[EagleWings]

   
I don't know what the difference is, but I've read where a couple people said the X3ii was actually a bit faster in use than the X5ii.  Don't know how universal that opinion is, but I know I've read where someone said that.
 
Hopefully it's something that can be corrected (or at least mitigated) with a firmware update for those experiencing the slowdown.  It it's an unsolvable hardware issue that would be a bummer.
 
I only use folder browsing and the only noticeable slowdown I've had was that album artwork sometimes loads a second or two after the music starts playing when I select a new album.  Not a big deal to me.  Having the album artwork at all is cool, since much of my music doesn't have it anyway.  One time I had a delay when I tried to switch songs.  I thought I must have missed the button, and pressed it again, but then it suddenly skipped twice.  Only happened once though.

 
I am no expert in electronics. But my logical guess is that higher resolution screen on the X5ii might have something to do with it. 2 years back when I was trying to decide between a 13" Macbook Pro Retina and 13" Macbook Air, I did some side-by-side comparison. Some transitions and visual effects worked buttery smooth on the Air, while it was jittery on the Pro, although Pro had a better main processor, graphic processor and RAM. So I attributed this behavior to the High Res screen on the Pro. And I read similar observations on few tech review sites and even they mentioned it was due to the retina screen.
 
On my X3ii, I have a couple of albums with the album art and I do see a .5 to 1 sec lag while switching songs even on the 'Folder Mode'. But may be these album art images are more than the recommended size. But the EQ has not shown any kind of impact in the GUI performance so far. And I have not noticed any sluggish performance in browsing through the menu either. 

 

[EagleWings]

  Hopefully it's something that can be corrected (or at least mitigated) with a firmware update for those experiencing the slowdown.  It it's an unsolvable hardware issue that would be a bummer.

 
And to add to my previous post, although the high res screen may have have been the reason for this jittery transitions in the past on my Macbook Pro, with the new OS updates, this has improved considerably to a point that it is almost buttery smooth now. So yes, even I hope it is not a hardware constraint but something that could rather be fixed by a firmware update.

 

[bruce1967]

   
X5 is WAY faster than Ipod Classic 160gb in general and have not had it choke on a single file (knock on wood).  Ipod would crap out all the time on high bitrate ALAC which was their own damn proprietary codec .....

Yeah I had tried ALAC on my old iPod classic too and it would always crap out too. The 256aac files or mp3s where the only stuff I could put on it and  have it play smoothly.

 

[BeatsWork]

   
I am no expert in electronics. But my logical guess is that higher resolution screen on the X5ii might have something to do with it. 2 years back when I was trying to decide between a 13" Macbook Pro Retina and 13" Macbook Air, I did some side-by-side comparison. Some transitions and visual effects worked buttery smooth on the Air, while it was jittery on the Pro, although Pro had a better main processor, graphic processor and RAM. So I attributed this behavior to the High Res screen on the Pro. And I read similar observations on few tech review sites and even they mentioned it was due to the retina screen.
 
On my X3ii, I have a couple of albums with the album art and I do see a .5 to 1 sec lag even on the 'Folder Mode'. But may be these album art images are more than the recommended size. But the EQ has not shown any kind of impact in the GUI performance so far. And I have not noticed any sluggish performance in browsing through the menu either. 

 
Would be really damn handy if Fiio had a utility like Belarc Advisor so we could spit out reports and compare notes:
 

1. Firmware
2. Size/Brand/Rating of SD card(s)
3. Format of SD card?
4. FLAC/MP3
5. Directory Structure
6. Artwork size

 

[EagleWings]

   
Would be really damn handy if Fiio had a utility like Belarc Advisor so we could spit out reports and compare notes:
 

1. Firmware
2. Size/Brand/Rating of SD card(s)
3. Format of SD card?
4. FLAC/MP3
5. Directory Structure
6. Artwork size

 
True. That would definitely be valuable feedback for Fiio themselves so that they can identify the root problem and work on it.

 

[EagleWings]

 
Yeah I had tried ALAC on my old iPod classic too and it would always crap out too. The 256aac files or mp3s where the only stuff I could put on it and  have it play smoothly.

