Fractal VP4 Processors versus Axe-FX II, FM9, FM3 ... and implications for future products?

[quadgear]

Wondering how much power the VP4 Platfom has relative to it's siblings.

Spoiler: Here's what we know (from the Fractal wiki (some of which came from Cliff's posts here on TGF)):

• The VP-4 uses the Axe-Fx III DSP's little brother. It's a single core version with the same instruction set so porting stuff from the Axe-Fx III is almost trivial.
• The VP4 uses a SoC. It has an ARM Cortex A15 core and a C66x core along with a bunch of peripherals. The DSP in the Axe-Fx III would be too power-hungry for this application.
• The III uses (1) dual-core Texas Instruments DSP. The FM3 uses (1) dual-core Analog Devices DSP. The FM9 uses (2) dual-core Analog Devices DSPs. The TI DSPs are much more powerful than the Analog Devices DSPs per clock and run at around twice the clock speed as well. So one TI DSP core is about four times more powerful than one Analog Devices DSP core. If we normalize processing power to the III it would be:
  
  • Axe-Fx III: 100%
  • FM9: 50%
  • FM3: 25%
• So why not use the TI DSPs in everything? Power. The TI DSPs use more power and generate more heat requiring active cooling. They are also more complicated to use requiring dedicated clock generation units, multiple power supplies with specific sequencing requirements, etc.
• Even more here: https://wiki.fractalaudio.com/wiki/index.php?title=Axe-Fx_III,_FM9_and_FM3

Does this mean the VP4 has about 50% of the power of the Axe-FX III, about the same as an FM9, and double the FM3? And would that mean that the platform could run roughly the same patches as an FM9 ... assuming Fractal were to make such a device?

Apologies for "asking for more" and "what's next" the day after the launch of an amazing product. But it's interesting, eh? ;-)

 

[Piing]

 

[holoholo]

So, at 4:00 of his video Cordy adds a multitap delay to an empty preset and cpu goes up by 6%... that's exactly the same percentage that same block uses on my fm9 turbo!
I think we can assume this thing has the same processing power as one core of an fm3/9 turbo

Good catch from the other thread here

 

[laxu]

Cliff can correct me, but the main benefit for Fractal here is cost and porting effort required by having a directly Axe-Fx 3 compatible platform.

If TI is now offering DSPs that are more power efficient, cost effective and more straightforward to integrate, then future Fractal products could move to using only TI processors instead of the mix of TI and Analog Devices. Axe-Fx IV is likely to use the newer TI C77x cores, but "FM4" and "FM10" are still a mystery, if those products happen in the first place.

Cliff did make a comment here about the Analog Devices SC594. While this was in regard to a potential future Line6 product, I'm sure Fractal has considered the same processor for their future FM series as well. Afaik the SC594 should be about as powerful as the FM9 but with a single chip. So you could think of getting a "FM4" that has the same DSP capabilities as the FM9 - basically "more than enough for 99% of guitarists out there."

Fractal could potentially make just a single floor unit for next gen, finally realizing the idea of the modular system that the FM3+FC6/12 can be, but without the DSP compromises the FM3 makes.

I'd love to see a "FM0" brain type device where you can connect a variety of external peripherals. The LuminiteFx Graviton M1 MIDI controller is a great example of that sort of product line, and a direction I'd love to see on future modelers. Every peripheral works wirelessly without issue, and you can make it as complicated or as compact as you want. For gig-proof security you can still connect the footswitches with a wired connection too.

 

[DLC86]

Afaik the SC594 should be about as powerful as the FM9 but with a single chip. So you could think of getting a "FM4" that has the same DSP capabilities as the FM9 - basically "more than enough for 99% of guitarists out there."

Fractal could potentially make just a single floor unit for next gen, finally realizing the idea of the modular system that the FM3+FC6/12 can be, but without the DSP compromises the FM3 makes.

Their new SC835 actually seem to double that in terms of GFLOPS per core... But atm there's only a single-core version, if they put out a dual-core it will be a chip with 4x the processing power of the one inside the FM3 turbo.

 

[paisleywookiee]

We should rename the thread “Fractal Armchair Engineering”.

Don’t get me wrong though, I’m all for it!

 

[blandified]

Good catch from the other thread here

Im a noob. If the VP4 has the same processing power as the FM9, is adding an amp/cab model possible?

