I thought you were taking the screenshots literal, that's why i asked.
My bad if that was your meaning. I agree it way to early to tell anything in regard to the III at this point but I can verify when I got one in my rack..... Might not be till summer as the wait list looks crazy. LOL...Buzzer!
You got my perspective -exactly- backwards.
I think that was a gross misrepresentation of how much more powerful the III is than the II however accidental.
The III can run circles around the II in ways people haven't even seen yet.
Hm... OK. Honestly, I was expecting more DSP headroom even with higher cab/effect modes in III.It’s not a real comparison... depends on the mode of the Cab block, mode of the Pitch block (more voices = higher cpu), etc.
Also, that 70% allows you do a lot more than the is possible with the II.
What was the point of you posting the exact same preset with both II & III, if not to compare the processing power?EDIT: The new firmware of the Axe FX III is still under development, beta stage and constantly evolving so judging the usage by block count is silly at this point.
Hm... OK. Honestly, I was expecting more DSP headroom even with higher cab/effect modes in III.
But I'll take your word for it until I get my III
Just saw nicolas's edit:
What was the point of you posting the exact same preset with both II & III, if not to compare the processing power?
Tha point was to see what was my CPU usage in the XL, but i was not aware they where still in a beta stage of the firmware, so optimizations are undergoing and not finalized.
There's only ~1 week left before the ship date, so hopefully optimizations can be made in that time... Either way, excited for the III.Tha point was to see what was my CPU usage in the XL, but i was not aware they where still in a beta stage of the firmware, so optimizations are undergoing and not finalized.
The beta firmware still has lots of asserts and instrumentation for debug purposes. The looper, for example uses something like 12% CPU with the instrumentation and asserts enabled. With this stuff disabled (as would be the case in release firmware) the CPU usage drops to 4%.
While I don't expect this kind of improvement on all effects suffice it to say that the beta firmware CPU usage is not representative of the release version.
Furthermore we always put quality before quantity. The new reverb algorithms use more CPU than those from the Axe-Fx II would use but they sound better. Also the reverb defaults to high-quality mode whereas the II defaults to normal-quality mode. The drive block in the III uses a higher oversampling ratio and double-precision filters in some places compared to the II. The cabinet block can process up to four IRs simultaneously whereas the II defaults to one. Etc., etc., etc. Our clientele values quality first and none of the beta testers have yet to encounter a scenario where they have run out of CPU, and that's with the instrumented beta firmware.
Thanks a lot Cliff for all the hard work. Very cool to see these details. I'm running an Ax8 (Downgraded from an XL as the core amp modeling is most important to me) now and the amp modeling is still most important to me. Can you say anything about the modeling you see coming for the III? Is there another epiphone/quantum leap in the works?
Edit: Just realized this is my 1,000th post! How cool is it that it is directed to Cliff? Fate.
That is pretty pretty cool. I am starting to jones for the III but maybe I can save money not getting the MFC (but of course I probably will). When the III was first announced I was like "What, me need that? I've got the Ax8 and Kemper which are totally great and already overkill. The III's got nothing I really need." But I put myself on the waiting list just in case. Then as we get closer to shipping date I'm like "Well maybe I can check it out and move it on if it's not that great." And now I'm like "WHEN IS THIS THING GOING TO SHIP? WHERE AM I ON THE WAITLIST? WHEN AM I GOING TO GET THE EMAIL? I NEED THIS!"It has improved. Dramatically? No. The beta testers are reporting that the difference is noticeable and positive. When I get some time I'm going to see how much of it I can back-port to the II but right now all resources are focused on our early March shipping goal. Unfortunately the II doesn't have much spare CPU left for the amp modeling so I don't know what is possible.