Announcing Axe-Fx III Mark II TURBO

Processor power is not only defined by its speed, so a fast processor does not have more power to perform functions than just to run faster. So I am surprised that everyone understands that if it is 25% faster, its load is also 25% less. If there is anyone who has compared exactly the same function Standard vs Turbo it would be good to say.
 
with regards to my above observation. 12% of a 1ghz dsp isn’t exactly equal to 12% of a 1.25ghz dsp - it should be more better for the 1.25
 
I just looked at about 10 factory presets on my mk1 vs the turbo. The turbo has an extra 9 to 13% cpu on the presets that were compared. No usb plugged into either unit. Guessing the average, there's 11 to 12% more cpu on presets.
Thanks for sharing this comparison. Your comparison seems realistic. It is possible that MkII vs MkII TURBO would be an even smaller difference.
 
Storage space is not processor.

If storage space made a car go faster, station wagons would be faster than Corvettes....
Of course I didn’t mean storage memory although that was noted as the main difference. I think MKII has more differences than MkI to get the MkII designation such as system memory which definitely needs more for more demanding operations.
 
Of course I didn’t mean storage memory although that was noted as the main difference. I think MKII has more differences than MkI to get the MkII designation such as system memory which definitely needs more for more demanding operations.
I think the mk II has more storage memory for presets and IRs. I don’t recall seeing any mention of system memory so performance is likely the same:
https://forum.fractalaudio.com/threads/announcing-axe-fx-iii-mark-ii.165314/


Greetings to all,

Starting today we will begin selling a new version of the Axe-Fx III. The new Axe-Fx III Mark II features the following upgrades:

  • New IPS Display offers improved contrast, better viewing angles and more vivid colors.
  • Double the preset memory = space for 1024 presets.
  • Adjustable RGB LEDs let you set the color and brightness of the front panel logo.
  • Increased non-volatile user data memory for future upgrades (i.e. more IR storage).
Presets between the original and the Mark II are completely compatible.
 
I just looked at about 10 factory presets on my mk1 vs the turbo. The turbo has an extra 9 to 13% cpu on the presets that were compared. No usb plugged into either unit. Guessing the average, there's 11 to 12% more cpu on presets.
This makes me wonder if a 12.5% increase is also available to the Amp core. If the CPU is 25% faster, wouldn't that be split across the 2 cores? If so, is there a way to take advantage of the boost on the amp core?
 
This makes me wonder if a 12.5% increase is also available to the Amp core. If the CPU is 25% faster, wouldn't that be split across the 2 cores? If so, is there a way to take advantage of the boost on the amp core?
That's probably earmarked for future Fractal wizardry.
 
This makes me wonder if a 12.5% increase is also available to the Amp core. If the CPU is 25% faster, wouldn't that be split across the 2 cores? If so, is there a way to take advantage of the boost on the amp core?
The 12% is probably not a one to one comparison as 12% percent of 1000 is 120 and 12% of 1250 is 150. Adding random blocks to a preset looks like 2 to 5 % for each additional block. 3 to 5 additional blocks in a preset could be really huge. Almost makes the need for preset switching obsolete but may create a need for more scenes (and/or channels) in "kitchen sink" type scenarios.
 
Back
Top Bottom