Announcing the New FM9 Amp Modeler/FX Processor

the SHARC dsp chips aren't the only processors in the unit. As well, the OS is going to take up CPU cycles by itself. If Cliff says it's about twice as powerful I would tend to believe him.
 
Thanks for the reply. Maybe I'm wrong. But if there is a dedicated DSP on the FM9 for 2 reverbs (~70%) plus an Amp (~10%?), it seems reasonable assume that it represents almost the same effective CPU of the FM3.

Even if I am correct, It seems a good improvement for me.
The FM3 has 2 cores, one of which is dedicated to Amp and Delay blocks.

The FM9 has 4 cores, so even with 2 dedicated cores it still has 2x the power.

However, I just checked the wiki here:

https://wiki.fractalaudio.com/wiki/index.php?title=FM9#Specifications

This part isn't 100% clear

Amp modeling, delays and reverbs each run on a dedicated core DSP.

Does that mean each of the 3 items listed has a dedicated core? If so, then your observation may be correct as that leaves a single core for all other effects.

Anyone seen more details on that?
 
The way I am viewing the CPU is:-

FM3 - 2 CPUS = for all audio blocks. CPU usage is reported across both CPUs.

FM9 - 4 CPUs = 1 CPU for Amp and Cab, 1 CPU for Reverbs, 2 CPU for all other blocks. CPU usage is only reporting usage for the 2 general block CPUs.

So if you preset has an amp/cab/reverb only then there will be a big difference in reported CPU usage. If the preset is mainly compressors, pitch, drives, modulation, then they will be showing similar CPU usage. So FM9 has double the CPU capacity, but CPU usage is not being reported in the same way.
Not quite - the FM3 dedicates one core for Amp and Delay. I'm pretty certain the CPU reflects only the other core.
 
the SHARC dsp chips aren't the only processors in the unit. As well, the OS is going to take up CPU cycles by itself. If Cliff says it's about twice as powerful I would tend to believe him.
The specs don't mention any other processor. The Axe Fx III specifically does mention others.
 
The FM3 has 2 cores, one of which is dedicated to Amp and Delay blocks.

The FM9 has 4 cores, so even with 2 dedicated cores it still has 2x the power.

However, I just checked the wiki here:

https://wiki.fractalaudio.com/wiki/index.php?title=FM9#Specifications

This part isn't 100% clear



Does that mean each of the 3 items listed has a dedicated core? If so, then your observation may be correct as that leaves a single core for all other effects.

Anyone seen more details on that?
Replying to myself, I see this here:

https://wiki.fractalaudio.com/wiki/index.php?title=CPU_usage

CPU management​

Axe-Fx III​

CPU usage up to 80% is safe. Beyond that, the CPU meter on the hardware and in the editor will turn red as a warning.

FM9​

CPU usage up to 80% is safe. Beyond that, the CPU meter on the hardware and in the editor will turn red as a warning and audio will be muted.

The delays and reverbs on the FM9 each have a dedicated core DSP.

FM3​

CPU usage up to 80% is safe. If CPU usage gets too high, the audio will be muted and a warning appears.

The Delay blocks on the FM3 share a core DSP with amp modeling.
 
The specs don't mention any other processor. The Axe Fx III specifically does mention others.
fm3 wiki: The FM3 is powered by a 3-Core “Griffin” DSP with one ARM and two SHARC+ cores providing superior power in a compact format.
 
fm3 wiki: The FM3 is powered by a 3-Core “Griffin” DSP with one ARM and two SHARC+ cores providing superior power in a compact format.
Good info... Although I'd wager the FM9 might be using 2 of those. ;)

Edit:

From the manual:
On the FM9, CPU usage does not increase when USB is connected/disconnected.

That would seem to indicate USB is offloaded elsewhere.
 
According to the FM9 manual, the Delay blocks run in their own core (so this would exclude the MTD etc.). And so do the Reverb blocks. Amp modeling has always had its own DSP core. So that would leave one core for the remaining tasks. So it seems.
Yep... That's my interpretation, too.

Maybe Matt or Cliff will confirm? Not gonna tag them, though - they get too much of that already :)
 
Not quite - the FM3 dedicates one core for Amp and Delay. I'm pretty certain the CPU reflects only the other core.
Yep you're right - just check on my FM3. Empty preset = 12.2%, add an AMP block = 13.8%, add delay 15% - so they arent adding much to CPU usage. But add a drive block and CPU goes up by 8% to 25%.
 
Yep you're right - just check on my FM3. Empty preset = 12.2%, add an AMP block = 13.8%, add delay 15% - so they arent adding much to CPU usage. But add a drive block and CPU goes up by 8% to 25%.
Yep, certain blocks are heavy. Plex and Pitch are big too.
 
From the manual:

That would seem to indicate USB is offloaded elsewhere.

Well, that still has to be validated when I have my hands on a FM9. A couple of these tidbits remain, too much work to add disclaimers everywhere.

EDIT: never mind, I thought it was a quote from the wiki.
 
Last edited:
Well, that still has to be validated when I have my hands on a FM9. A couple of these tidbits remain, too much work to add disclaimers everywhere.
Agreed. I was just happy to see my preset went from 85% to 65%. thanks to @iaresee
I don't intend to over analyze the numbers. I'm ordering the FM9 just based on 2 amp blocks, an additional reverb and some additional cpu. It will replace an fm3/fc12 combo.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Agreed. I was just happy to see my preset went from 85% to 65%. thanks to @iaresee
I don't intend to over analyze the numbers. I'm ordering the FM9 just based on 2 amp blocks, an additional reverb and some additional cpu. It will replace an fm3/fc12 combo.
Yeah regardless of the details It still seems the fm9 will allow you to do a lot more with a preset
 
Moke was your question about CPU ever answered fully? It seems like from above the FM9 has much more overall raw CPU headroom than the FM3 but I could’ve misinterpreted
No, not really. I want to know specifically, which blocks are processed by each DSP.

I'm not sure how to advise client's questions about what will be possible moving forward in respect to my presets. I've got no issue with however the available CPU% is allocated. I just don't want to make promises that I can't keep.
 
Last edited:
No, not really. I want to know specifically, which blocks are processed by each DSP.

I'm not sure how to advise client's questions about what will be possible moving forward in respect to my presets. I've got no issue with however the available CPU% is allocated. I just don't want to make promises that I can't keep.

Outside of a quote from the Fractal guys, this is probably testable no? Or at least the general idea?

As I currently understand it:
We know the amps and reverbs are on two separate cores.
Which of the delay blocks, if any, have a direct/significant effect on the CPU meter?
If you build a maxed out (80%+) preset on the FM3 that has no reverb or delay types, how much CPU does that preset register on the FM9?
 
Haven't read this anywhere unless I missed it, but will the FM9 have the same presets and the FX III?

I just watched a video demonstrating the FX III presets and they sounds really good.
 
Outside of a quote from the Fractal guys, this is probably testable no? Or at least the general idea?

As I currently understand it:
We know the amps and reverbs are on two separate cores.
Which of the delay blocks, if any, have a direct/significant effect on the CPU meter?
If you build a maxed out (80%+) preset on the FM3 that has no reverb or delay types, how much CPU does that preset register on the FM9?
It is testable, but I don't have an FM9. And some of my customers may get one before I am able to get one in my hands to do some testing.
 
Back
Top Bottom