The 56367 chip went out of production in 2006, so probably got replaced with the 56321.

Well yeah but the numbers don't add up.

http://www.freescale.com/files/wireless_comm/doc/fact_sheet/ SYMFMCMPRTBLFS.pdf
If you look at this PDF the TI1 has the 367 processor (150 Mhz and MIPS) and the Blofeld has the 371 processor (180 mHz and MIPS) plus it has the EFCOP co processor. Don't know if that's used or not but the 371 was a lot more expensive (like 4 times) than the 367 so why would they buy a much more expensive DSP if they did not use the EFCOP ? Going by that comparison the Blofeld has more than half the MIPS of the TI2 (not counting the EFCOP) 180 to 300. With the EFCOP the 371 is capable of 275 MIPS total.

And the TI2 is 25% more powerful than a TI1. It does not add up.

DSP56367@150MHz was discontinued, so now they use DSP56321@275Mhz for the Virus Ti. The voice polyphony figures are for the current model.

Yes however assuming the TI2 is almost twice as powerful as a TI1 is still wrong.
It's only 25% faster which is odd in itself since it is a newer architecture,one would think it'd be more efficient per clock cycle than the old one and it isn't.

So the TI1 has 300 MIPS and the Blofeldt has 180 or 275. The TI2 would by my calculations have 375.


This post is interesting. Close to 200 voices on an old C2D.

I've got the Virus Poco and while there are thousands of excellent patches that are available for it I think Alchemy and DIVA sound much better. I would never buy it now because native synth development has surpassed it in sound quality with better sounding filters etc. I'm actually playing with it now alongside DIVA and Alchemy and Virus Poco sounds harsh in comparison. It certainly doesn't sound bad but it doesn't beat the latest native synths. Don't waste any starry eyed nostalgia on the Virus Poco. Save it for some other mythical beast. I don't own any Virus hardware so can't comment on that.

OK, let's assume that the Virus is only twice faster than a Blofeld. That means it could run on a new machine. But it also hints on why it sounds so good. It uses twice more cycles than Largo and probably three times more than Sylenth1 and Dune. And considering the guys from Access are no amateurs, those cycles are not wasted, but spent on quality.

Of course I picked the definition that suited me because it's what I meant, and how I explained it. Just because you're trying to change what I meant doesn't make your explanation right. And why you're trying to be a troll about this is baffling, but I'm not going to waste any more time on this, ignore you, and move on.

Devon

Can I just ask what the hell is going on around here? A thread title that makes no sense.......was it split from somewhere?

The reason i like the Virus and my analog synths is because they are harsh! Don't get me wrong, Alchemy is great, even Synth1 is great, but they are totally different synths for totally different things.

Wanna sell your Poco Virus license?

More funny details:
The DSP56321's in the TI2 cost $40 each. The DSP56371 in Blofeld is $10.

Oh. 40$ is quite expensive for a DSP chip. What's the funny part?

I did side by side and the Blofield is this one:

Targeted at audio/video (AV) receivers, home theaters, surround sound decoders, mini stereo systems, digital TV audio systems and automotive audio systems, the DSP56371 is designed to meet the demands of audio electronics system designers by supporting the latest generation decoders, such as Dolby®, THX® and DTS®, among others.

The DSP56371 is capable of running delay management, bass management and DTS96/24 while using less than half of the DSP's computing capability. This enables designers to add system enhancements that the discerning audio consumer expects. The performance increase is made possible through the use of a higher core frequency, fewer memory wait states, a larger amount of on-chip static random access memory (SRAM) and the addition of an enhanced filter coprocessor (EFCOP). By removing the need for external high-speed SRAM and making smaller, less complex boards, the DSP56371 is performance-rich and cost-effective.

The Virus one is much more general chip and has 3 outs (which maybe explains the Virus 3 channel thing.

Here's that chip specs:

The DSP56321, a member of the DSP56300 family of programmable DSPs, supports network applications with general filtering operations. The on-chip enhanced filter coprocessor (EFCOP) executes filter algorithms in parallel with core operations to provide enhanced signal quality without affecting channel throughput or total number of channels supported, resulting in increased overall performance. Like the other family members, the DSP56321 uses a high-performance, single clock cycle per instruction engine, a barrel shifter, 24-bit addressing, instruction cache, and direct memory access (DMA) controller. The DSP56321 offers 275 million multiply accumulates per second (MMACS) performance (550 MMACS using the EFCOP in filtering applications) using an internal 275 MHz clock, a 1.6-volt core and independent 3.3-volt input/output (I/O).

Lol well err this is a better read and much more interesting than the DEVELOPER clash in the other thread here. Infact i never knew half of this so it's an interesting topic... if you want a better laugh mate just jump on the Saurus bashing thread above hehe

Rob

Im really interested in a powercore virus, but it seems the development has stopped because TC Electronics dropped the powercore series.Is it ok to buy a powercore /virus combination or too much hassle?

Yes i would like to know this too, i use to have 2 cards in my pc around 2009 with base and multi-licences but i quickly sold them when i heard there was gonna be no support. I think i would buy these again i.e Powercore X8 if i knew that i'd get future support. Plenty places still selling the powercore virus and v-stations though.

Rob