Back after 2 years off - Really basic question about XITE-1

[mano]

Hi everyone

I miss using SCOPE too much (Pulsar 2 card)! I still have my card, but took a break from music making to focus on family, and I want to use my card again... Waiting patiently for the 5.1 64Bit release (not beta) to come out. Since I'll be paying 200 euros to get that, I am contemplating buying a new card or box while I am at it...

I have a really basic question, but cannot find the info anywhere... How many DSPs does XITE-1 have? Reading threads, it looks like this is a new generation of DSPs, so perhaps you can't say a number per se, but what is the EQUIVALENT POWER compared to the PCI board generation DSP?

All I see on SC website is "10 x the power" ... 10 x what... Scope (14 dsps) = 140 DSP equivalents?!

Again sorry if I offend anyone with such a simple question, but for the life of me, I cannot understand the spec sheet from the website...

Thanks guys

-mano

[garyb]

yeah, ten times a Scope Pro, although it's maybe 80% of that usable and still improving. it's a pretty no-brainer deal if you have the money. i can't think of a more useful product, audio production-wise, for that money.

[Sounddesigner]

XITE-1 has 18 dsp's inside it. 12 of the dsps are the newer third generation dsps and 6 of the dsps are the same as the old pci platform dsp's to ensure compatibility with older devices.

In theory and as far as specs go XITE-1 is 10X the power of the older pci SCOPE Professional card. 10X is'nt seen at the moment because all devices that run on XITE-1 where not coded for XITE-1 but created for the old pci Platform so they don't take advantage of the new architecture of XITE-1 for more power-efficiency. Once Sonic Core release the new SDK 5 for XITE-1 and code new devices themselves for XITE-1 we shall see a huge leap in XITE-1's power. Currently i suspect the power of XITE-1 to be anywhere from 5-8X the power of the older pci cards in practice depending on wich plugins you use. After new plugins are created for XITE-1's architecture then its power should be anywhere from 5-10X that of 14dsp pci.

Even in situations where XITE-1 is only 5X the power of 14dsp pci it's still a huge difference and MUCH MUCH better to have the XITE-1. And those situations should decrease as time passes.


EDITED

[Warp69]

I would estimate the current implementation (5.1) as between 2x and 5x times faster than a Scope Pro depending on the device. The number of possible PlateX's is different from setup to setup (hardware setup) - some can load 5 instances and others can load 11 instances without errors. You can load 3 (some state 4, but I have never seen it) instances on Scope Pro.

I have yet to see any test that shows 6-10x performance of a Scope Pro card.

When SC starts to optimize specifically for XITE, then the performance will increase - now, most of the power is from the frequency scaling.

[Sounddesigner]

I would estimate the current implementation (5.1) as between 2x and 5x times faster than a Scope Pro depending on the device. The number of possible PlateX's is different from setup to setup (hardware setup) - some can load 5 instances and others can load 11 instances without errors. You can load 3 (some state 4, but I have never seen it) instances on Scope Pro.

I have yet to see any test that shows 6-10x performance of a Scope Pro card.

When SC starts to optimize specifically for XITE, then the performance will increase - now, most of the power is from the frequency scaling.

I don't think anyone would ever see as low as 2x power in practice. PlateX i believe is the worst optimized device for XITE-1 SCOPE and most demmanding in multiple ways (most problematic). In realworld no one would use 8 plate-x's in a project to limit XITE-1's power to only 2x that of 14dsp pci if their XITE-1 could handle only 8. Also if someone did need the 8 instances well tho that person may only have 8 loaded their dsp-power-meter would be far far from full and the actual problem is a connection problem not a power one. This means that if only 4 where used many many other devices should be loadable in the same mix. I don't believe anyone would ever experience as low as 2x in practice (and if so it would be a very small number of people i'm sure).
But sure due to CONNECTION problem the plate-x does give a low count from what i've seen in recent benchmarks. But i'm sure the connection problem will improve with updates aswell.

[Warp69]

I agree that the issue with the PlateX is related to SAT connection problems and not DSP usage, but the same thing is true for the Scope Pro card - it's limited by the PCI bus and not DSP power.

Im actually not concerned about the fact that people can only load 8 (Is that the number you can load?) PlateX on XITE - Im more concerned about the future development of reverbs - the designs Im working on now for Native has 2-8 times as many memory reads/writes than PlateX. Bricasti class reverbs will have 25+ times as many memory reads/writes.

PlateX might be the worst optimized plugin on XITE - I don't know (only SC can answer that) - is the Ambience algorithm and the Chorus better optimized?

As I said earlier - all of this could be a non-issues with future updates specifically for the XITE.

