Apex vs. RKE

[BrianOKC]

Like the title says what does the Apex offer the RKE doesnt ? Why should I buy the Apex in our opinion.

[RussM]

A few key differentiators I can think of right now:

- Apex has built-in network support, included in the base package; the NET module for the RKE is an added-cost $120 item

- Apex has web-based programing & control. RKE's web interface currently has only monitoring and RSS configuration (full control is being developed though)

- Apex has lower cost per controlled outlet (Apex Energy Bar 8 with 8 outlets is $149.95 MSRP vs RKM-PC4 with 4 outlets is $90 ... $18.75/outlet vs $22.50/outlet.

- Apex supports multiple head (display) units; RKE does not currently.

- Apex handles firmware updates in one shot; RKE requires the head unit and each individual module to be disconnected from the system and connected to a PC one at a time for firmware updates

- Apex has built-in support for Tunze STREAM pumps; RKE does not.

- Apex has built-in support for 0-10v dimmable lighting systems; RKE's equivalent module is an added-cost item

- Apex's Energy Bars have built-in hubs for additional system inter-connectivity; RKE's hub module is an added-cost item.

- There is not currently a trade-in program for the Apex; There is one for RKE.

- Apex-specific probe expansion modules are not yet available; RKE has an additional pH & temp module available now, with the salinity module due to start shipping very soon.

- RKE has pre-built float kits (floats switches, brackets, and wiring) available; It's DIY for Apex.

[clp]

There is really no comparison between the two controllers. The RKE is inferior in just about every aspect. Here are some features in which the Apex system is better:

Looks better
Very attractive mechanical design
High Quality Display with excellent clarity/contrast.
- Costs less.
- Easy to use configuration wizards.
- Most expandable controller - up to 240 modules, thousands of outlets, hundreds of probes.
- backwards compatible with older AquaController accessories.
- More features - Some include:
more flexible/sophisticate configuration
season lighting control
season temperature control
- Integrated Ethernet (Optional $$$ on RKE)
- Monitoring & Control & configuration on the webserver.
- Only controller with web browser based configuration.
- XML support
- multiple head unit displays - not possible on RKE
- multiple sound alarms.
- Includes 6 digital inputs vs 2 on RKE.
- Galvanic Isolation on probes result in accurate readings. RKE has no isolation and has major interference issues.
- Includes built-in variable speed pump control. Not possible on RKE
- Includes built-in 0-10V light dimming. Extra on RKE
- Can name outlets, and modules - not possible on RKE
- ORP input is modal - can be ORP or pH input on Apex - not possible on RKE
- Default outlet state on Apex. On competition of a communication error occurs all outlets
just shut off - RKE just shuts everything off
- State of the Art 32 bit processor - not an 8 bit slow processor like RKE.
- 5 times faster than competitor's controllers
- 16 times more code space - much more expandable for future enhancements.
Not code space limited like the RKE
- 16 times more storage space for datalogs than the RKE.
- Bus interconnect can be starred or daisy chain configuration.
- Has Power failure detection/alarms/control - not possible on RKE.
- EB8 has power failure detection/alarms/control - not possible on RKE
- Don't have to disassemble controller to perform firmware upgrades
- Reliable/High Quality buttons (No unreliable capsense)
- Lowest cost per outlet control options
- Robust communications protocol Bus Interface with error correcting.
- EnergyBars have built-in AquaBus hubs - On RKE must purchase add-on.
- Built in virtual outlets. On RKE must purchase announced but not shipping PC1.
- Cable lengths can be much longer than RKE.

Curt

[RussM]

+ what Curt said

[kajung2k]

Swwwwweet!

[RParker]

I debated them back and forth also, I placed my order for the Apex no more then 30 seconds ago.

[Lightsluvr]

Originally posted by clp
There is really no comparison between the two controllers. The RKE is inferior in just about every aspect. Here are some features in which the Apex system is better:

