Thanks for sharing this comparison. Your comparison seems realistic. It is possible that MkII vs MkII TURBO would be an even smaller difference.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.
Should be the same difference, since the processor isn't what changed to make Mk2....Thanks for sharing this comparison. Your comparison seems realistic. It is possible that MkII vs MkII TURBO would be an even smaller difference.
No. The CPU use for a Mark I and Mark II is identical.Thanks for sharing this comparison. Your comparison seems realistic. It is possible that MkII vs MkII TURBO would be an even smaller difference.
Memory is increased in MkII relative to MkI.Should be the same difference, since the processor isn't what changed to make Mk2....
Storage space is not processor.Memory is increased in MkII relative to MkI.
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.Storage space is not processor.
If storage space made a car go faster, station wagons would be faster than Corvettes....
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: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.
This makes zero sense.
English is my first language, still doesn't make sense to meGood to know! I though it was me who could not make sense of that, since English is not my first language
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?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.
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.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?