Avid Pro Audio Community

Avid Pro Audio Community (https://duc.avid.com/index.php)
-   Pro Tools 11 (https://duc.avid.com/forumdisplay.php?f=115)
-   -   PT 11 HD Native vs PT 11 HDX (https://duc.avid.com/showthread.php?t=337557)

Dantesjuice 04-15-2013 01:06 PM

PT 11 HD Native vs PT 11 HDX
 
I have tried to find this answer on the webinar transcripts and in this forum but i cant seem to find a definitive answer...

If i understand correctly, 1 HDX card will provide me with 256 voices while an HD native system will give me unlimited tracks/voices? If this is the case, then what is the point of using DSP cards with PT 11?

I just purchased a dual 6 core mac pro with hyperthreading which gives me 24 total processors (says PT 10)

Maybe I misread and im not fully understanding the point of an HDX card with PT 11, but if it seems that your actually being limited with an HDX card then im really confused lol

Any info on this would be great!

Thanks! =)

TOM@METRO 04-15-2013 01:21 PM

Re: PT 11 HD Native vs PT 11 HDX
 
In native vanilla PT... 96 simultaneous tracks max.

HDN = 256 max

HDX = 768 max

http://www.avid.com/US/products/Pro-...tware/Features

DetroitT 04-15-2013 01:33 PM

Re: PT 11 HD Native vs PT 11 HDX
 
Greater expandability
Heat, less latency (HDX vs HDN), DSP when needed.
Hard so say until 11's out as to additional performance.

DAWgEAR 04-15-2013 05:12 PM

Re: PT 11 HD Native vs PT 11 HDX
 
Quote:

Originally Posted by TOM@METRO (Post 2030562)
HDX = 768 max

Just to clarify, 768 refers to voicable tracks. Actual voices depends on the number of HDX cards: 1 card (256 voices), 2 cards (512 voices), etc.

These figures are for 44.1kHz/48kHz.

TOM@METRO 04-15-2013 11:49 PM

Re: PT 11 HD Native vs PT 11 HDX
 
Quote:

Originally Posted by DAWgEAR (Post 2030674)
Just to clarify, 768 refers to voicable tracks. Actual voices depends on the number of HDX cards: 1 card (256 voices), 2 cards (512 voices), etc.

These figures are for 44.1kHz/48kHz.

That is correct. And the reason that I posted the link to the chart.

SDDP 04-16-2013 01:25 PM

Re: PT 11 HD Native vs PT 11 HDX
 
So correct me if I am wrong, but with 11 out and Macpro with 12 cores at 3.03GHz and 64gb using HDN... and ADC set to 16,383 (max). PT11 using the cores and ram, one should be able to do a full 5.1 mix far better and more effiecently than what a TDM HD with like 10 cards or more?

I mean with this set up, how much more powerfull would HDX be?
Since waves is native anyways, so being able to use all that ram with that GHz speed and cores (okay no heat and the latency is not like the HDX, but were're talking point zero zero something here, very insiginificant).
If you don't need 700+ tracks and are not mixing Avatar II. Wouldn't this scenario suffice for a LONG LONG time?

Emcha_audio 04-16-2013 02:09 PM

Re: PT 11 HD Native vs PT 11 HDX
 
Quote:

Originally Posted by SDDP (Post 2031056)
So correct me if I am wrong, but with 11 out and Macpro with 12 cores at 3.03GHz and 64gb using HDN... and ADC set to 16,383 (max). PT11 using the cores and ram, one should be able to do a full 5.1 mix far better and more effiecently than what a TDM HD with like 10 cards or more?

I mean with this set up, how much more powerfull would HDX be?
Since waves is native anyways, so being able to use all that ram with that GHz speed and cores (okay no heat and the latency is not like the HDX, but were're talking point zero zero something here, very insiginificant).
If you don't need 700+ tracks and are not mixing Avatar II. Wouldn't this scenario suffice for a LONG LONG time?

No matter how powerful your desktop/laptop will be, HDX will add it's power on top of that.

Brandonx1 04-16-2013 10:26 PM

Re: PT 11 HD Native vs PT 11 HDX
 
Quote:

Originally Posted by SDDP (Post 2031056)
So correct me if I am wrong, but with 11 out and Macpro with 12 cores at 3.03GHz and 64gb using HDN... and ADC set to 16,383 (max). PT11 using the cores and ram, one should be able to do a full 5.1 mix far better and more effiecently than what a TDM HD with like 10 cards or more?

I mean with this set up, how much more powerfull would HDX be?
Since waves is native anyways, so being able to use all that ram with that GHz speed and cores (okay no heat and the latency is not like the HDX, but were're talking point zero zero something here, very insiginificant).
If you don't need 700+ tracks and are not mixing Avatar II. Wouldn't this scenario suffice for a LONG LONG time?

Yes. It would be a very powerful set up. Probably more then an hd 10


All times are GMT -7. The time now is 12:55 AM.

Powered by: vBulletin, Copyright ©2000 - 2008, Jelsoft Enterprises Limited. Forum Hosted By: URLJet.com