Looks better
Very attractive mechanical design
High Quality Display with excellent clarity/contrast.
- Costs less.
- Easy to use configuration wizards.
- Most expandable controller - up to 240 modules, thousands of outlets, hundreds of probes.
- backwards compatible with older AquaController accessories.
- More features - Some include:
more flexible/sophisticate configuration
season lighting control
season temperature control
- Integrated Ethernet (Optional $$$ on RKE)
- Monitoring & Control & configuration on the webserver.
- Only controller with web browser based configuration.
- XML support
- multiple head unit displays - not possible on RKE
- multiple sound alarms.
- Includes 6 digital inputs vs 2 on RKE.
- Galvanic Isolation on probes result in accurate readings. RKE has no isolation and has major interference issues.
- Includes built-in variable speed pump control. Not possible on RKE
- Includes built-in 0-10V light dimming. Extra on RKE
- Can name outlets, and modules - not possible on RKE
- ORP input is modal - can be ORP or pH input on Apex - not possible on RKE
- Default outlet state on Apex. On competition of a communication error occurs all outlets
just shut off - RKE just shuts everything off
- State of the Art 32 bit processor - not an 8 bit slow processor like RKE.
- 5 times faster than competitor's controllers
- 16 times more code space - much more expandable for future enhancements.
Not code space limited like the RKE
- 16 times more storage space for datalogs than the RKE.
- Bus interconnect can be starred or daisy chain configuration.
- Has Power failure detection/alarms/control - not possible on RKE.
- EB8 has power failure detection/alarms/control - not possible on RKE
- Don't have to disassemble controller to perform firmware upgrades
- Reliable/High Quality buttons (No unreliable capsense)
- Lowest cost per outlet control options
- Robust communications protocol Bus Interface with error correcting.
- EnergyBars have built-in AquaBus hubs - On RKE must purchase add-on.
- Built in virtual outlets. On RKE must purchase announced but not shipping PC1.
- Cable lengths can be much longer than RKE.

Curt

Curt - what a great analysis of the differences in the products. I am glad I made the purchase of our Apex! Can I copy this list into my build thread? I get this question a lot... and it couldn't be answered better than you have...

LL

[Lepers]

Please.... I'm waiting for an european version !!!!

When will we can buy it in France ?

[cbrguy]

Originally posted by RussM
A few key differentiators I can think of right now:

- Apex has built-in network support, included in the base package; the NET module for the RKE is an added-cost $120 item

--While it's included you'll have to replace everything in that module if it breaks (kinda like the VCR/DVD deal). Also, when you buy it as part of the package it costs less

- Apex has web-based programing & control. RKE's web interface currently has only monitoring and RSS configuration (full control is being developed though)


- Apex has lower cost per controlled outlet (Apex Energy Bar 8 with 8 outlets is $149.95 MSRP vs RKM-PC4 with 4 outlets is $90 ... $18.75/outlet vs $22.50/outlet.

4 outlets allows you to spread out larger loads. Also think of how many outlets you lose with big adapter etc...


- Apex supports multiple head (display) units; RKE does not currently.

- Apex handles firmware updates in one shot; RKE requires the head unit and each individual module to be disconnected from the system and connected to a PC one at a time for firmware updates

- Apex has built-in support for Tunze STREAM pumps; RKE does not.

- Apex has built-in support for 0-10v dimmable lighting systems; RKE's equivalent module is an added-cost item

- Apex's Energy Bars have built-in hubs for additional system inter-connectivity; RKE's hub module is an added-cost item.

- There is not currently a trade-in program for the Apex; There is one for RKE.

- Apex-specific probe expansion modules are not yet available; RKE has an additional pH & temp module available now, with the salinity module due to start shipping very soon.

- RKE has pre-built float kits (floats switches, brackets, and wiring) available; It's DIY for Apex.
It's pretty much a DIY for RKE too since you have to splice your own wires

I think your comparison for the RKE was pretty realistic, but I added a few items.

I think that Curt's is just listing what is better on paper, but those features will never be used Like DA said they second that you need that many modules they'll give you a free head unit!

I think it's kind of lame that Curt listed that the APEX looks better and has a better screen?!? It looks Identical to the RKE and I am pretty sure where they got their design and architecture ideas from.

There are also many items in Curts list that are not true.

[clp]

Lightsluvr,
Fill free to post the comparison if you would like.


cbrguy,

>There are also many items in Curts list that are not true.

Let me know what they are, and if they arent' right, I'll correct them.

Curt

[HeneryH]

Saying a modular Net module is better due to replacabilty when it fails is a stretch. Network connector failures are so rare I am willing to live with the risk.

I agree that the look is a direct copy of the RK. I have not held mine yet but some pictures make the finish look a little cheap.

[cbrguy]

Reliable/High Quality buttons (No unreliable capsense)
They no longer use Capsense

Galvanic Isolation on probes result in accurate readings. RKE has no isolation and has major interference issues.
There is only an issue with the Ph probe if you have multiple SL1 modules the SL2 does have isolation.

Easy to use configuration wizards
The RKE has "wizards" too

High Quality Display with excellent clarity/contrast.
The RKE has a quality display too

ORP input is modal - can be ORP or pH input on Apex - not possible on RKE
I really don't see that as an + or -


Lowest cost per outlet control options
This is questionable. Let's say you only need 12 outlets what would be cheaper?

