Brand and model of FM3, FM9 and AxeFX III CPU

Shahar

Shahar

Experienced
What is the make and model of the CPU in the FM9? Or is it a proprietary processor developed by Fractal?
 
Thanks @yek according to the wiki link, its Analog Devices, but can you tell me the model (and the model of the TI processor as well)?
 
chris said:
y
Click to expand...
Because I can look up the roadmap for that family of ICs, gives me a sense of what coming down the pike. Also want to see the low level specs for the processor, out of curiosity. I can also compare the specs against the competitors products.
 
Shahar said:
A modeler is a computer (has a processor, memory, a user interface, etc.)
Click to expand...
hey there

Its my guess that you are referring to a desktop computer form factor? Maby the unit has all these form factor items, but it is not intended as a PC computer as I see it. Thats why I wonder why you are comparing these with each other to get the specs of the Fractal unit. Yes normally this is standard info to know about a pc so you know what you can do with it, but it says nothing about the modeler what you can do with it.

So what if you get the answer to your questions? In any way its still an audio modeler eco system. Hacking shit is cool, but your quest doesn't ring any bells to me why it is usefull to know this info.
Sorry mean no offence dude I just dont get it.
 
Its no different than gear-heads looking up and discussing engine specs on a hotrod. I have an EE background and I find this kind of stuff interesting. I have a feeling its an ADSP-2156x but wanted to find out.

Its a public forum, and I asked a valid question based on my curiosity. You don't have to get it, its "my" question.
 
Last edited:
chris said:
Specs don’t tell the entire story. It’s what you do with it. 👍
Click to expand...
What a crap response. Yeah, no. Clearly specs matter. If you have a bigger cache, it could improve latency on certain things... Some SOCs provide dedicated accelerators for certain computations. You can't do certain things without them.

OP, this will probably help your search. Might have better luck opening one of the modelers to get the exact model. I opened my AX8 once, they're not too hard to open.

https://www.analog.com/en/parametricsearch/11131#/
 
I don't understand why people are fighting the question. I have an interests in these kinds of topics myself as I studied Computer Science. I'm fascinated by SoCs and actively study designs. This is no different.
 
gb714us said:
I don't understand why people are fighting the question. I have an interests in these kinds of topics myself as I studied Computer Science. I'm fascinated by SoCs and actively study designs. This is no different.
Click to expand...
because people come here and ask for details of the units to put in their own products. pretty common.
 
chris said:
because people come here and ask for details of the units to put in their own products. pretty common.
Click to expand...
That wasn’t my intent, like I mentioned before I am purely curious from computer engineering perspective. And you shouldn’t be worried, I’m confident that the firmware, algorithms, user interface code, and “secret sauce” type IP is very much under lock and key.
 
The Wiki is the best starting point for answers to these sort of questions. Cliff discussed the processors, the development tools, and other aspects in the design of the series, Yek compiled everything he could find, and stuck it there.

"The III uses (1) dual-core Texas Instruments DSP. The FM3 uses (1) dual-core Analog Devices DSP. The FM9 uses (2) dual-core Analog Devices DSPs. The TI DSPs are much more powerful than the Analog Devices DSPs per clock and run at around twice the clock speed as well. So one TI DSP core is about four times more powerful than one Analog Devices DSP core. If we normalize processing power to the III it would be:
  • Axe-Fx III: 100%
  • FM9: 50%
  • FM3: 25%
So why not use the TI DSPs in everything? Power. The TI DSPs use more power and generate more heat requiring active cooling. They are also more complicated to use requiring dedicated clock generation units, multiple power supplies with specific sequencing requirements, etc." [53]
Click to expand...

This is one of my favorite quotes:
"These Keystone processors chew through data like a hot chainsaw through a sorority girl. The Axe-Fx III is a beast. I don't think people realize how powerful it is. It has the equivalent power of 8 SHARC chips, at least. And that's just the DSP. The memory bus is 3-4 times faster than other stuff." [4]
Click to expand...
 
Last edited:
Processor performance is only as good as the code it runs. If the code is bloated and inefficient, the extra power of a faster chip can be wasted. Same goes for Cache and RAM amounts too. You have to look at the performance in the context of its intended use instead (audio fidelity, modeling accuracy, latency/feel, etc.). The FM3 has less than half of the power of the Axe III, yet it is able to produce pretty much the same output quality in its amp models, so it all depends on how you look at it and what specifically you are comparing.
 
Shahar said:
Its no different than gear-heads looking up and discussing engine specs on a hotrod. I have an EE background and I find this kind of stuff interesting. I have a feeling its an ADSP-2156x but wanted to find out.

Its a public forum, and I asked a valid question based on my curiosity. You don't have to get it, its "my" question.
Click to expand...
It's a fair question. No idea why some people feel the need to throw in smart ass, condescending comments - that are not helpful. Just ignore.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom