About CPU frequency function on the sMS-200 and sMS-200ultra,

[stefano_mbp]

21 minutes ago, MasterWarzombie said:

is there an option to put in performance?

Of course, just open the little menu under CPU frequency and scroll up/down to find the setting you prefer 

 

21 minutes ago, MasterWarzombie said:

why have frequencies higher than 528?

The sms200 standard CPU frequency is roughly 1GHz (performance) …

 

21 minutes ago, MasterWarzombie said:

I don't understand this CPU frequency option

There is quite a consensus about the theory that higher frequencies can lead to some electrical noise.

21 minutes ago, MasterWarzombie said:

please tell me the best choice for my use

There is no general best choice, just try different setting and choose the one that seems the best for you

[MasterWarzombie]

Isn't the performance option in the drop-down menu the best choice instead of 528?

[stefano_mbp]

3 minutes ago, MasterWarzombie said:

Isn't the performance option in the drop-down menu the best choice instead of 528?

The performance option is the standard/default one, you can try other settings and decide which is the best for you … 

[dgilz]

Try the settings advised by May from SOtM, these are a start : download the lattest kernel (beta mode), lower the CPU and as Stefano says : listen and if you enjoy it, you’re there. 

[Philippe Bill]

528Mhz is the minimum for my sMS-200Ultra
With 312Mhz, the sMS-200 is blocked

 

[mitch751]

I failed to update  kernel version no. is 6.1.60-211 , only 6.1.60-210 from the OS provided by May (thank you).

 

However I am able to change the frequency too, I lowered the frequency as suggested by May, yes indeed, the sound is different and better 

[_nick]

On 1/25/2024 at 2:41 PM, audiobomber said:

Should we use the highest frequency that still maintains stability?

 

My system (NAS > sMS-200 > Modius DAC) seems stable at 100BASE-T and 312Mhz CPU speed, using MinimServer and BubbleUPnP.

These are the same as my settings and they work perfectly. I think this is the best sound quality. I’ve always preferred 100BASE-T over 1000BASE-T as the sound is noticably better (to my ears). I’d describe it as more delicate and refined. I’m using Roon Rock OS (Intel NUC) > sMS-200 Ultra Neo > Chord Qutest.
 

@audiobomber how would you describe the difference between the two speeds?

[audiobomber]

19 hours ago, _nick said:

@audiobomber how would you describe the difference between the two speeds?

I've used my sMS-200 Neo in 100BASE-T for years. I hadn't tested vs. 1000BASE-T since the initial change. Because you asked and out of curiosity, I tested today, through headphones and speakers in my desktop system, with a few well-known tunes.

 

I heard subtle differences in bass power, high frequency smoothness, instrument separation and soundstage, all in favour of 100BASE-T. I would stress, these differences are subtle, not night and day, but nevertheless important to me as an audiophile.

[Stonemanty]

Hello, new here 

 

I’ve just done the Firmware/Kernel upgrade 

on my SMS-200 UN.  I use Roon only, I’m on the 312 and 1000base settings at the moment, but I’ll definitely try the others in due course 

 

I must say it’s a notable change; more spacious and detailed at the top end, but far more significant on my system is the bass 

 

For example, Bat For Lashes - The Wizard and Janelle Monae - Screwed have some very deep bass that were previously there, but not especially well defined.  Now they are utterly transformed.  There are notes and textures emerging and the tonal balance has moved completely 

 

So much so, I’m going to have to re-run RoomPerfect on my Lyngdorf ‘3400! 
 

Amazing work, many thanks to May and all at SOtM, keep it coming 😀👍

 

regards

Andy

[Joao Lins]

Hello everyone.

 

Just to add my two cents: I use my sMS200ultra as HQPlayer Embedded NAA and feed it with DSD 512 streaming. For me, the minimum CPU frequency that works is 528 MHz. When I select 312 MHz, some clicks appear every now and then.

 

Does anyone else got the same experience with NAA?

[stefano_mbp]

18 hours ago, Joao Lins said:

For me, the minimum CPU frequency that works is 528 MHz. When I select 312 MHz, some clicks appear every now and then.

Playing DSD512 and cpu frequency set at 528MHz there are still some clicks on my sMS200 Neo, it works fine playing DSD256 with the same cpu frequency.

Now it is working fine at 912MHz, will try later to reduce the cpu frequency a little bit more.

[VladD]

Hi,

 

Using Roon with my Sms200Ultra Neo with no problems at 312 Mhz. Improved SQ.

Now trying also 144 Mhz, improved SQ further (cleaner bass, slightly lower background noise). So far so good. Stable, no problems.

Only the web interface is very slow, but still functional.

[fminne]

I am able to reduce the CPU Clock to 144MHz (Roon Ready).
But when I want to go to the GUI, I have to stop the music. Otherwhise the GUI is not working correctly.
But that is no issue as I only need the GUI once each 2 months to check if a new frimware/ Kernelversion is availbale. At that moment I can manually speed up to the max. CPU-frequency. After the check (and installation), I can put 144MHz back as CPU clock and start the music

Thanks SOtM for this very nice feature. I hope 144MHz will still be available in the next releases.

[creativepart]

Like other's I've updated the Kernel to 6.1.60-211 from the beta server, set the SMS200 Ultra neo to 100baseT and the CPU frequency to 528mhz and enjoying some noticeable sonic improvements. I'm streaming Qobuz via Roon and HQPlayer at 705.6hz into a Chord Hugo TT2 via USB.

(Roon Core and HQP reside on M1 iMac)

[_nick]

7 minutes ago, creativepart said:

Like other's I've updated the Kernel to 6.1.60-211 from the beta server, set the SMS200 Ultra neo to 100baseT and the CPU frequency to 528mhz and enjoying some noticeable sonic improvements. I'm streaming Qobuz via Roon and HQPlayer at 705.6hz into a Chord Hugo TT2 via USB.

(Roon Core and HQP reside on M1 iMac)

For me the biggest improvement stems from the 100baseT setting: a noticeable improvement over 1000baseT. Whereas the benefits from modifying the CPU frequently are negligible in comparison