140 * 3=420 vs 3*90=270 sure you would have more outlets, but if you never need them what good are they.

Cable lengths can be much longer than RKE.
RKE improved their BUS length and with the ability to add a hub
I really don't see cable length being an issue for either controller


State of the Art 32 bit processor - not an 8 bit slow processor like RKE
5 times faster than competitor's controllers
So what would this do special for either controller?

[HeneryH]

Chiming in again with my thoughts... sorry.

Cable length is important to many who have sumps/equipment in the basement. If the RK hub is free then OK, otherwise, thumbs up to Apex on this.

Processor speed.... who cares. It is user impact that matters. Code space is another issue though. I tried to mod my AC3 web page and ran out of space.

Displays... Are there pixel count or color depth comparisons?

Outlet price. You can never have enough controlled outlets so I prefer cheaper at the x8.

[clp]

[QUOTE]Originally posted by cbrguy
Reliable/High Quality buttons (No unreliable capsense)
They no longer use Capsense
[/QUOTE
They do on the RKE v1 and on the their PC4. Try getting into manual mode on a PC4 if you an electronic ballast turned on.

Galvanic Isolation on probes result in accurate readings. RKE has no isolation and has major interference issues.
There is only an issue with the Ph probe if you have multiple SL1 modules the SL2 does have isolation.

The SL2 doesn't exist yet. If you want multiple pH probes you must currently have 2 SL1s. Given their hardware design interference also come from just 1 SL1 between the pH and ORP probes.

Easy to use configuration wizards
The RKE has "wizards" too

Yes, the RKE has menu driven configuration as well.

High Quality Display with excellent clarity/contrast.
The RKE has a quality display too

If you see both displays side by side, you will definitely that the the RKE display looks washed out. The contrast is not nearly as good on the Apex display. Also the Apex display large font is nice & smooth - not blocky like the RKE's large font.

ORP input is modal - can be ORP or pH input on Apex - not possible on RKE
I really don't see that as an + or -

It is a big feature for someone who wants 2 pH probes (1 for tank, 1 for Ca Reactor). On the Apex system you don't have pay an additional probe module.

Lowest cost per outlet control options
This is questionable. Let's say you only need 12 outlets what would be cheaper?

140 * 3=420 vs 3*90=270 sure you would have more outlets, but if you never need them what good are they.

For the apex that should be:
150 * 2=300
Or you if you really wanted 12 then get a EB8 and a DC4HD and the price would be:
150 + 125 = 275

Or if you wanted 16 it would be:
150 * 2 = 300 vs 4 * 90 = $360

Cable lengths can be much longer than RKE.
RKE improved their BUS length and with the ability to add a hub
I really don't see cable length being an issue for either controller

I don't believe that the hub has any active repeater inside of it, so the 100' cable length max on the RKE would still apply. The Apex's AquaBus also uses industrial quality transceivers so communication errors between modules is not an issue. On the RKE it is communicating with modules using I2C running at 40 kHz. I2C is a TTL level bus for internal PC board communication - it is certainly not designed for 100' connections in a high noise environment. It just isn't reliable enough.

State of the Art 32 bit processor - not an 8 bit slow processor like RKE
5 times faster than competitor's controllers
So what would this do special for either controller?

Having a faster processor has many advantages:
- Faster web page access
- More data filter processing options which are possible with a slower 8 bit processor.
- Other future enhancements.

Curt

[DaveMorris]

In regards to cable....What DA has published and what reality is are two different things. They say total bus length is 100'. I have pushed that to close to 200' with no issues at all. And yes, I run electronic ballasts. I also run two bus cables 20' along side ballast lamp cables with no interference.

As far as look goes...let's be honest. Saying that the Apex looks better is like comparing two shades of blue and asking which one is bluer. Even at MAX when the APex was first on display I heard people commenting on how it looked just like the RKE. Even the displays look the same. Can you change colors on the Apex?

As an RKE fan/user I am happy to see the Apex out now because we as reefers will all benefit from a competitive market. Neptune and DA will be going back and forth producing modules, software, and making improvements and we all get to snap it all up faster than they can produce the products.

[DaveMorris]

Originally posted by clp

If you see both displays side by side, you will definitely that the the RKE display looks washed out. The contrast is not nearly as good on the Apex display. Also the Apex display large font is nice & smooth - not blocky like the RKE's large font.

That is what the contrast setting is for. I can wash out the display or make it completely black. It has wonderful contrast somewhere in the middle. I haven't placed the two right next to each other to compare lettering, but I have no complaints about the way the letters look on my RKE display. I don't think they look "blocky" at all.