With my limited knowledge, it feels like these new chips are the future of Fractal products. A smaller VP4 has the same power as an FM9? More reason to get a VP4 if it has amp models.

 

[Lysander]

Im a noob. If the VP4 has the same processing power as the FM9, is adding an amp/cab model possible?

It does not. Pretty sure Cliff mentioned the VP4 runs a low power SoC with TI DSPs - compatible with Axe-FX III, but completely different from the FM3/9.

 

[Mongillo19]

I think we can just write off this thing running amp models

 

[DLC86]

Im a noob. If the VP4 has the same processing power as the FM9, is adding an amp/cab model possible?

With my limited knowledge, it feels like these new chips are the future of Fractal products. A smaller VP4 has the same power as an FM9? More reason to get a VP4 if it has amp models.

Doesn't have the same power as an fm9, I said that it probably has roughly the same power as a single core of the FM9 chip... the fm9 has 4 cores, 2 of which dedicated to effects and 2 to amps.
In theory it should be possible to run a single amp block if that's really the case (we don't know for sure), but most likely the cpu would be entirely used by that block alone, so I don't think it will happen.
Much more likely to see another pedal that does just amp and cab imho.

 

[quadgear]

Doesn't have the same power as an fm9, I said that it probably has roughly the same power as a single core of the FM9 chip... the fm9 has 4 cores, 2 of which dedicated to effects and 2 to amps.
In theory it should be possible to run a single amp block if that's really the case (we don't know for sure), but most likely the cpu would be entirely used by that block alone, so I don't think it will happen.
Much more likely to see another pedal that does just amp and cab imho.

How do you explain the Fractal wiki entry that says:

The VP-4 uses the Axe-Fx III DSP's little brother. It's a single core version with the same instruction set so porting stuff from the Axe-Fx III is almost trivial

 

[saarangnarayan]

I think we can just write off this thing running amp models

The VP4 might not. But maybe a future generation of products based on this form factor might?

 

[blandified]

Yeah I'm definitely not looking for the VP4 to run amp models, just curious on the technology capabilities of this.

So it has similar DSP headroom like the FM9, but some other spec changes that would not allow it to effectively run amp models, is what I'm hearing?

I thought I remember some one mentioned that potentially an IR block could be added to the VP4. Does IR in this case mean a cab model? So the only thing missing would be an amp model. Maybe I have my terms wrong though.

 

[likitlikeyoulikeit]

Yeah I'm definitely not looking for the VP4 to run amp models, just curious on the technology capabilities of this.

So it has similar DSP headroom like the FM9, but some other spec changes that would not allow it to effectively run amp models, is what I'm hearing?

I thought I remember some one mentioned that potentially an IR block could be added to the VP4. Does IR in this case mean a cab model? So the only thing missing would be an amp model. Maybe I have my terms wrong though.

This would be very beneficial for those using 4CM with preamp pedals, which is part of the draw of this ...and cliff did mention it. But he didn't expand on it .....

 

[mbenigni]

How do you explain the Fractal wiki entry that says:

The VP-4 uses the Axe-Fx III DSP's little brother. It's a single core version with the same instruction set so porting stuff from the Axe-Fx III is almost trivial

The emphasis here should be on "same instruction set". In other words the code to perform any given task will look very similar, if not the same. It doesn't necessarily mean the two devices can perform the same tasks, or the same tasks simultaneously.

 

[likitlikeyoulikeit]

Maybe we can get that one device teardown guy....the one with the white hair ...and is always in his dining room...is it Tony?

Maybe he'll tell us all the good news.

 

[Foxmeister]

The emphasis here should be on "same instruction set". In other words the code to perform any given task will look very similar, if not the same. It doesn't necessarily mean the two devices can perform the same tasks, or the same tasks simultaneously.

It does make you wonder if the VP4 can shadow AxeFXIII firmware updates a little more closely than the FM series, but, to be honest, Fractal seems to have significantly reduced that "delay" with recent firmware updates.

 

[0XI0]

it's a package of chips with S/PDIF ffs

 

[likitlikeyoulikeit]

Do they come in "all dressed"?

 

[DLC86]

How do you explain the Fractal wiki entry that says:

The VP-4 uses the Axe-Fx III DSP's little brother. It's a single core version with the same instruction set so porting stuff from the Axe-Fx III is almost trivial

What @mbenigni said. Axe FX DSP's little brother means that it's a processor from the same family but less powerful.