• We would like to remind our members that this is a privately owned, run and supported forum. You are here at the invitation and discretion of the owners. As such, rules and standards of conduct will be applied that help keep this forum functioning as the owners desire. These include, but are not limited to, removing content and even access to the forum.

    Please give yourself a refresher on the forum rules you agreed to follow when you signed up.

Ares is coming to the AX8?

Smittefar

Fractal Fanatic
But why - I get that AxeFXII has been Cliff's baby for many years, but other than that, I can think of no reason not to develop directly to the AX8 - especially if you want it to look like, AX8 is a current product.
 

ChristThePhone

Forum Addict
But why - I get that AxeFXII has been Cliff's baby for many years, but other than that, I can think of no reason not to develop directly to the AX8 - especially if you want it to look like, AX8 is a current product.
This is just guessing but as a software developer I might prefer a powerful environment to do initial coding, testing, and debugging.
 

Smittefar

Fractal Fanatic
But isn't it double work? First porting the code to one platform and next porting to another platform with different capabilities.
 

ChristThePhone

Forum Addict
But isn't it double work? First porting the code to one platform and next porting to another platform with different capabilities.
It might sound like unnecessary extra work to first develop for the AxeFX2 and then port it to the AX8. But don't forget that the AX8 is a spin-off of the AxeFX2 and so it wouldn't be a surprise when the entire development and test tools chain was
centered around the AxeFX2 and somewhere further down the road the AX8 branches of.
 

Kurapica

New here
Sorry, what? I believe the AX8 is also cheaper than the AxeFX Ultra (discontinued for many years), so by your logic that one should get updates before the AX8 as well?
Sorry I had no logic while I posted that reply. I was just whining about Fractal's strategy developing HW/FW.

What I saw is FX-III was a not well-tested and well-developed platform when they released it. So did the Ares. Fractal is busy releasing a bunch of firmware to patch bugs and to improve functionality. During this, maybe Cliff and his teammate had a break, they ported Ares to FX-II which I think is a mistake. Although FX-II is more powerful than AX-8, it is easier to have Ares. But with no doubt it brings new bugs and they spent some time to fix Ares for FX-II.

With all those above, I think Cliff don't have any manpower to release new AX-8 firmware. So we have no more Ares model, no new models, no performance gain.

I agree improb_driver who said "give the man a break", but we DO be ignored for a wile. That is the fact.
 

Smilzo

Forum Addict
But isn't it double work? First porting the code to one platform and next porting to another platform with different capabilities.
Programming DSP is different from any OS-frame programming.There is no OS to organize memory, or to stop wrong phisical address istruction. So basically if you have different memory and CPU, you have a brand new code. You can organize the code to be partly re-used, but is add costrain and slow down machine. All is up to the programmer.
 

Randalljax

Forum Addict
my guess . pure speculation is he has already looked at the possibility.

if you remember the last Ares it cause a lot of bugs and a few weeks of troubleshooting jut because it was CPU intensive .

Cliff even commented I kept running out of CPU.

I think many of us think it shouldn't be a problem, but thats not the reality , the AX2 has twice the Cpu of the AX8 to play with
and if you read the thread there had to be compromises to make it fit

So I don't think it easy as 123 , it probably would be very time consuming and may even have to do things differently, look for compromises things that people don't use .

I said it in another thread the no answer from FAS doesn't mean No , if it cannot be done I am sure Cliff will communicate that when he has had the time and has exhausted all the possibilities. if he can make it better he Will
 

teddis

Forum Addict
It has already caused some cross compatibility issues with AX3, AXII and AX8 users.......
Having to roll back to quantum, due to no AREs on AX8......thats a problem. Its needs be unified across the platform.
 

geetarplayer

Inspired
Why would Cliff port "some of the ARES stuff" to AX8, and not all of it? That's what he did recently. It's easier to port 100% of something than parts of it. I think the AX8 has seen all the ARES it's gonna see.
 

AJ Vargas

Inspired
Because the Axe FX II first got 'some' of the Ares stuff under the hood of the Quantum FW, then was later when he went full ARES for it...

Now, if we're talking exclusively about hardware support for the ARES port, then yes, we can argue if FW 10.01 is the last portion of ARES the AX8's gonna see, yet in Cliff we trust. ;)

Edit: As noted by J.J below, then a full ARES port for the AX8 depends on it's processing power and not on it's memory for the code.
 
Last edited:

AJ Vargas

Inspired
Yeah, I know it's not 100%, but the modelling algorithms changed vastly enough so now it's referred to as "ARES" instead of "QUANTUM (with some ARES epiphanies here and there)". I know it's getting picky about it but the folks over at the Axe FX II sub-forum are getting crazy over how good it sounds, haha

Edit: I was referring to this as the last Quantum before he decided going full Ares...

*******************************************************************************
10.00
Incorporated some of the “Ares” modeling from the Axe-Fx III.
*******************************************************************************

Axe-Fx II "Quantum" Rev 10.00 Firmware Release
 
Last edited:
Top Bottom