NI-x000 vs NI-x100 series questions

gravityhammer

Hello all -

Our company is a relatively new AMX dealer, so we've only been involved in installs of new equipment. We've been offered a couple of jobs to update programming on older Netlinx equipment - x000 series master controllers rather that x100 series. Is there a chart listing the differences between the x100 and x000 series (hardware and software-wise)? We're trying to figure out our limitations.

Thanks for the help!

Hedberg

The only difference, as I understand it, is that the x000 masters came with ICSNET ports installed and the x100 master sdid not, but could have it installed. In my opinion, you should see no difference when maintaining these systems -- all you have to be aware of is that with those systems with ICSNET ports installed, you have extra capabilities and you need to be aware that there may be devices connected on ICSNET on some installations. Programming an ICSNET device is like programming any other device so it shouldn't be an issue.

gravityhammer

Thanks for the response. Are there any memory differences? Looking at the AMX website it appears there may be.

Jorde_V

gravityhammer wrote: »

Thanks for the response. Are there any memory differences? Looking at the AMX website it appears there may be.

There are, the x100 series has more memory. Standard it has double, but if required you can get 256MB instead of 64MB. (talking RAM here)

The x100 series generally is ±2,5 times faster than the x000 series.

John Nagy

Also, the 000 series is out of production for about 5 years now. As it has far less memory than the x100 series, many large programs require using the NON-DUET firmware as it leaves enough memory to operate in. The last available non-Duet for it is 4 years old now and not updating. There's 4 years of advancements that are not available to you if you must use the old firmware to avoid the major memory hit of DUET. Most of the meaningful advancements are in TCPIP stability, important for keeping wifi-panels connected.

So, lots of reasons to relegate x000 units to use in small systems, without much IP devices or WIFI panels, and best for use as I/O slaves to a newer series master.

Auser

John Nagy wrote: »

As it has far less memory than the x100 series, many large programs require using the NON-DUET firmware as it leaves enough memory to operate in.

By large we're talking controlling multiple spaces with multiple UI's (generally residential). There's still adequate memory available when running the Duet firmware for most corporate systems (boardrooms and the like). Depending on how you code, the x000's should be capable of dealing with 4+ areas and 8+ touchpanels while running Duet firmware.

John Nagy wrote: »

So, lots of reasons to relegate x000 units to use in small systems, [...]

This is true.

John Nagy wrote: »

[...] without much IP devices or WIFI panels, and best for use as I/O slaves to a newer series master.

I don't agree with this.

gravityhammer wrote: »

We're trying to figure out our limitations.

If you're going to be reusing existing x000's as the client can't see a net cost-benefit gain to updating, make sure you run the latest (Duet) firmware and code efficiently enough to work within the available memory and they will operate fine.

The only other considerations that I'm aware of is that a particular revision had a bad physical Ethernet interface which doesn't operate reliably (I believe AMX will perform a hardware modification to rectify this at no cost) and that serial ports are failing on many x000 series masters in recent times due to a part failing. Just things to watch out for.

ericmedley

Auser wrote: »

By large we're talking controlling multiple spaces with multiple UI's (generally residential). There's still adequate memory available when running the Duet firmware for most corporate systems (boardrooms and the like). Depending on how you code, the x000's should be capable of dealing with 4+ areas and 8+ touchpanels while running Duet firmware.



This is true.



I don't agree with this.



If you're going to be reusing existing x000's as the client can't see a net cost-benefit gain to updating, make sure you run the latest (Duet) firmware and code efficiently enough to work within the available memory and they will operate fine.

The only other considerations that I'm aware of is that a particular revision had a bad physical Ethernet interface which doesn't operate reliably (I believe AMX will perform a hardware modification to rectify this at no cost) and that serial ports are failing on many x000 series masters in recent times due to a part failing. Just things to watch out for.

I've found the fairly good workaround for the NIC problem on the older NI-X000s is to force the interface to 10 meg 1/2 duplex. That seemed to keep it happy. All things considered, this is not a problem in that 10 meg is easily fast enough to deal with mist things AMX. You do this by telnetting (is this a word???) into the master and setting it there.

Also, they DO NOT like to connected to the old Linksys WGxxx routers/wireless routers. The connection will go to sleep. Here again, a nightly reboot will fix this problem for the most part too.

DHawthorne

I've had very few instances where the two series were not completely interchangeable. Interestingly enough, they were not cases of running short of memory or processing power, but of flaky IP connections. But, by-and-large, the X000 series s perfectly usable, even with Duet firmware installed. Of course, that might largely be because I hail from the very beginnings of NetLinx programming, and started out with Axcent (heck, I started programming in the first place for CPM systems with a 64K memory limit, I'm just used to small memory footprints); I also tend to write my own modules rather than depend on the AMX-provided ones, so it just might be my code is a little tighter.

Auser

ericmedley wrote: »

I've found the fairly good workaround for the NIC problem on the older NI-X000s is to force the interface to 10 meg 1/2 duplex. That seemed to keep it happy.

You've clearly had better luck than I

As far as I'm aware a hardware modification was required on Rev B and earlier boards to make them play nice with others (as below).