Fractal Audio Systems mystery product speculation

[unix-guy]

As said, we're talking generic hardware and a generic OS. Both things dedicated and you could squeeze a lot more out of things.
Besides, I doubt an FM3 requires more than 4 x the CPU power of a Helix.



Yeah well, let's see.

We are in a thread talking about a Fractal product.

Fractal products use high end DSPs with a specialized "OS" and specialized hardware to achieve the results Cliff expects.

So "generic" doesn't apply...

 

[unix-guy]

Sascha makes a very good point. I know we don’t have Fractal Native to find out how it would run on the same Apple chip, but if you’re suggesting the same computer couldn’t handle complex Fractal signal chains, I don’t believe you.

I could care less if you believe me or not... I posted a quote above from Cliff. I'm not making it up, just passing on what he said.

 

[norminal]

Interesting...

Oh come on! You’re a beta tester and I’m betting you’ve had one of these, whatever this is!

 

[sashimi]

I could care less if you believe me or not... I posted a quote above from Cliff. I'm not making it up, just passing on what he said.

Sorry if that came out wrong, no attitude intended, I have read the same quotes about ARM processors in the fractal wiki myself and never doubted them, just saying the bit about 4x helixes running on a mac and not breaking a sweat was a good counterpoint to it, and I’d like to hear Cliff’s response myself. I understand it’s probably unrealistic to expect a specialized modeler processor, be it Fractal, Helix or any other, to be as powerful and efficient as apple silicon anyway, with the billions of dollars probably spent developing it.

 

[Sascha Franck]

So "generic" doesn't apply...

So, are you saying that specialized DSPs and operating systems should perform worse than generic things? Or did you just not get what I was saying?

 

[Sascha Franck]

and I’d like to hear Cliff’s response myself.

Same here.

 

[timbuck3]

No matter what Cliff has up his sleeve, the competition set the bar low lately..

What competition? Tmp?

 

[deepskyone]

ARM != ARM

ARM is just an instruction set architecture (ISA) that is being developed and licensed to other companies by Arm Ltd. Desktop ARM-based chips are completely different beasts compared to ARM-based chips for embedded devices like the Fractals.

My assumption is that the desktop chips have far higher core counts and clock speeds and thus thermal and power requirements.
Apple Silicon especially is based on the newest process (so-called node) of their chipmaker TSMC and they bought 100% of TSMC's capacity of that node when it was introduced. Meaning that this technology is not even available for off-the-shelf ARM chips and won't be for a long time.

TL;DR: Apple computer and guitar modeller CPUs both use the ARM ISA but that is the only thing they have in common.

 

[laxu]

IMO there's lots of space wasted on the FM3. Unless they really needed that space for the circuitry, I fail to see why it has to be that bulky (or not have, say, 2-3 more switches, which would fit easily.
As far as the integrated PSU goes, in general I'm all for it, but on a larger pedalboard it's sometimes turning into a disadvantage as you may have a powerful multiout PSU already, good enough to drive some more demanding units as well. Wouldn't work with the FM3, so you'd always have to deal with an additional full size power connection.

A lot of the size is determined by the back I/O, space required for power supply, and especially reusing parts.

The footswitch PCB is straight from the FC series. They just have 2 or 4 of them. The chassis is from the FC6, modified for the FM3. IMO both could have had 4/8 footswitches without the spacing becoming cramped at all, but this is the design we got.

The cooling fan location seems designed for "just get some air in and avoid some dumbass blocking the intake." I don't think it necessarily needs it, it's more of a precaution to keep the unit working in the worst case conditions. Like maybe an outdoor stage on the hottest day of summer or something.

 

[laxu]

My assumption is that the desktop chips have far higher core counts and clock speeds and thus thermal and power requirements.
Apple Silicon especially is based on the newest process (so-called node) of their chipmaker TSMC and they bought 100% of TSMC's capacity of that node when it was introduced. Meaning that this technology is not even available for off-the-shelf ARM chips and won't be for a long time.

The Mac Studio and Pro desktops don't really scale that well compared to the Macbook Pro laptops. The Apple processors are built power efficiency first, performance second so just giving them higher power limits and bigger heatsinks does not make them significantly faster. Afaik single core performance between Macbook Pros and Mac Studio is near identical and Studio is better for multicore performance and has a much faster GPU.

By comparison ARM chips used on pedals are far removed from Apple. The ARM you might find in a Strymon or UA pedal is probably closer to an old smartphone chip. The highest end unit using purely ARM cores is afaik the Fender Tone Master Pro and that seems to run into limits way faster than the ARM+SHARC DSP based Quad Cortex.

 

[Sascha Franck]

The Mac Studio and Pro desktops don't really scale that well compared to the Macbook Pro laptops. The Apple processors are built power efficiency first, performance second so just giving them higher power limits and bigger heatsinks does not make them significantly faster. Afaik single core performance between Macbook Pros and Mac Studio is near identical and Studio is better for multicore performance and has a much faster GPU.

That's all fine. And yet, I can run 4 fully loaded Helices on a single core of Apple's cheapest current computer. And my MBA is getting lukewarm at best.

 

[deepskyone]

That's all fine. And yet, I can run 4 fully loaded Helices on a single core of Apple's cheapest current computer. And my MBA is getting lukewarm at best.

You are comparing apples to oranges (no pun intended).

 

[TheTrueZoltan!]

You are comparing apples to oranges (no pun intended).

No, he actually isn‘t. It‘s basically the same software.

 

[DLC86]

That's all fine. And yet, I can run 4 fully loaded Helices on a single core of Apple's cheapest current computer. And my MBA is getting lukewarm at best.

At what roundtrip latency?

PS: btw you're comparing a DSP of a decade ago to a recent multi-core CPU.
Recent Analog Devices DSP cores have something like 5x 10x the processing power than that inside the Helix.

 

[deepskyone]

No, he actually isn‘t. It‘s basically the same software.

It's not about the software it's about the hardware.

As I said above, Apple ARM chips are orders of magnitude more powerful than off-the-shelf embedded ARM chips. That's why it's not surprising that an MBA can run a full OS and multiple instances of Helix Native while the Pod Express can only run a downgraded version of Helix Core.

 

[Sascha Franck]

You are comparing apples to oranges (no pun intended).

I'm not. Not at all.
I'm comparing audio DSP juice per buck. As easy as that.

 

[Sascha Franck]

It's not about the software it's about the hardware.

As I said above, Apple ARM chips are orders of magnitude more powerful than off-the-shelf embedded ARM chips. That's why it's not surprising that an MBA can run a full OS and multiple instances of Helix Native while the Pod Express can only run a downgraded version of Helix Core.

So how comes that some recent ARM powered Windows boxes are at least getting pretty close?

 

[Sascha Franck]

At what roundtrip latency?

3.5ms. Using a cheap Motu M2.

 

[Sascha Franck]

Recent Analog Devices DSPs have roughly 5x the processing power than that inside the Helix.

So, where's the device not heating up too much without needing a fan?

 

[DLC86]

So, where's the device not heating up too much without needing a fan?

Those chips came out a couple months ago... And FM9 and Quad Cortex chips already can handle more than double than a Helix chip