Scope "equivalence" of XITE?

The Sonic Core XITE hardware platform for Scope

Moderators: valis, garyb

Post Reply
marcianus
Posts: 28
Joined: Sat Mar 27, 2004 4:00 pm

Scope "equivalence" of XITE?

Post by marcianus »

To compare power (if possible), what's the equivalence in number of Scope/Pulsar Sharcs of the XITE?

Thanks in advance
dawman
Posts: 14368
Joined: Sun Jul 24, 2005 4:00 pm
Location: PROJECT WINDOW

Re: Scope "equivalence" of XITE?

Post by dawman »

That is a constantly changing formula actually.
When I first got the XITE-1 I have to admit I was kind of upset because I have a rather large investment in custom and 3rd party devices.
These are not optimized yet, well until the new SDK 5.0 is shared and released.
However, I have had a couple of devices optimized which I was most appreciative for becuase I have to have these live or I am up Shit Creek without a Paddle.
This formula for measuring power has changed for the second time now, and if we see a third increase in power I will be most impressed.
The word was that new AD Chips were 10 times the power.....that's impressive, but I really didn't buy that campaign slogan, but if I could get the power of 5 or 6 Pro cards, I would be satisfied because of my current needs.
I have come to the conclusion that when using optimized plugs, one can get close to the advertised claims.
But using 3rd party devices meant to emulate real analogs, and devices for live performance I am comfortable saying that each AD Chip is equal to 7 or 8 older SHARC's.
In essence, I am enjoying the power of 90 to 96 x SHARC's................ankyuvarymush.
With one more upgrade ( I pray that it comes ), I can see having the 10x power claims.
That would be 120 old SHARC's using the 12 x new AD Chips. and the 6 x old SHARC's providing compatability.
Before August 10th I could get 2 x B2003's on a single new AD chip, now I can get 3.
That's my best measurement because the old B2003 took 3 x older SHARC's.
User avatar
siriusbliss
Posts: 3118
Joined: Fri Apr 06, 2001 4:00 pm
Location: Cupertino, California US
Contact:

Re: Scope "equivalence" of XITE?

Post by siriusbliss »

That's a pretty good equivalence analysis.

Perhaps it's time to do the old Masterverb test again since the latest optimizations?

Greg
Xite rig - ADK laptop - i7 975 3.33 GHz Quad w/HT 8meg cache /MDR3-4G/1066SODIMM / VD-GGTX280M nVidia GeForce GTX 280M w/1GB DDR3
dawman
Posts: 14368
Joined: Sun Jul 24, 2005 4:00 pm
Location: PROJECT WINDOW

Re: Scope "equivalence" of XITE?

Post by dawman »

MasterVerb is no longer a go to choice for anyone who has used Warp69's reverbs or Paul Tanti's PT-Free-96k which is an excellent low DSP choice.
And on the XITE-1 there is still no reverb that accesses the internal RAM.
That's a test I would love to see, as well a device that actually takes advantage of the RAM.
I think we are close though, because I get messages like " Cannot access SDRAM," etc. So someone has been getting ready for this.....I can feel it.

For anyone who doesn't have the PT-Free-96k I suggest snagging this and try the SL9000-X post ( serial ), using external AUX sends and returns of a mixer, and just play with the gate to shorten the tail. It is just another good sounding weapon.

http://www.youngmusic.at/down&urlgo=www ... 8&dba=free
Warp69
Posts: 679
Joined: Sun Jun 17, 2001 4:00 pm
Location: Denmark
Contact:

Re: Scope "equivalence" of XITE?

Post by Warp69 »

XITE-1/4LIVE wrote:And on the XITE-1 there is still no reverb that accesses the internal RAM.
Im not sure about that. If you use the PC based delays in Scope SDK you'll automatically use the RAM on the XITE. But it's correct that you could create better reverbs if you designed your plugins for XITE.
User avatar
pollux
Posts: 503
Joined: Fri May 28, 2004 4:00 pm
Location: France

Re: Scope "equivalence" of XITE?

Post by pollux »

Warp69 wrote:
XITE-1/4LIVE wrote:And on the XITE-1 there is still no reverb that accesses the internal RAM.
Im not sure about that. If you use the PC based delays in Scope SDK you'll automatically use the RAM on the XITE. But it's correct that you could create better reverbs if you designed your plugins for XITE.
This means you got access to the V5 XITE SDK? :D shhhhtttt
Warp69
Posts: 679
Joined: Sun Jun 17, 2001 4:00 pm
Location: Denmark
Contact:

Re: Scope "equivalence" of XITE?

Post by Warp69 »

pollux wrote:
Warp69 wrote:
XITE-1/4LIVE wrote:And on the XITE-1 there is still no reverb that accesses the internal RAM.
Im not sure about that. If you use the PC based delays in Scope SDK you'll automatically use the RAM on the XITE. But it's correct that you could create better reverbs if you designed your plugins for XITE.
This means you got access to the V5 XITE SDK? :D shhhhtttt
Uhm nope, I don't have access to XITE or Scope SDK 5.

Infact, I don't have access to any Scope related right now since it was necessary for me to upgrade to PCIe only.
dawman
Posts: 14368
Joined: Sun Jul 24, 2005 4:00 pm
Location: PROJECT WINDOW

Re: Scope "equivalence" of XITE?

Post by dawman »

Warp69 My Brotha'.
I am using XP Home 32bit.
Is there a utility where I could possibly view a meter for motherboard RAM like we have for the DSP amounts.?

TIA
User avatar
garyb
Moderator
Posts: 23244
Joined: Sun Apr 15, 2001 4:00 pm
Location: ghetto by the sea

Re: Scope "equivalence" of XITE?

Post by garyb »

Jim, afaik the video adaptor uses a set amount of memory that is reserved at boot per the bios. usually, it's no more than 256mb, more often 64 or 128mb max.
Post Reply