AVID Must DO Something for AAX DSP

[Dave Lang]

(side note - Felipe - your name still isn't in your signature)

[feliponk]

Originally Posted by Dave Lang

(side note - Felipe - your name still isn't in your signature)

now better?

[spenner]

Originally Posted by feliponk

No worries here Spenner but I'm not Felix the Cat

HA! Even if your name wasn't in the signature, and considering your user name, I don't know where I got "Felix" from. Too much computer screen I guess.

[John_Toolbox]

Originally Posted by Mysterious Waves Informant?

all true, but not single operation multiply in double precision. and since multiplication of double precision is key to double precision processing, then at DP we have less then 1/2 the performance

I don't understand what the point your source is trying to make with the comments after the first two words. (I would hope that everyone here gets the concept that "double precision" would require twice as much DSP power, just like running at 96k would take twice the amount of disk space as 48k).

[Emcha_audio]

Originally Posted by Marsdy

I will no doubt be corrected if I'm wrong but the core engine in the TI DSP operates at 32 bit single precision. It can operate at 64 bit precision but not in a single cycle so as I mentioned,

Yes you are wrong. Check the datasheet that me and others have linked to for you several times. The chip can indeed run natively 64 bit precision in one cycle. In fact the can do it 6 times per cycle.

[Emcha_audio]

Originally Posted by feliponk

David, FYI "The Avid Guy" has a name, Felipe, so a little respect and education will be greatly appreciated, since I have always spoke to you using your name.

No worries here Spenner but I'm not Felix the Cat

Now, since David keeps saying that the TI DSP are 32 bits at its core, I hope this info from the TI Site will clear this to you.

"The TMS320x is the next generation of Texas Instruments' C67x generation of high-performance 32-/64-bit floating-point digital signal processors.
Enhanced C67x+ CPU. The C67x+ CPU is an enhanced version of the C67x CPU used on the C671x DSPs. It is compatible with the C67x CPU but offers significant improvements in speed, code density, and floating-point performance per clock cycle. The CPU natively supports 32-bit fixed-point, 32-bit single-precision floating-point, and 64-bit double-precision floating-point arithmetic."

Regards.

Filipe, we have posted that info at least a dozen time already, he still doesn't get it.

[Marsdy]

Originally Posted by John_Toolbox

I don't understand what the point your source is trying to make with the comments after the first two words. (I would hope that everyone here gets the concept that "double precision" would require twice as much DSP power, just like running at 96k would take twice the amount of disk space as 48k).

The bit I've highlighted in bold is the point!!!! It's what Dave Tremblay alludes to in the quote here:
http://duc.avid.com/showpost.php?p=1...&postcount=113

Here's my point, (not directed at you John.)

It seems there is a significant overhead running HDX plug-ins at 64 bit floating point precision. McDSP have gone 64 bit and I reckon Sonnox have too. This might account for why they are getting far lower plug-in instances than Avid who I reckon are running many if not all of their plug-ins at 32 bit floating point precision. Therefore, Avid is getting the most out of the TI DSP chips which can happily complete a 32 bit floating point operation in one cycle. They are effectively bypassing the jiggery pokery and DSP overhead required to get TI DSP chips to work at full 64 bit precision.

So why am I making a big deal about this. Firstly Avid have claimed an HDX1 card equals the performance of an HD4 or even HD5 system. If your plug-ins are operating at 64 bit precision then this appears NOT to be true. It's misleading in other words.

On my HD3 system I can get 250 instances of the McDSP 6030 using 25 chips. Assuming an HDX system is using two chips for the mixer I estimate you're going to get 272 instances of the 6030. I'm sorry, but given the cost of upgrading from HD3 to HDX, that is NOT much of an upgrade in my book. Yes I know HDX has much better headroom and a much higher voice count but hopefully you get my point. The thing is, and this might just be me but I use McDSP and Sonnox PIs in preference to Avid's most of the time.

Secondly. Why have McDSP and (probably) Sonnox decided to go 64 bit? Because it sounds better than 32 bit floating point apparently. I'm speculating here but MAYBE, they've discovered that 32 bit floating point doesn't sound as good as 48 bit fixed point i.e. TDM. And if Avid is running it's PI's at 32 bit do THEY sound as good as the 48 bit fixed point TDM versions?

And thirdly, where are all the HDX plug-ins for goodness sake? If Softube can get to market so quickly why are other developers so far behind? And why are MAJOR players like Waves and TC ignoring HDX completely? Then there are the "lost" plug-ins like Echo Farm, Virus Indigo.

I sincerely hope I'm wrong about ALL the above but heaven help Avid if the new Mac Pros turn out to be REALLY fast.

[A1]

Originally Posted by Marsdy

...I sincerely hope I'm wrong about ALL the above but heaven help Avid if the new Mac Pros turn out to be REALLY fast.

...They sure will be fast for HDX to run faster!...

[bonfi64]

If apple will come out with a new mac pro (i'm shure they will) it will be three time the performance of my 1.1 if i need an upgrade, i will go for that not for
HDX cause the price to upgrade from my HD2 is exactly what i paid for the HD2 three years ago, and i think is out of the market, i also notice lots of user have problem with old plugs and the new sistem, i mean it will be ok in two years maybe, one years after PT11 will come out, i will stay with my solid HD version 8, and a new mac pro (hope the cards will fit in that!!!

[bonfi64]

and also who need to run faster if the music market is so slow!!