casual gamers, yet the price for the 500 GB version is creeping close to that of full-sized consoles. I also personally do not like the Nvidia controller and have hacked it to use a PS4 controller.
Sideload apps is of course possible, but hit-and-miss when using a controller. The touchpad on the PS4 controller is especially useful here.
As for the lack of a remote, the Shield does have an IR port and I had falsely assumed that there would be some way of programming it to respond to any old IR remote. That doesn't seem to be the case, at least not yet.
In conclusion, if you have the money and are really only into casual/android games like me then the 16 GB model + SD card is a safe bet. However if you like to have a large selection of AAA games and you don't care about all the media and emulation capabilities of the Shield then you're better off spending a little extra on a console.
I bought the 16gb model and I'm not disappointed. I'm not really into native android gaming and have a fair selection of emulators installed but all the ROMS are no an external usb drive. If your streaming games via GRID or a PC then they take up zero space on your device. Having been spoiled by AAA PC games I find native android gaming underwhelming.
Something else worth noting about Nvidia GameStream: Don't make the mistake I made. I assumed that all modern Nvidia cards are GameStream capable and that simply isn't the case. It's still restricted only to the higher end GTX cards.
I love my Shield, I got the 16 GB model since I figured if I needed more storage I would use a MicroSD and USB HDD (which I currently do) but it not as easy to use compared to the 500 GB model. Mine bricked itself after an update and if I can't fix it I'm going to see if I can get the 500 GB model for an extra charge after I RMA the 16 GB or I may just buy it flat out.
I think the 500Gb model is only worth it if your going to install a load of android games. Even then after rooting and setting up Foldermount to map the Obb and data folders to the usb drive I haven't experienced any problems. The only thing I use the micro sd for now is capturing video. I just feel the $100 markup to the 500gb version is overpriced. It should have been $50 more and it would have been a no brainier.
I have a bunch of ROMs for old games on my external HDD currently (a few hundred GB worth) and I have a bunch of big games installed on my microSD.
so you need to root to install games on sd / usb
but what about the nvidia updates, can that affect the root? and brick the box
is there guide for this.. as i would like to put all my games ideally on an sd card 64gb or a 1tb usb external?
Flashed with full android 1.8 the shield become a emulating beast able to run anything you throw at it. It is a really great htpc/PC replacement.
And with link2sd you can move large games obb to sd.
Hi all, so I've purchased the Nvidia Shield Pro (500GB) model the other day and noticed the device made some slight disk spinning noise, only to realize that this console comes with an HDD rather than flash memory. I also noticed that even thought this device is still running lollipop, I'm still able to utilize any one of the external ports as the default memory.
This question is mainly for those of you who had the opportunity to try both models. I'm not a fan of HDDs much, but the voluminous internal storage is convenient in a way, although I could easily do without it, if the 16gb is the more stable model. From my experience NAND flash based devices seem to run fast, but are they noticeably faster than their hybrid HDD counterparts? Is there any difference in speed and performance between the 16gb and the 500gb Shield TV devices? I'm asking because I noticed the Shield controller's home and back buttons don't always respond, and my device is running build v2.1 which supposedly fixed any known controller bugs. I'm tempted to return the 500gb and grab a 16gb just for the sole fact that the Pro model runs on dated hard disk technology, not to mention the faulty HDD units in some of these models. Let's hear some opinions on this, I've not found any comparison on these from a performance perspective. Every comparison I found so far brags about how advantageous 500gb is over 16gb, but no one seems to compare their performance side by side. So if you've tried out both variants, do you find the standard 16gb edition to process data quicker than the Pro model, and are you experiencing any unresponsiveness with the back and home buttons on shield's controller?
***edit***
Just ordered a 16gb Shield TV Console from GameStop. Since no one's chiming in on the topic, I'll have both versions in a few days and will post my findings after testing them side by side.
I did a little research and from what I understand the only real difference between them is the internal storage. Performance speeds are the same and it support external hard drives and SD cards. I know music, pictures, games, ect. can be stored on the SD card but can apps be stored to or is a root required. Either way I plan on getting the 16GB version and using this 128GB SD I have and rooting it and seeing how it goes. If it's what I think it's like, then this may be one of the greatest things to run the Android OS.
Hello some news ?
To me I went for 16gb version as it would be flash memory so much quicker and no mechanical drives which equal less heat and less fan spooling.
Also the fact that they recalled the 500gb version and we're withdrawn from nvidia site.
Let us know your findings.
TalkDubby2Me said:
I did a little research and from what I understand the only real difference between them is the internal storage. Performance speeds are the same and it support external hard drives and SD cards. I know music, pictures, games, ect. can be stored on the SD card but can apps be stored to or is a root required. Either way I plan on getting the 16GB version and using this 128GB SD I have and rooting it and seeing how it goes. If it's what I think it's like, then this may be one of the greatest things to run the Android OS.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Apps can be stored on the SD card without root access. Keep in mind that the developer of the app must allow for this so there a few apps out there that will only install on internal storage, though I have yet to come across one.