[Hawkdl2]

I've been waiting to see how the Apex fares in actual use before I decide, but I will be buying either the RKE or the Apex and am setting up a system that warrants remote displays, remote outlets, 5 or more float switches, long cable runs and networking. I am not a fan or opposed to either company having never owned a product from either, but here are some of my thoughts on the features that are important to me that are weighing on my decision:

1. Apex allows for multiple displays the RKE does not - not critical, but this is a very cool feature.

2. The RKE is limited to ~100 TOTAL feet of bus cable the Apex seems to allow runs up to 200 ft with no overall limit that I've heard of - this is critical for me.

3. The RKE uses bus cables I can custom make at home, the Apex uses USB-like cables that have to be purchased - not a deal killer either way and may be related to run length limitations, but I'd prefer to make my own cables.

4. The two units are so close in appearance I would happily have either on my control panel.

5. The RKE 4-outlet configuration does allow for more flexibility in spacing and does result in twice the number of mechanically switched high amp outlets per total outlets purchased (i.e. 2 on the EB8 vs 4 on 2 x PC4)

6. The Apex has a lower cost of entry for a fairly complete starter package, but only time will tell if the cost of 12+ outlets, 4-6 float inputs, and anything else I will change the equation (it would be nice to know what the EB8 and stand alone displays are going to retail for).

7. Being able to update firmware without having to disassemble the system is a real plus for the Apex.

8. Following both manufacturers forums, I would say neither are fool-proof in programing or set up and both have seen posts from people about ready to give up. On the other hand, neither seems to have such a poor programing wizard as to render them painful to master.


I'm curious what others think of these particular features - have I got the comparison correct?

[cbrguy]

Opps sorry for the math error but it's still more. I think cost is relative. Some people want an net module others don't. So you really can't say that the APEX is cheaper.

The SL2 does exist there are a few people that are using them.

also as am typing this DA just sent an email that the pre orders will start on the 17th

But I agree with DaveMorris I am happy that there is competition in the market now.

Also, I run my sump in the basement and I really don't think too many people are running their sump over 100' away from the tank. That would be one hell of a return pump.

[Lepers]

RKE and Apex... Do you Have an european model ?

[kenargo]

I will preface with the fact that my findings are NOT based on owning an RKE but reading through the manual and posts/replies...

RKE - has a color display (Apex is B/W) though both support contrast.

Home screens - The Apex has 4 separate screens, each configurable to what is displayed (time, date, probes (up to 4) per screen and outlets (up to 8 per screen, up to 2 lines worth). The RKE solves the issue in a slightly different manner by supporting scrolling (something they refer to as 'Quick Data'#

Both have 4 feed cycles #RKE calls them Standby and is limited to a max of 60 minutes - 1 sec#, Apex limits to 999 minutes.

RKE manual appears to support brightness for the lunar modules #MLC or ALM#, the Apex tracks lunar cycles through season table #which can be modified# but does not support directly user controlled brightness

I found that the RKE does not appear to have an equivalent to Max Change #to control the amount of time a device remains in a set state after power fail or being turned on/off#. In a recent thread the reply suggests that there is a fixed time of 15 minutes #using a light programming mode#.

One item I was unable to find in the RKE what the ability to have outlets revert to a pre-programmed value when communications to the base unit are lost. The Apex can be programmed to turn outlets on/off when communications to the base are lost.

I was also unable to locate indications that the RKE supports power loss scenarios as the Apex can. The Apex can be programmed to detect power out for an individual EB8 or a general power fail #if the base unit is powered by a battery or UPS#.

Web access to the RKE doesn't appear to be as rich as for the Apex. You need the optional module #RKM-NET# which appears to give you some net facilities #email, status, log and graph# but I was unable to locate information that indicated support for control or programming of the connected devices as the Apex has.

They both appear to be quite suitable for the advanced monitor and control facilities of an aquarium of any size though the missing ability to remote access and control the RKE is a major missing feature that surprised me to be missing (though again, not being an owner I was going by manuals and threads so it could be a feature that I missed).

[Constantin]

while Apex is vastly superior simply because its programmable online from the start, I must say that alot of things on Curts lists arent really true *yet* as right now you cannot have anything other than the base module with 1 bar . Also DA were the ones that had the modular design first, but i am very happy Neptune adopted that design, as it seems to be very easy to set up and very easy to work with, not to mention the cool head unit!
i am sure things will become avaliable for Apex but its been a long time since the scheduled launch for apex and i am still stuck with only one outlet, just because you cannot chain link dc8 and powerbars - it makes sense to buy more powerbars, also no additional modules for more ph probes not to mention salinity.
But right now, all I need is more power bars, gogogo Curt!

