On 4/5/06, carmen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > I think you are missing the point. The current design for OGD1 is a > > large FPGA with lots of onboard fast RAM and high speed IO ability. > > Tim is wondering if such a card (perhaps with some modification for > > audio) would be useful to the audio community. > > there are several commercial PCI/Firewire products similar to this. namely > the Pulsar, UAD1, TC PowerCore, and a recent card from Creative. they > generally provide DACs and onboard DSP to be used for synths/fx for audio > production, or in creative's case, gaming.. > > considering how many LADSPA plugins are straight up broken on 64bit, for > example, i doubt theres a critical mass of developer interest to make them > run on an optional DSP card , especially before making them run on the core > CPU that AMD has been selling the past 3 or 4 years. can GCC compile C code > to run on the FPGA? that could be a swing factor.. > > i dont think im missing the point of what the card can do. but i think most > of us would foremost like something that can be used with low latency with > JACK, of suitable quality and portability, and not have to worry about the > developer deciding no longer to make ALSA drivers next week because 96% of > their users run MacOSX or WinXP.. > > Carmen >
I'd never pay 500 euro for a dsp card. Never. A sound card, with nice pre's etc yeah, maybe. I can get a whole lot of cpu for 500 euro. I think this covers the whole client side dsp thing as stated on ardour's website. For that price i can buy 2 dual core amd64 4200+ cpus. I think that would be a better use of the money and do more audio dsp. To me a card like the layla or 1010 is good for 300 euro or less, but dsp chips are no use. Loki