 
I figured, no amount of reading would match the experience of actually trying the device, so I placed the order for an X5ii yesterday. It should arrive on Monday. When are you receiving yours?

 

[bruce1967]

   
I figured, no amount of reading would match the experience of actually trying the device, so I placed the order for an X5ii yesterday. It should arrive on Monday. When are you receiving yours?

Mine should be here on Monday or Tuesday...funny you should say no amount of reading would match the experience of actually trying the device..I was just thinking that while reading yet another review on it

 

[x RELIC x]

The delay in displaying art has to do with the album art size. The X5ii needs to load the full artwork in to memory at once, but with music it reads a portion at a time. The screen is only 400x360 so there is no need to choke the system with artwork larger than this. The delays have nothing to do with the larger screen.

 

[EagleWings]

The delay in displaying art has to do with the album art size. The X5ii needs to load the full artwork in to memory at once, but with music it reads a portion at a time. The screen is only 400x360 so there is no need to choke the system with artwork larger than this. The delays have nothing to do with the larger screen.

 
Thanks for clarifying. My point was also trying to compare the nature of the lag on the X5ii and X3ii. I was offering a hypothesis that, the resolution of the screen could have an impact on the lag as X5ii has a higher resolution screen that the X3ii. After reading both the threads (X5ii and X33ii), there seems to be more complaints about the lag on the X5ii than on the X3ii. Once I receive my X5ii on Monday I will test this behavior on both the devices using the same album (and album art) to give a fair comparison.

 

[EagleWings]

 
Mine should be here on Monday or Tuesday...funny you should say no amount of reading would match the experience of actually trying the device..I was just thinking that while reading yet another review on it

 
Cool.

 

[x RELIC x]

Thanks for clarifying. My point was also trying to compare the nature of the lag on the X5ii and X3ii. I was offering a hypothesis that, the resolution of the screen could have an impact on the lag as X5ii has a higher resolution screen that the X3ii. After reading both the threads (X5ii and X33ii), there seems to be more complaints about the lag on the X5ii than on the X3ii. Once I receive my X5ii on Monday I will test this behavior on both the devices using the same album (and album art) to give a fair comparison.

I think the reason this thread has more reports of slowdowns is because the X5ii can accommodate two cards which obviously leads to being able to load more files, which leads to multiplied slower responsiveness if there is anything out of order. Be good to you read your findings.

 

[EagleWings]

I think the reason this thread has more reports of slowdowns is because the X5ii can accommodate two cards which obviously leads to being able to load more files, which leads to multiplied slower responsiveness if there is anything out of order. Be good to you read your findings.

 
That is an excellent point. To keep the test fair:
- I will be using only one card on the X5ii
- I will be using the same card on both the devices (to rule out the possibility that one card's read/write speed could be faster than the other's)
- I will be formatting the card on each device before loading the data and beginning the test
- Instead of a side-by-side comparison, I will be actually timing the lag individually on both the devices
- The card will be loaded with approximately 10GB of same data for both the devices during the test 

 

[BeatsWork]

   
That is an excellent point. To keep the test fair:
- I will be using only one card on the X5ii
- I will be using the same card on both the devices (to rule out the possibility that one card's read/write speed could be faster than the other's)
- I will be formatting the card on each device before loading the data and beginning the test
- Instead of a side-by-side comparison, I will be actually timing the lag individually on both the devices
- The card will be loaded with approximately 10GB of same data for both the devices during the test 

 
Curious how you're going to do that?  It's easy on PC as you can simply use a benchmark which runs actual code and files but assuming you do this manually there's always "human variation" to factor in.

 

[EagleWings]

   
Curious how you're going to do that?  It's easy on PC as you can simply use a benchmark which runs actual code and files but assuming you do this manually there's always "human variation" to factor in.

 
Yes, that is going to be a challenge and that is exactly what my mind is working to figure out right now. 

 
Any input is appreciated!!

 

[x RELIC x]

I think that since we aren't robots anything that is able to be caught with regards to timing delays (with included human error) would be enough. I mean, do we really need to know down to the millisecond. Personally, if it's that small a gap I wouldn't really care!