-Just my 2 cent.

[NeveSSL]

Originally posted by clp
There is really no comparison between the two controllers. The RKE is inferior in just about every aspect. Here are some features in which the Apex system is better:

Looks better
Very attractive mechanical design
High Quality Display with excellent clarity/contrast.
- Costs less.
- Easy to use configuration wizards.
- Most expandable controller - up to 240 modules, thousands of outlets, hundreds of probes.
- backwards compatible with older AquaController accessories.
- More features - Some include:
more flexible/sophisticate configuration
season lighting control
season temperature control
- Integrated Ethernet (Optional $$$ on RKE)
- Monitoring & Control & configuration on the webserver.
- Only controller with web browser based configuration.
- XML support
- multiple head unit displays - not possible on RKE
- multiple sound alarms.
- Includes 6 digital inputs vs 2 on RKE.
- Galvanic Isolation on probes result in accurate readings. RKE has no isolation and has major interference issues.
- Includes built-in variable speed pump control. Not possible on RKE
- Includes built-in 0-10V light dimming. Extra on RKE
- Can name outlets, and modules - not possible on RKE
- ORP input is modal - can be ORP or pH input on Apex - not possible on RKE
- Default outlet state on Apex. On competition of a communication error occurs all outlets
just shut off - RKE just shuts everything off
- State of the Art 32 bit processor - not an 8 bit slow processor like RKE.
- 5 times faster than competitor's controllers
- 16 times more code space - much more expandable for future enhancements.
Not code space limited like the RKE
- 16 times more storage space for datalogs than the RKE.
- Bus interconnect can be starred or daisy chain configuration.
- Has Power failure detection/alarms/control - not possible on RKE.
- EB8 has power failure detection/alarms/control - not possible on RKE
- Don't have to disassemble controller to perform firmware upgrades
- Reliable/High Quality buttons (No unreliable capsense)
- Lowest cost per outlet control options
- Robust communications protocol Bus Interface with error correcting.
- EnergyBars have built-in AquaBus hubs - On RKE must purchase add-on.
- Built in virtual outlets. On RKE must purchase announced but not shipping PC1.
- Cable lengths can be much longer than RKE.

Curt

Wow... do you think you could possibly post an objective comparison? This seems to me to be riddled with opinion.

Am I the only that thinks so?

For example, the speed of a processor is based on the clock of the processor, not how many bits it can process.

Or did I miss something?

Not to mention the Apex looks a lot LIKE the RKE, not necessarily better.

Not trying to start any flaming by any means, but I find that response to be unbelievably subjective. Not a whole lot of facts in there and very misleading. In fact, some statements are flat out incorrect (such as star topology vs. daisy chaining... the RKE can do that).

Brandon

[kenargo]

Originally posted by NeveSSL
Wow... do you think you could possibly post an objective comparison? This seems to me to be riddled with opinion.

Am I the only that thinks so?

For example, the speed of a processor is based on the clock of the processor, not how many bits it can process.

Or did I miss something?

Not to mention the Apex looks a lot LIKE the RKE, not necessarily better.

Not trying to start any flaming by any means, but I find that response to be unbelievably subjective. Not a whole lot of facts in there and very misleading. In fact, some statements are flat out incorrect (such as star topology vs. daisy chaining... the RKE can do that).

Brandon

I would have prefered to see a response on the major components listed rather than picking out some of the lesser items. Tell me about the differences in functionality!

For example:

Can the RKE be programmed and controlled over the Net? Can I turn off/on an outlet from my office if I notice something looks bad?

Does the RKE support fallback in and power fail scenarios that the Apex can?

I don't have a particular interest in CPU nor the color of the plastic (not over functionality).

[clp]

Sure, I'll agree with you that a couple of the items are subjective:

Looks better
Very attractive mechanical design
Easy to use configuration wizards

But I'd say the rest are fact.

Yes clock speed is important in processor but also very important is the natural word size of the processor. Most of the data that the Apex controller process is not 8 bit. It is mostly 16 bit on controller functionality and for web stuff 32 bit. On an 8 bit processor it takes 4 times as many operations to process 32 bit data types. 2 times as many for 16 bit data types.
The Apex processor runs at 70 Mhz. The RKE processor runs at most 24 Mhz. So the speed advantage of the Apex processor (assuming average data size is 16 bits) is 70/24 * 2 = 5.8 times

Curt

[HeneryH]

Curt, our (those who brought up the speed/word size issue) point is that speed and word size advantage does not necessarily translate into user noticeable performance increases.

Maybe it does, maybe it doesn't.

10ms response vs 58ms response would never be noticed.

Engineers love it but users maybe couldn't care less.