4 x card limit........why?

[Guest]

Please forgive me if this has been flogged to death. I've tried to use the search engine and I'm not finding an answer sooo.........

My question is why are we limited to four cards? I've got a 13 slot Magma here with 4 UAD-1 cards in it and it can obviously accommodate more. Is this a bandwidth issue, driver issue........what? If someone can point me to a previous thread that addresses this it would be much appreciated.

Thanks,

 

[LEX]

My guess is it has something to do with RAM and the 32 bit OS.

Plus it means a complete driver and plug rewrite to make it work, and most hosts have no more than 5 slots, and you have to have at least 1 audio card.

I think the technology has moved faster than any of these audio companies have realized, and are trying to catch up.

Give it a year. I bet it will be different.
We'll be Dual Quad's in less then 1 year on 64 bit.

LEX

 

[Guest]

My guess is it has something to do with RAM and the 32 bit OS.

Plus it means a complete driver and plug rewrite to make it work, and most hosts have no more than 5 slots, and you have to have at least 1 audio card.

I think the technology has moved faster than any of these audio companies have realized, and are trying to catch up.

Give it a year. I bet it will be different.
We'll be Dual Quad's in less then 1 year on 64 bit.

LEX

Yes,

Things definitely look exciting on that front. Like everyone else, I'm hoping for a new interface that can handle the processing that is now possible on "at least" 4 x UAD-1 PCI cards. The alternative is looking
like a 64 bit Magma with a PCIe adapter and still being limited to 4 x cards. That's a hell of a lot of scratch to invest in hardware when the additional upcoming CPU cores and RAM capabilities of the 64 bit OS are going to be making the kind of modelling capable with proprietary PCI or PCIe cards QED within the expanded capabilities of native systems.........but we've beat that one to death already. Everyone knows it's coming, and coming fast (just not fast enough) :lol:

 

[him]

Data transferring via cpu to uad-1's proccessor and coming back again to cpu makes the audio loop more complex and creates latency as well. The more uad-1 plug-ins you use, the heavier the cpu loads.

 

[LEX]

Well, you know what is going to happen, which I am sure why UAD hasn't pushed it so.

When 64 bit comes full swing, there is still going to be alot of 32 bit users out there.

SO it is probably going tobe an upgrade to the 64 bit world, while the 32 bit world stays where it is.

It is just technology. People are going to bitch, but that is the way it is.

I at least hope they offer an upgrade path for those who want to go that way.
Hopefully it won't be as soon as Vista is released, as I guess 1 year before usable, so we can put our money back into what we invested for in the first place.

LEX

 

[Eric Dahlberg]

Data transferring via cpu to uad-1's proccessor and coming back again to cpu makes the audio loop more complex and creates latency as well. The more uad-1 plug-ins you use, the heavier the cpu loads.

I hope higher CPU load isn't the concern, most people probably have power to spare these days.