I'm currently building a studio computer and would like to use a Small Form Factor computer with my Scope. Sadly enough I cannot find any information on the dimensions of the Scope cards and therefore I cannot find out if they would fit inside a small case...
Can someone provide me with the dimensions or with personal experience using Scope cards with SFF cases?
Thanks!
Scope + SFF computer?
-
BingoTheClowno
- Posts: 1722
- Joined: Wed Nov 12, 2003 4:00 pm
- Location: Chicago
- Contact:
Preferrably all of them so i can figure out which one might fitOn 2005-02-24 10:26, BingoTheClowno wrote:
Scope cards specifically? They might not even be recomended for a small factor case with a low to medium power supply.
I don't think the PSU will be a major issue. I use an underclocked 2d vidcard and my CPU is a 90nm athlon 64 at 2 ghz.
Thank you for the information. Do you happen to have the precise dimensions?On 2005-02-24 12:30, stardust wrote:
In fact the Luna is quite uncritical by size.
also the project is not longer than a normal ATX MoBo.
scope professional instead is a real full length PCI card that is longer than the ATX Mobo.
So in a midi size case you need to coordinate HD cages air flow and PCI slot of scope.
Some Z peaople reported also MoBo with electronic componenets on the Mobos that might conflict with the Elkos on the scope boars. This is not valid for proper designed boards where the PCI slots are not cirumvented by components.
cheers stardust
Thanks.On 2005-02-24 12:49, stardust wrote:
~19 cm length home
~33 cm length professional
That pro card is a *beast*, reminds me of the old SB AWE32. Maybe they could start using less dsp chips with more power or maybe smaller dsp chips with the same power (e.g. 90/130nm) to save some space
When is the next generation of scope due?
Maybe a firewire breakout box would be niceOn 2005-02-24 15:15, stardust wrote:
This question would mean when to find instruction compatible sharc DSPs with higher clock...
And when implementing the new HW a scope source code compatible new HW design.
In short I dont know. And I dont want to speculate.
honestly I dont see a need atm.
I've used a rather small desktop stuffed with 2 Pulsar Ones for quite some time, which I tried to run as silent as possible - with the result of an (eventually) fried mobo (or CPU)...
Well, at least the box made it for 3 years, but it was always at least twice as noisy as my current 19" industrial case.
The latter runs without any tricks (except replacing the Intel boxed fan), while the small system was tweaked as hell - and finally to death
Sharcs typically operate at pretty high temperatures, but there isn't even much choice for CWA.
Only a couple of chips matches economic requirements.
The specs may read impressive, but you always have to set bang versus bucks - and you'll notice a tremendous price increase once the onchip multi-ported Ram increases.
There's always been speculation about a 'next generation' board by CWA, but it would cost an aweful lot of money.
There are other problems to be adressed first (imho), otherwise it wouldn't even make sense to release something new.
The SFP platform is far from being exploited, as can be observed by lots of recent third party releases - and the new community of SDK enthusiasts is pretty likely to come up with useful stuff too, once the (usual) obstacles of learning a new system are mastered.
Flexibility and integration are still unmatched, but unfortunately that's not the easiest thing for marketing, as solid performance isn't exactly spectacular.
They are still consolidating economic figures to gain back a solid base, and under these circumstances a few flaws are acceptable imho.
cheers, Tom
Well, at least the box made it for 3 years, but it was always at least twice as noisy as my current 19" industrial case.
The latter runs without any tricks (except replacing the Intel boxed fan), while the small system was tweaked as hell - and finally to death
Sharcs typically operate at pretty high temperatures, but there isn't even much choice for CWA.
Only a couple of chips matches economic requirements.
The specs may read impressive, but you always have to set bang versus bucks - and you'll notice a tremendous price increase once the onchip multi-ported Ram increases.
There's always been speculation about a 'next generation' board by CWA, but it would cost an aweful lot of money.
There are other problems to be adressed first (imho), otherwise it wouldn't even make sense to release something new.
The SFP platform is far from being exploited, as can be observed by lots of recent third party releases - and the new community of SDK enthusiasts is pretty likely to come up with useful stuff too, once the (usual) obstacles of learning a new system are mastered.
Flexibility and integration are still unmatched, but unfortunately that's not the easiest thing for marketing, as solid performance isn't exactly spectacular.
They are still consolidating economic figures to gain back a solid base, and under these circumstances a few flaws are acceptable imho.
cheers, Tom