183,152 users have contributed to 42,278 threads and 254,995 posts.
In the past 24 hours, we have 4 new thread(s), 14 new post(s) and 57 new user(s).
Without spilling the beans about the details, I think it's safe to say that we have already overcome this hurdle (... well - something _must_ have happened behind the scenes all the time 😉 ...). All you faithful believers in this project will be pleased, that's for sure.@DG said:
Well get that new super PC ready then...........!
DG
Without spilling the beans about the details, I think it's safe to say that we have already overcome this hurdle (... well - something _must_ have happened behind the scenes all the time 😉 ...). All you faithful believers in this project will be pleased, that's for sure.@DG said:
Well get that new super PC ready then...........!DG
You can't say something like that and then nothing else. Get spilling. [:D]
DG@Dietz said:
... it's not very useful to make multiple impulse-respones from a 2 square-meter closet, for example
What do you mean by this? Do you recommend me waiting for MIR? I'm just using space designer in logic at the moment..and i want something more..i know there is only so much info you're allowed to give us before MIR's official release..but when it comes to spending serious money please advise me.......😛
Thanks for your time!
Matt
No offense taken, Henrik. Yes, the concept is ready since 2003 or so, and I've got work done using the MIR's basic principles back in 2004. But we were waiting for faster CPUs a long time (too long, actually).@hbuus said:
No offense, but I will believe this when I see it.
It's been work in progress since, what, 2002?
Best regards,
Henrik
Dietz,
I forgot to say that I'm actually very excited to see what MIR is all about.
Judging from VSL's track record, it will be something special for sure.
My skepticism has to do with the fact that I was going through some old forum posts in here recently.
Here I noticed that the current thread about MIR is pretty much the same as some of the MIR-threads in 2007, 2006, ..., 2003 [:)]
But I can certainly understand the wait for processing power, and will be happy to see MIR in the shops soon.
We live in exciting times!
Best regards,
Henrik
Are you talking of GPU-computing or something like that? It seems that it's offering loads of performance for those kind of things (convolution).@Dietz said:
Nonetheless we had to find a new way to overcome the still existing hurdles of processing power, after all those years. Personally, I think it was worth waiting, though: What you will see appearing on the market soon is more or less MIR Vers. 3, offering full resolution without the need of offline rendering.
No, they said they found some _other_ way of overcoming CPU limitations.
They discussed the GPU option in the early days of MIR development, but decided it would be best not to be tied down to any specific hardware (and avoiding the need to rewrite MIR's code numerous times).
They discussed the GPU option in the early days of MIR development, but decided it would be best not to be tied down to any specific hardware (and avoiding the need to rewrite MIR's code numerous times).... although we are _still_ discussing this option for the future. Things changed a lot in this regard during the last one or two years. There seems to be some kind of standardisation going on, as far as the use of GPU for non-graphical, "external" tasks is concerned. This means that the tie software / hardware wouldn't be _that_ rigid any more.