[garyb]

really, even on the pci cards, there are limits to reverbs. i can't run as many platex plugins on my pci system as can fill all my 35 dsps. i can, however, still load the dsps to full with other devices. a couple of highend reverbs are plenty. eight is lovely. that said, yes, there is quite a bit of optimizing going on, both with devices and the system itself, especially with 64bit just becoming available. if you want to do mixing or use synths however, there is no shortage of power.

as to the future warp69 reverbs, GREAT! i share your hopes, and know that whatever forum you use to develope them, they will be super useful and great sounding. i also know that my Scope system will continue to interface with them, even if they become hardware. i'll likely buy them, assuming the funding. i think that S|C hears you and that they will do as they have been, quietly working and doing their best to realize all the dreams and potential of this technology. if they fail to fully realize your requirements, the system won't necessarily be useless or a failure.

[Warp69]

they will do as they have been, quietly working and doing their best to realize all the dreams and potential of this technology. if they fail to fully realize your requirements, the system won't necessarily be useless or a failure.

I believe they do and I surely hope that everybody wish that SC will succeed with XITE - The Scope concept is unique.

This is not an attack - far from it - Im just stating the obvious 'XITE is more powerful than Scope Pro but we haven't reached full potential (10x performance) yet'

I'll have to admit that I would rather see SC used the time to create something unique for XITE, that makes people want XITE for those reasons instead of '5-10x the performance of Scope Pro', rather than optimization.

[Warp69]

Better automatic load distribution. benchmark is the algorithm result with 3 of the 15 DSP PCI cards.

Well - this is THE core feature of the Scope concept - no other DSP solution have implemented the same kind of distribution. I believe it's a major task to redesign the load distribution - I don't think anyone would be comfortable digging around in that code. One small error and Scope won't work at all. This one will take some time.

[Sounddesigner]

I agree that the issue with the PlateX is related to SAT connection problems and not DSP usage, but the same thing is true for the Scope Pro card - it's limited by the PCI bus and not DSP power.

Im actually not concerned about the fact that people can only load 8 (Is that the number you can load?) PlateX on XITE - Im more concerned about the future development of reverbs - the designs Im working on now for Native has 2-8 times as many memory reads/writes than PlateX. Bricasti class reverbs will have 25+ times as many memory reads/writes.

PlateX might be the worst optimized plugin on XITE - I don't know (only SC can answer that) - is the Ambience algorithm and the Chorus better optimized?

As I said earlier - all of this could be a non-issues with future updates specifically for the XITE.

The plate-x has caused me more problems then all scope devices. It is harder to load it at 96khz then ambience and c-d. It loads sometimes and sometimes not at 96khz wich means there is some element of unpredictability with XITE. Ambience and c-d load fine now but i still would not try to use a few plugs of this nature in a project cause even if you can load them it's a good chance you'll be wrestling threw many long 'optimization messages'. You learn quickly what to use and what to stay away from once you have a XITE.

As far as further optimizing and bug-fixing older devices; it may be best from now on if Sonic Core only optimize/fix further a very small select few and move on to newer devices. I think part of the long period of codeing to get XITE-1 out of beta has to do with the fact that the SCOPE Platform has so many old devices available for it taking too much of Sonic Core's codeing-time (and codeing for older pci). The scope platform is VERY huge compared to other dsp platforms and many of the older devices just might not be worth the trouble anymore.

One thing is for sure with me and that is Sonic Core is going to need to cut alot of things from their schedule and devote more time to XITE-1 to bring it out of beta quickly and create devices that take advantage of it's architecture and other new features. SCOPE is a greedy and jealous platform that may demmand ALL of their time in order to fully reach its potential and possibly for survival down the road. I don't believe they can be too divided with too many projects, SCOPE is just too large in nature for that. Duende kinda shows where too little can get you, one needs to be a giant out here.

S|C do also need to work better with third-party developers and hurry with new SDK cause in my mind they can't do it all alone for too long. The strenghth of SCOPE is also in the openness of the platform and many third-party contributers unlike more closed platforms.

But also i do put trust in Sonic Core and believe they'll do enough of the right things.

As far as high-end 'Natural' reverbs go; from what i understood from Quantec developer this is too demmanding for both dsp platforms and Computers atm and Bricasti seems to confirm it. They also have a scope card .

[mano]

Thanks guys

XITE-1 is amazing then. I was dreaming about having 14 DSPs "one day" ... so the idea to have ~140 DSPs equivalents is ming boggling. HOWEVER the $4,000 price tag is way too much for me right now, so I must pass. I know I could trade my Pulsar 2 card for some $ (~$1,000?), but it's still way too much.

I just bought my SCOPE 5 upgrade last night, and got my key today... My Pulsar 2 card is in the computer ready to setup software... yesss.

Thanks guys

Manuel