How much hardware accelleration of effects or streams (if any) do the new DX boxes provide? 

Does the Nitris DX offer more accelleration than the Mojo DX?

Or, does it simply add analog i/o?

-

Also, does anybody know of any on-line reviews of the new hardware they can point us to?

Thanks,

Jim

We haven't had many folks editing on the new stuff yet. (the client is still digitizing a few hundred hours of tapes) but it's been rock solid so far and the new software renders quicktimes in record times. It seems strong. As soon as I get someone to an online, I'll report back.

Streams have always been as much of a drive thing than anything, so remember that. Don't buy a nice new rig and hobble it with slow storage. Go.. big...

I'm surprised there aren't more replies to this.  These products are shipping, right?  Are they working so well that nobody has a need to visit the forums?  I wonder.

I don't think it's that so much as your questions were pretty subjective Jim.

The degree of performance enhancement on the DX boxes is not a matter of the hardware itself. It's dependent on the CPU and your storage too, not to mention the GPU.

For us, this hardware is the way Avid should have been running for the last 6 years. The best analogy I can offer you is it's like a really fast Meridian.

And yes, they are that stable.

Thanks, BD.  I guess I'll have to take a drive down to my local reseller, and see if I can get them to hook up the Nitris, and then the Mojo to the same computer to do a AB comparison. 

Given the same hardware other than the DNA, there must be an ability to measure a difference in the real-time track or effect counts and compare the two.  That's what I'm after.  If the Nitris offers more than the Mojo, then that's what I want

The Avid product page is a bit sketchy on the "improved real-time effects performance" nitty.

From this answer on the FAQ page, I assume there is no accelleration difference between the two.  However, it's clear that the Nitris will capture to the DNxHD codec, while the Mojo won't.

I'm not sure how much of a drawback that would be.  Capturing from DB, for example might save some drive space over 1:1, right?

From the FAQ:

What’s the difference between the Mojo DX and Nitris DX?

The two principal differences are the connectivity options and the Avid DNxHD encode/decode which is only available on Nitris DX. Nitris DX offers more connectivity for analog equipment such as Betacam SP, more audio connections, and more SDI connections allowing simultaneous connection to decks and monitors as an example, or separate connectivity for SD and HD devices. Please see the editor product pages for more details.

The DX hardware is not a FX accelerator in the traditional sense (Meridien/ classic Symphony Nitris hardware, etc). The process it is involved in is pre and post FX  - basically decompression/compression (DNxHD hardware codec) and reformating (thin raster, frame rate conversion etc).

Regarding Mojo DX DNxHD capture - it can. However, you will need 8 core CPU to do so (xw8600 and the newer Mac Pros). Avid said compression to DNxHD requires about 4 cores but that would be borderline. The opted against recommending it considering this is expected for professional use. Thus, 8 core for DNxHD capture with Mojo DX (Nitris DX has the codec hardware based).

We have two new edit suites set to be up and running by Aug 1st. This includes both all new hardware and MC Nitris DX. Will give feedback when I can.

KVL