Greg Ferguson
Legend!
They also don't report when they're doing things until they spring them on us unawares.Fractal doesn't report things unless they're doing it.
That's called being "sneaky".
They also don't report when they're doing things until they spring them on us unawares.Fractal doesn't report things unless they're doing it.
The nice thing is that the presets continue to work normally. At your leisure you can experiment and decide whether you want to switch to a Dyna-Cab or not.oh, I'm sure they'll add it. Not sure that it will work for people that run at presets running at 80% though.
The FM9 does, and the Turbo definitely does, it might mean making minor adjustments to existing presets if they're converted to use Dyna-Cabs.Not sure if the fm9 and fm3 will have the horses to run it.
at the moment, on fractal systems, CPU usage up to 80% is safe... over the 80% the "Warning/CPU Limit" message appears. This is the limit...oh, I'm sure they'll add it. Not sure that it will work for people that run at presets running at 80% though.
Sure, if we're willing to give up USB and the front-panel's responsiveness.at the moment, on fractal systems, CPU usage up to 80% is safe... over the 80% the "Warning/CPU Limit" message appears. This is the limit...
Maybe Fractal can optimize the CPU usage up to 90%.... 10% of the CPU recovered, instead of changing hardware.
I bet there will even be versions of dyna-cabs for the FM3. But the embedded IRs, if that is the way fractal is doing it, might be lower res on the FM3. I'm just guessing based on my experience with software modelers.The FM9 does, and the Turbo definitely does, it might mean making minor adjustments to existing presets if they're converted to use Dyna-Cabs.
As I said: "Maybe Fractal can optimize the CPU"Sure, if we're willing to give up USB and the front-panel's responsiveness.
Hard to see under the hood to know. But its a quad core CPU right? So it is certainly possible some parallelism could help if it hasn't already been implemented everywhere possible. I used to write code for a living. I'm sure the fractal folks can see under the hood so they probably know where and why they get CPU bound.As I said: "Maybe Fractal can optimize the CPU"
Technically not much will work for people running over 80% thoughoh, I'm sure they'll add it. Not sure that it will work for people that run at presets running at 80% though.
Hard to see under the hood to know. But its a quad core CPU right? So it is certainly possible some parallelism could help if it hasn't already been implemented everywhere possible. I used to write code for a living. I'm sure the fractal folks can see under the hood so they probably know where and why they get CPU bound.
Dedicated cores aren't necessarily superior to spreading the workload across cores according to load. I'd guess the delay and reverb cores get CPU bound pretty quick while the amp modeling core could be humming along at 50% utilization - especially for single amp block patches.The FM9 already has a core dedicated to Amp modeling, another core dedicated to Delays, and another dedicated to Reverbs.
This isn't a generic OS nor typical processing requirements, thoughDedicated cores aren't necessarily superior to spreading the workload across cores according to load. I'd guess the delay and reverb cores get CPU bound pretty quick while the amp modeling core could be humming along at 50% utilization - especially for single amp block patches.
So one optimization technique is schedule threads for execution to the core with the least utilization. There are plenty of OSes and real time systems that do exactly this. But I did not know Fractal took a dedicated core approach. So that would probably take a major rewrite.
A large number of us did, or still do.I used to write code for a living. I'm sure the fractal folks can see under the hood so they probably know where and why they get CPU bound.
Would that be the Intel that got their ass handed to them by TSMC, and are now begging the government for some free money?I used to work for Intel.
This thread could go in all sorts of directions, but just like with chips, there are limits.Would that be the Intel that got their ass handed to them by TSMC, and is now begging the government for some free money?
Yep same Intel - only would be more accurate to say they got their ass handed to them by AMD. When I worked for Intel they ruled both the CPU space and the video capture space. Best performance hands down on both fronts.Would that be the Intel that got their ass handed to them by TSMC, and are now begging the government for some free money?