Hey everyone, sorry it took me a month to post back, now that I've owned a 500gb for two weeks and a 16gb for a month, I've noticed a few slight differences. The 500gb was a tiny bit noisier as it utilizes an HDD alongside a nandflash for its internal storage. The HDD disk spins even while the device is in sleep mode, which is normal behavior with HDDs from what I gather. I'm just not a fan of having more moving parts in a device than necessary. Also, software updates and initial installation takes much longer on the 500gb model, probably due to slower write speeds on HDD. WiFi disconnecting bug after waking up from sleep mode on lollipop 5.1.1 seemed more persistent on the 500gb model as well. The only other difference I noticed was with fluidity, the 16gb doesn't seem to have much hiccups/stutters, where as on the 500gb (maybe mine was one of the defective units) it wouldn't respond right away after returning to home screen or in some apps the back and home buttons wouldn't register on first press more often then not (dolphin emulator being one of them). Once I set up the 16gb model, I haven't experienced any such issues, the back and home functions work every time in any app perfectly fine.
From what I can tell, the 500gb model was somewhat of a last minute decision as it feels less refined than the 16gb model. It's also not as great for modding as there seems to be less dev support for it. 500gb model may be a good choice for someone not looking to tweak this device, but rather for simple plug and play without much thinking involved. For all the mods and tweaks, custom ROMs, the 16gb seems to be the more popular choice. It's also the more refined and tested variant in my opinion.
Syndrome666 said:
Hey everyone, sorry it took me a month to post back, now that I've owned a 500gb for two weeks and a 16gb for a month, I've noticed a few slight differences. The 500gb was a tiny bit noisier as it utilizes an HDD alongside a nandflash for its internal storage. The HDD disk spins even while the device is in sleep mode, which is normal behavior with HDDs from what I gather. I'm just not a fan of having more moving parts in a device than necessary. Also, software updates and initial installation takes much longer on the 500gb model, probably due to slower write speeds on HDD. WiFi disconnecting bug after waking up from sleep mode on lollipop 5.1.1 seemed more persistent on the 500gb model as well. The only other difference I noticed was with fluidity, the 16gb doesn't seem to have much hiccups/stutters, where as on the 500gb (maybe mine was one of the defective units) it wouldn't respond right away after returning to home screen or in some apps the back and home buttons wouldn't register on first press more often then not (dolphin emulator being one of them). Once I set up the 16gb model, I haven't experienced any such issues, the back and home functions work every time in any app perfectly fine.
From what I can tell, the 500gb model was somewhat of a last minute decision as it feels less refined than the 16gb model. It's also not as great for modding as there seems to be less dev support for it. 500gb model may be a good choice for someone not looking to tweak this device, but rather for simple plug and play without much thinking involved. For all the mods and tweaks, custom ROMs, the 16gb seems to be the more popular choice. It's also the more refined and tested variant in my opinion.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
Yeah I am kinda thinking I would've been better off grabbing the 16 gig model and adding a 128GB sd card. Does anyone know what kind of HD they use on it?
I bought both - one for general living room tv use (16gb) and the 500gb for myself to put in my man cave and play games on. I couldn't wait to set the 500gb up for myself as I had already got the living room one working and I was absolutely gob smacked at what it could do - however - upon setting it up and filling it full of emulation stuff, I found it to be really disappointing. HOWEVER, upon further investigation, I discovered that if you have an external HD attatched to it - in my case a USB 3 2tb one - it dragged like hell, probably due to the fact that the HD is full of emulation artwork etc. Unplugging it seemed to solve the problem and now i'm back up to full speed (more or less) again.
Anyone else think its strange that Nvidia chose to go with completely different designs for both types? Surely it would have been easier, and more cost effective, to just leave the hdd port unoccupied on the 16gb version, so a hdd/ssd could be added at a later date. And £70 just for a 500gb hybrid drive? It certainly seems a bit on the steep side.
I would like to know how much of a difference a SSD would bring to the Pro version compared to the SSHD it has inside, if it's worth it when using it for Plex only
The SATV and the SATV Pro boards are the same with the Pro version having connectors added for the SSHD. The SSHD can be replaced with an SSD, but in my experiences I do not recommend the swap. The SSHD draws .74ma and a 500GB Samsung evo SSD draws 1.5A. I noticed strange behavior of the USB ports (perhaps from current starvation). I guess if one wanted to dive into the power circuit to see if the balance of the components would handle replacing the voltage regulator with a high output current replacement, then with a beefer regulator I would be on board with the ssd swap.
If you are after what the box is meant for the buy a SATV. If you are after dev, then buy a SATV PRO.
The SSHD can be added to the SATV buy soldering on a SATA connector and modifying the device tree....
From what I've read, the Pro model just isn't worth it. Everything runs off the hard drive, including the system ROM, so it is definitely slower. For the $100 difference you could buy a 2 TB external HDD instead and still keep your apps on the internal flash.
Mogster2K said:
From what I've read, the Pro model just isn't worth it. Everything runs off the hard drive, including the system ROM, so it is definitely slower. For the $100 difference you could buy a 2 TB external HDD instead and still keep your apps on the internal flash.
Click to expand...
Click to collapse
With Plex Server, is the 16GB version still worth it? I indirectly heard that the Plex Server quickly fills up the 16GB data of onboard memory, and cannot be used on an external USB 3.0 drive. Is this correct?
Can we also plug in a USB 3.0 SSD drive to the Shield, and have the system ROM and all apps run from the USB 3.0 SSD drive, leaving the 16GB onboard memory empty? If the answer is yes, then it's a nobrainer to use a regular Shield rather than a Shield Pro.
I can't answer the first question (I run Plex on a PC, not the Shield) but for the second: there is a method but it's a little tricky. I'm using it now with an old SSD.
http://www.videomap.it/forum/viewtopic.php?f=25&t=1580&start=410#p3628
Be sure to format the SSD on your PC and not the Shield or it won't work.