On 01/05/2006, at 3:03 AM, jonathankek2000 wrote: >> I'm with you George. I run 2 UAD's in a non AMD 8131 Dual 2ghz G5 and >> regularly run them over 90% with complete stability and no computer >> slow down. > > Well that's great for the very few out there that don't own a Mac with > PCI-X. However, this does very little for the 90% that DO own a PCI-X > Mac, with the dreaded AMD chip. > > What you're actually saying here is that if you own a Mac from the > "old school" PCI days everything is fine with the UAD-1 card, which is > apparently stuck in the "old school" days of PCI. Any newer thinking > or change in the Bus, and UA is lost and they can't figure out how to > make their card perform properly. (Which BTW they promised to fix, and > stated they were working on a fix) > > This is because they are selling an OLD design and they refuse to > update that design. (And it needs to be updated, IMHO) > > The original message posted was about trying a UAD-1 card in a PCI-E > Intel Mac, and my advice stays the same. When they come, let's hope > Universal Audio does a better job with PCI-E than they've done with > PCI-X, because my UAD-1 card works more efficiently in my OLD G4 > running OS 9, than it does in the G5 running OS X. > > Since the G5's with PCI-X have been out for years, UA should have > designed a newer card to work with the new G5s or offered a Firewire > UAD-1 bridge..... or something. Hi Jonathan You obviously sound really pissed off with this situation. And I can appreciate that, but the truthful answer here is that the AMD chip is at fault. It is the faulty component. The UAD card will happily run in a PCI or PCI-X slot assuming that the slots and computer they are in comply with the intended specification. PCI-X Mac's used the AMD chip. It is a faulty component. Even AMD admit this. If you want to direct your anger in the right direction then aim for Apple who have chosen not to do the right thing by the small number of their customers that this chip does affect. Anyway. This is all old old news now. It's a sorry state of affairs. I would love to have purchased a Dual 2.7 PCI-X machine but because I knew about these issues and I was happily committed to UAD I made my choice accordingly and am happy. Forewarned is forearmed. We're on the bleeding edge of a relatively small market here weather we like it or not. If we were a bigger market I feel certain Apple would have done something about it - and that sucks. At least UA have been open about letting their customers know about the issue. AFAIK Apple have admitted not fault whatsoever. I imagine UA are very annoyed with Apple over this issue as well... Oh and one final thing. I can't agree with you that PCI is old school compared to PCI-X. What was the point of PCI-X anyway? Did you ever hear of a PCI-X specific device let alone an audio interface or card? Old school be dammed. PCI-X was at best, an interim piece of crap that not only did nothing for us, it actually broke stuff. If that's new school - you can keep it. I'd much rather stick with what I have. Imagine if you'd jumped on the "new school" PCI-X train and invested in PCI-X specific cards. How would you be feeling now? Kind regards ::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::: Paul Najar Jaminajar Music Production www.jaminajar.com