FM9 Full Res IRs possible at some point?

C

cberry

Member
Hi everyone, I couldn’t find info but I’m wondering if the FM9 has the processing power in theory to handle Full Res IRs? Thanks!
 
Possibly if you strip the preset down to the amp and cab. According to Cliff, the FM9 has about half the CPU power of the FX3 Mk II, and the FullRes IRs add about 20% for each slot in the CAB block in the FX3 Mk II.

If you intend to run FullRes IRs regularly you should be using a FX3 Mk II Turbo to let it cover the difference in needed CPU power, which is why I think the Turbo was added to the line-up.

P.S. Cliff said they add 10% more CPU processing.
https://forum.fractalaudio.com/threads/aitr.176587/post-2145186
 
Last edited:
Greg Ferguson said:
Possibly if you strip the preset down to the amp and cab. According to Cliff, the FM9 has about half the CPU power of the FX3 Mk II, and the FullRes IRs add about 20% for each slot in the CAB block in the FX3 Mk II.

If you intend to run FullRes IRs regularly you should be using a FX3 Mk II Turbo to let it cover the difference in needed CPU power, which is why I think the Turbo was added to the line-up.
Click to expand...
Curious what FAS says. Although everything you said is right the FM9 uses the cores different. For example delay and verb each have their own core
 
My understanding is that the cab/IR is handled on the smallest chip in the FM3/FM9, which also handles the screen duties. Not sure if it has enough juice. Also need a bunch of non-volatile memory to store such long IRs, so we would probably have to sacrifice some user preset space or something? IDK. Seems like a stretch...
 
If in the future FM3 or FM9 will be able to use FullRes, I will be honestly surprised.
When buying FM3 or FM9 this should not be expected.
Unless Fractal wants to make FullRes an advertising slogan for its products.
Since it's only 10% CPU or less, both FM3 and FM9 can do it.
 
Mystik said:
Since it's only 10% CPU or less, both FM3 and FM9 can do it.
Click to expand...
That's 10% CPU on much more capable processors that have 4+x the power of the ones built into the FM3.

The processing power between the devices isn't a straight comparison, 10% on the FX3 doesn't mean 10% on the FM3. For instance, identical presets that run at 43% on my FX3 are 75% on my FM3. The IRs are standard length, not Ultra-Res, so I'm giving the FM3 as much advantage as possible, so even if the increase was linear, at 10%, it'd push the CPU beyond its limit.

There's also the major difference in the available storage space. The FM3 is much more limited so user IR space would be sacrificed whereas the FX3 had an entire second bank that could be used.
 
ctrimmer said:
My understanding is that the cab/IR is handled on the smallest chip in the FM3/FM9, which also handles the screen duties.
Click to expand...
Do you have a reference for that?

The architecture of the FM3 and FM9 are different from each other and both are different from the Axe Fx III.

The FM9 uses 1 core for Reverbs, 1 core for Delays and and 1 core for Amps. The other blocks run on the remaining core. They're all the same size core as there are 2 of the same DSPs each with 2 cores.

As far as I'm aware there are other processors that handle midi, the screen, etc.
 
unix-guy said:
Do you have a reference for that?

The architecture of the FM3 and FM9 are different from each other and both are different from the Axe Fx III.

The FM9 uses 1 core for Reverbs, 1 core for Delays and and 1 core for Amps. The other blocks run on the remaining core. They're all the same size core as there are 2 of the same DSPs each with 2 cores.

As far as I'm aware there are other processors that handle midi, the screen, etc.
Click to expand...
https://wiki.fractalaudio.com/wiki/index.php?title=FM9#Processing
1633641174558.png
I assumed that this section of the FM9 wiki meant that the IRs were processed by the ARM chip, which also handles the graphics duties from my understanding. I could be totally off-base, or misreading that.
 
ctrimmer said:
https://wiki.fractalaudio.com/wiki/index.php?title=FM9#Processing
View attachment 89804
I assumed that this section of the FM9 wiki meant that the IRs were processed by the ARM chip, which also handles the graphics duties from my understanding. I could be totally off-base, or misreading that.
Click to expand...

yek said:
Does the processing of impulse responses run in the accelerator, like on the FM3?
Click to expand...

FractalAudio said:
Yes.
Click to expand...
Thanks for posting that link. I was not aware of this.

Since I'm not an FM3 owner, I'm not up to speed on the "accelerator".

Is that totally separate from the DSP or a sub-component.

I suspect the latter since otherwise I'd think that changing the number of IRs, etc in the Cab block wouldn't affect the CPU percentage which seems to exclude the "dedicated" processors...

Maybe Cliff will enlighten us unless someone else knows?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom