How is the speed of the XL compared to the M4?  

RE: How is the speed of the XL compared to the M4?

Download the printer configs in Prusaslicer and compare sliced stats.

I would think the XL has a higher top end past the default values simply because its a coreXY. But you probably have to test/set those faster values in yourself because Prusa has stated that they are more focused on print strength/reliability than outright speed.

RE: How is the speed of the XL compared to the M4?

I should preface it by saying that I very much like my (single-tool) XL. I didn't buy it for the size but I find more and more uses for it. But a speed demon it isn't. Even the new IS support in the new slicer and firmware doesn't make much of a difference. Plus, it routinely spends 8 minutes or more "absorbing heat" at the beginning of a print. For me it's not much of an issue because I value quality over speed but your mileage may obviously vary. 

it can be upgraded to multi tool

Yeah, in theory. I made the mistake of downgrading my order from 5 tools to single tool, assuming I could upgrade later. Now it  looks like it won't be before fall of next year that I can buy additional print heads. Again, I like it and find uses for it but I really bought it for the 5 tools, so this all left some sour taste in my mouth.

RE: How is the speed of the XL compared to the M4?

I do not have a MKIII or a MKIV. Both are Mendels. I do have a slew of Mendels, but you really cannot compare a Mendel to any form of Cartesian or CoreXY machine. My 11 year old rep2s all print faster than the MKIV. Two completely different approaches. You also cannot compare any of the above to a Delta. A WAY better comparison would be the XL VS the E3D Toolchanger. I have both.

I have been testing the XL extensively for my podcast (3D Printing Today) as well as my service biz. PS makes it tricky to provide an explicit speed since it (correctly) has a speed setting for each kinetic path motion. I've been 3D printing for so many years now with so many machines that I can easily see how fast it is printing. So I think I can make a well educated assessment made only on observations...

Against all my expectations, the Prusa XL is a serious speed demon. I see travel speeds that are well over 100mm/s. I see tool paths that are doing between 80 to 100mm/s. and... most importantly tool changes happen within 3-4 seconds! My e3d TC takes about 20!

Why?

The acceleration settings have it ramping up and slowing down in very short periods. Thats why you read so many posts about all the vibration and movement everyone is seeing. It takes off like a bandit and stops on a dime(?... its a saying. You know what I mean). Yet (nine spools of filament later) it has never skipped a register on me. Not once. The design of the X carriage coupling is nice and lean and super reliable. No servo or stepper for the lock makes it light and FAST. The Engineering of the coupling mechanism is pure genius. Light years ahead of E3D. I can fully understand why E3D has bowed out. The competition has them totally beaten. The tools themselves are also less than half the mass of my E3D TC! The feeder steppers are the smallest lamination stacks I've ever seen in a 17 yet the motors all work well with the enlarged feeder gear. I was very very doubtful about it, but I see it first hand that even though its only a single gear feed it's super strong and very accurate.

What takes my e3d TC 4-6 hours takes my XL 1.5 hours!

I've been trying real hard not to gush about it on the podcast, but I'm afraid I won't be able to hold it in much longer.

RE: How is the speed of the XL compared to the M4?

XL comes with a 0.6 nozzle, and I struggle with stringing till I replaced it with a 0.4 nozzle. Print times are about little longer than the MK4, but not by much. Printing at 0.3-layer height times are equal to MK4 IS. 

RE: How is the speed of the XL compared to the M4?

Posted by: @airsyspro

Looking to move up from my MK3 and I like the speed of the MK4, but I like the size of the XL plus it can be upgraded to multi tool. As this point speed is my most important priority. So is the XL as fast?

There's no simple answer to that question. I have both MK4 and XL (2H) and which is "faster" depends on the model and the parameters. The XL takes longer to preheat the bed, perform the auto-level, and get ready to print. They both have the same extruder but the XL has a 0.6mm nozzle vs the MK4 with a 0.4mm nozzle. The XL defaults to 0.32mm layer height (structural) compared to the 0.20mm layer height (structural) of the MK4. If you're using multi-material the toolhead changing on the XL is very fast - a few seconds - compared to the slow filament change of the MMU on a MK4.

The coreXY kinematics of the XL are significantly faster than the traditional bedslinger kinematics of the MK4. But it gets more complicated than that because the travel rate - usually the number manufacturers like to quote - isn't as relevant as the flow-rate, and in most prints you're not getting maximum flow-rate anyway. Some printers try to look impressive by moving the head quickly but they aren't putting much material down whereas a large-format printer with a larger nozzle can extrude more material and despite looking "slower" actually finishes sooner.

So the answer is ... it depends. If you are printing small models with fine detail the fast-startup and small nozzle of the MK4 might be "quicker". But if you are printing large models with coarse detail and multi-material the XL is going to be "quicker". And with the XL massive build plate you could also print dozens of models at the same time, but if you don't have a huge backlog of prints that doesn't matter.

RE:

The speed of the XL is significantly faster compared to the M4. The XL model is designed to handle larger datasets and more complex tasks, allowing it to process information at a much quicker pace than the M4. With its enhanced computational capabilities and larger memory capacity, the XL model can execute operations and generate outputs more rapidly, making it well-suited for demanding computational tasks. Its advanced architecture and optimized algorithms contribute to its superior speed, enabling it to efficiently handle a wide range of applications with enhanced performance and responsiveness compared to the M4 model.

RE: How is the speed of the XL compared to the M4?

Well like a lot of people here commented .. it depends

As far as capabilities are concerned it can be theoretically very fast. But its limited to how much filament can pass through the nozzle in a given speed. Now there is a nice post in here about the limitations of Nextruder. There is someone that states that he/she pushed the configuration to even grater speeds with the o.6 nozzle. Personally im not so into playing around with my printer. But nevertheless its faster than the MK3 and possibly can be faster with some tuning.

Are you printing multicolored or multi-material (i.e solulable supports)? Well you are for a speed boost comparing with mmu2s all other single extruder solutions. And the difference in speed  is getting even larger when the color/material changes increases.

On the other hand there is the preheating period (both for  bed and tools) that adds to the overall printing time. like 10 minutes or so. I dont know how comparable is this to MK4.

Also core XY is always a better choice IMHO

RE:

Posted by: @tsamisa

..But nevertheless its faster than the MK3..

Little bit of an understatement don't you think? It is with the same nozzle size and same quality 175% as fast, so nearly 2 times as fast. I had both printers for a short while and I am comparing speeds with the new firmware of course. Even if the nozzle Flow is the restricting factor the XL is significantly faster, as the Nextruder nozzles can extrude Filament 20 - 25% faster due to the longer heating zone.

Of course if you compare to the MK4, the speed difference is much lower (except for multicolor of course - MMU like solutions are always slow and wastefull)

EDIT: As people have pointed out the XL needs to preheat some time and that makes it slower especially for very fast model this heating time is significant.

RE: How is the speed of the XL compared to the M4?

...Little bit of an understatement don't you think?.....

I didnt feel the need to use metrics in my comparison, or superlatives to make the point that the prospective buyer will see a difference in speed. I dont see how this is an understatement. It would be if i was saying let say "slightly" or "borderline" or something like this. If at some point i made an error in phrasing ok lets correct it. "A twice as fast speed deamon"

RE: How is the speed of the XL compared to the M4?

RE: How is the speed of the XL compared to the M4?

What is your definition of "small models" in three dimensions?

Posted by: @nhand42

Posted by: @airsyspro

Looking to move up from my MK3 and I like the speed of the MK4, but I like the size of the XL plus it can be upgraded to multi tool. As this point speed is my most important priority. So is the XL as fast?

So the answer is ... it depends. If you are printing small models with fine detail the fast-startup and small nozzle of the MK4 might be "quicker". But if you are printing large models with coarse detail and multi-material the XL is going to be "quicker". And with the XL massive build plate you could also print dozens of models at the same time, but if you don't have a huge backlog of prints that doesn't matter.

RE: How is the speed of the XL compared to the M4?

I think a simple response is based on how long something takes to print.  We are finding the XL is be relatively slow, even discounting its long startup time it can take us twice as long to print a simple single head print on the XL as compared to our single head machine (from another supplier)   Why is it so slow compared to other  contemporary machines and can it be sped up?